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
Meta-Analysis
. 2016 Jan 29;2016(1):CD010264.
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010264.pub2.

Surgical versus non-surgical treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis

Fabio Zaina  1 , Christy Tomkins-Lane, Eugene Carragee, Stefano Negrini
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Surgical versus non-surgical treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis

Fabio Zaina et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. .

Abstract

Background: Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a debilitating condition associated with degeneration of the spine with aging.

Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of different types of surgery compared with different types of non-surgical interventions in adults with symptomatic LSS. Primary outcomes included quality of life, disability, function and pain. Also, to consider complication rates and side effects, and to evaluate short-, intermediate- and long-term outcomes (six months, six months to two years, five years or longer).

Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, five other databases and two trials registries up to February 2015. We also screened reference lists and conference proceedings related to treatment of the spine.

Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing surgical versus non-operative treatments in participants with lumbar spinal stenosis confirmed by clinical and imaging findings.

Data collection and analysis: For data collection and analysis, we followed methods guidelines of the Cochrane Back and Neck Review Group (Furlan 2009) and those provided in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (Higgins 2011).

Main results: From the 12,966 citations screened, we assessed 26 full-text articles and included five RCTs (643 participants).Low-quality evidence from the meta-analysis performed on two trials using the Oswestry Disability Index (pain-related disability) to compare direct decompression with or without fusion versus multi-modal non-operative care showed no significant differences at six months (mean difference (MD) -3.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) -10.12 to 2.80) and at one year (MD -6.18, 95% CI -15.03 to 2.66). At 24 months, significant differences favoured decompression (MD -4.43, 95% CI -7.91 to -0.96). Low-quality evidence from one small study revealed no difference in pain outcomes between decompression and usual conservative care (bracing and exercise) at three months (risk ratio (RR) 1.38, 95% CI 0.22 to 8.59), four years (RR 7.50, 95% CI 1.00 to 56.48) and 10 years (RR 4.09, 95% CI 0.95 to 17.58).Low-quality evidence from one small study suggested no differences at six weeks in the Oswestry Disability Index for patients treated with minimally invasive mild decompression versus those treated with epidural steroid injections (MD 5.70, 95% CI 0.57 to 10.83; 38 participants). Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ) results were better for epidural injection at six weeks (MD -0.60, 95% CI -0.92 to -0.28), and visual analogue scale (VAS) improvements were better in the mild decompression group (MD 2.40, 95% CI 1.92 to 2.88). At 12 weeks, many cross-overs prevented further analysis.Low-quality evidence from a single study including 191 participants favoured the interspinous spacer versus usual conservative treatment at six weeks, six months and one year for symptom severity and physical function.All remaining studies reported complications associated with surgery and conservative side effects of treatment: Two studies reported no major complications in the surgical group, and the other study reported complications in 10% and 24% of participants, including spinous process fracture, coronary ischaemia, respiratory distress, haematoma, stroke, risk of reoperation and death due to pulmonary oedema.

Authors' conclusions: We have very little confidence to conclude whether surgical treatment or a conservative approach is better for lumbar spinal stenosis, and we can provide no new recommendations to guide clinical practice. However, it should be noted that the rate of side effects ranged from 10% to 24% in surgical cases, and no side effects were reported for any conservative treatment. No clear benefits were observed with surgery versus non-surgical treatment. These findings suggest that clinicians should be very careful in informing patients about possible treatment options, especially given that conservative treatment options have resulted in no reported side effects. High-quality research is needed to compare surgical versus conservative care for individuals with lumbar spinal stenosis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

We have nothing to disclose.

