Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Observational Study
. 2014 Mar 20;4(3):e004651.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-004651.

Comparative effectiveness of microdecompression and laminectomy for central lumbar spinal stenosis: study protocol for an observational study

Affiliations
Observational Study

Comparative effectiveness of microdecompression and laminectomy for central lumbar spinal stenosis: study protocol for an observational study

Ulf S Nerland et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Introduction: This observational study is designed to test the equivalence between the clinical effectiveness of microdecompression and laminectomy in the surgical treatment of central lumbar spinal stenosis. Lumbar spinal stenosis is the most frequent indication for spinal surgery in the elderly, and as the oldest segment of the population continues to grow its prevalence is likely to increase. However, data on surgical outcomes are limited. Open or wide decompressive laminectomy, often combined with medial facetectomy and foraminotomy, was formerly the standard treatment. In recent years a growing tendency towards less invasive decompressive procedures has emerged. At present, many spine surgeons perform microdecompression for central lumbar spinal stenosis.

Methods and analysis: Prospectively registered treatment and outcome data are obtained from the Norwegian Registry for Spine Surgery. The primary outcome measure is change in Oswestry disability index between baseline and 12-month follow-up. Secondary outcome measures are changes in health-related quality of life measured by the Euro-Qol-5D between baseline and 12-month follow-up, perioperative complications, and duration of surgical procedures and length of hospital stay.

Ethics and dissemination: The study has been evaluated and approved by the regional committee for medical research in central Norway and all participants provided written informed consent. The findings of this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications.

Trial registration number: Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02006901).

Keywords: Neurosurgery.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Deyo RA. Treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis: a balancing act. Spine J 2010;10:625–7 - PubMed
    1. Ciol MA, Deyo RA, Howell E, et al. An assessment of surgery for spinal stenosis: time trends, geographic variations, complications, and reoperations. J Am Geriatr Soc 1996;44:285–90 - PubMed
    1. Gunzburg R, Szpalski M. The conservative surgical treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis in the elderly. Eur Spine J 2003;12(Suppl 2):S176–80 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Amundsen T, Weber H, Nordal HJ, et al. Lumbar spinal stenosis: conservative or surgical management? A prospective 10-year study. Spine 2000;25:1424–35; discussion 1435–6 - PubMed
    1. Atlas SJ, Keller RB, Robson D, et al. Surgical and nonsurgical management of lumbar spinal stenosis: four-year outcomes from the maine lumbar spine study. Spine 2000;25:556–62 - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data