Figures

1
1
Study flow diagram.
2
2
Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
3
3
Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
4
4
Forest plot of comparison: 1 Decompression ± fusion vs usual non‐operative care for Oswestry Disability Index, outcome: 1.1 Oswestry Disability Index [%].
5
5
Forest plot of comparison: 1 Decompression ± fusion versus usual non‐operative care for adverse events.
1.1
1.1. Analysis
Comparison 1 Decompression ± fusion vs usual conservative care for Oswestry Disability Index, Outcome 1 Oswestry Disability Index.
1.2
1.2. Analysis
Comparison 1 Decompression ± fusion vs usual conservative care for Oswestry Disability Index, Outcome 2 Pain.
2.1
2.1. Analysis
Comparison 2 Epidural steroid injection vs decompression with or without fusion, Outcome 1 Oswestry Disability Index.
2.2
2.2. Analysis
Comparison 2 Epidural steroid injection vs decompression with or without fusion, Outcome 2 Visual Analogue Scale.
2.3
2.3. Analysis
Comparison 2 Epidural steroid injection vs decompression with or without fusion, Outcome 3 Zurich Claudication Questionnaire.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

References to studies included in this review

Amundsen 2000 {published data only}
    1. Amundsen T, Weber H, Nordal HJ, Magnaes B, Abdelnoor M, Lilleas F. Lumbar spinal stenosis: conservative or surgical management? A prospective 10‐year study. Spine 2000;25(11):1424‐35. - PubMed
Brown 2012 {published data only}
    1. Brown LL. A double‐blind, randomized, prospective study of epidural steroid injection vs. the mild procedure in patients with symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis. Pain Practice 2012;12(5):333‐41. - PubMed
Malmivaara 2007 {published data only}
    1. Malmivaara A, Slatis P, Heliovaara M, Sainio P, Kinnunen H, Kankare J, et al. Finnish Lumbar Spinal Research Group. Surgical or nonoperative treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis? A randomized controlled trial. Spine 2007;32(1):1‐8. - PubMed
    1. Slätis P, Malmivaara A, Heliövaara M, Sainio P, Herno A, Kankare J, et al. Long‐term results of surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomised controlled trial. European Spine Journal 2011;20(7):1174‐81. - PMC - PubMed
Weinstein 2008 {published data only}
    1. Birkmeyer NJ, Weinstein JN, Tosteston AN, Tosteston JD, Skinner JS, Lurie JD. Design of the Spine Patients Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT). Spine 2002;27(12):1361‐72. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Radcliff KE, Rihn J, Hilibrand A, Dilorio T, Tosteson T, Lurie JD, et al. Does the duration of symptoms in patients with spinal stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis affect outcomes? Analysis of the Spine Outcomes Research Trial. Spine 2011;36(25):2197‐210. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Weinstein JN, Tosteson TD, Lurie JD, Tosteson A, Blood E, Herkowitz H, et al. Surgical versus nonoperative treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis: four‐year results of the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial. Spine 2010;35(14):139‐48. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Weinstein JN, Tosteson TD, Lurie JD, Tosteson AN, Blood E, Hanscom B, et al. SPORT Investigators. Surgical versus nonsurgical therapy for lumbar spinal stenosis. New England Journal of Medicine 2008;358(8):794‐810. - PMC - PubMed
Zucherman 2004 {published data only}
    1. Zucherman JF, Hsu KY, Hartjen CA, Mehalic TF, Implicito DA, Martin MJ, et al. A multicenter, prospective, randomized trial evaluating the X STOP interspinous process decompression system for the treatment of neurogenic intermittent claudication: two‐year follow‐up results. Spine 2005;30(12):1351‐8. - PubMed
    1. Zucherman JF, Hsu KY, Hartjen CA, Mehalic TF, Implicito DA, Martin MJ, et al. A prospective randomized multi‐center study for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis with the X STOP interspinous implant: 1‐year results. European Spine Journal 2004;13(1):22‐31. - PMC - PubMed

References to studies excluded from this review

Athiviraham 2007 {published data only}
    1. Athiviraham A, Yen D. Is spinal stenosis better treated surgically or nonsurgically?. Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research 2007;458:90‐3. - PubMed
Atlas 1996 {published data only}
    1. Atlas SJ, Deyo RA, Keller RB, Chapin AM, Patrick DL, Long JM, et al. The Maine Lumbar Spine Study, Part III. 1‐Year outcomes of surgical and nonsurgical management of lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1996;21(15):1787‐94. - PubMed
    1. Atlas SJ, Keller RB, Robson D, Deyo RA, Singer DE. Surgical and nonsurgical management of lumbar spinal stenosis: four‐year outcomes from the Maine Lumbar Spine Study. Spine 2000;25(5):556‐62. - PubMed
    1. Atlas SJ, Keller RB, Wu YA, Deyo RA, Singer DE. Long‐term outcomes of surgical and nonsurgical management of lumbar spinal stenosis: 8 to 10 year results from the Maine Lumbar Spine Study. Spine 2005;30(8):936‐43. - PubMed
Chang 2005 {published data only}
    1. Chang Y, Singer DE, Wu YA, Keller RB, Atlas SJ. The effect of surgical and nonsurgical treatment on longitudinal outcomes of lumbar spinal stenosis over 10 years. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2005;53(5):785‐92. - PubMed
Croft 2012 {published data only}
    1. Croft A. Conservative vs. surgical care of lumbar spinal stenosis. Dynamic Chiropractic 2012;30(5):1‐5.
Hurri 1998 {published data only}
    1. Hurri H, Slatis P, Soini J, Tallroth K, Alaranta H, Laine T, et al. Lumbar spinal stenosis: assessment of long‐term outcome 12 years after operative and conservative treatment. Journal of Spinal Disorders 1998;11(2):110‐5. - PubMed
Keller 1996 {published data only}
    1. Keller RB, Atlas SJ, Singer DE. The Maine Lumbar Spine Study, part I: background and concepts. Spine 1996;21(15):1769‐76. - PubMed
Malmivaara 2007a {published data only}
    1. Malmivaara A, Slatis P, Heliovaara M, Sainio P, Kinnunen H, Kankare J, et al. Surgery reduced pain and disability in lumbar spinal stenosis better than nonoperative treatment. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery [American] 2007;89(8):1872. - PubMed
Mariconda 2002 {published data only}
    1. Mariconda M1, Fava R, Gatto A, Longo C, Milano C. Unilateral laminectomy for bilateral decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis: a prospective comparative study with conservatively treated patients. Journal of Spinal Disorders and Techniques 2002;15(1):39‐46. - PubMed
Ohtori 2014 {published data only}
    1. Ohtori S, Yamashita M, Murata Y, Eguchi Y, Aoki Y, Ataka H, et al. Incidence of nocturnal leg cramps in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis before and after conservative and surgical treatment. Yonsei Medical Journal 2014;55(3):779‐84. - PMC - PubMed
Paker 2005 {published data only}
    1. Paker N, Turkmen C, Bugdayci D, Tekdos D, Erbil M. Comparison of conservative and surgical treatment results in lumbar spinal stenosis. Turkish Neurosurgery 2005;15(4):182‐4.
Pearson 2011 {published data only}
    1. Pearson A, Blood E, Lurie J, Abdu W, Sengupta D, Frymoyer JW, et al. Predominant leg pain is associated with better surgical outcomes in degenerative spondylolisthesis and spinal stenosis: results from the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT). Spine 2011;36(3):219‐29. - PMC - PubMed
Tosteson 2011 {published data only}
    1. Tosteson AN, Tosteson TD, Lurie JD, Abdu W, Herkowitz H, Andersson G, et al. Comparative effectiveness evidence from the spine patient outcomes research trial: surgical versus nonoperative care for spinal stenosis, degenerative spondylolisthesis, and intervertebral disc herniation. Spine 2011;36(24):2061‐8. - PMC - PubMed

References to studies awaiting assessment

Delitto 2015 {published data only}
    1. Delitto A, Piva SR, Moore CG, Fritz JM, Wisniewski SR, Josbeno DA. Surgery versus nonsurgical treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomized trial. Annals of Internal Medicine 2015;162(7):465‐73. - PMC - PubMed

References to ongoing studies

Overdevest 2011 {published data only}
    1. Overdevest GM, Luijsterburg PA, Brand R, Koes BW, Bierma‐Zienstra SM, Eekhof JA, et al. Design of the Verbiest trial: cost‐effectiveness of surgery versus prolonged conservative treatment in patients with lumbar stenosis. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 2011;12:57. - PMC - PubMed

Additional references

Ammendolia 2011
    1. Ammendolia C, Stuber K, deBruin LK, Furlan AD, Kennedy CA, Rampersaud Y, et al. Non‐operative treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis with neurogenic claudication: a systematic review. Spine 2011;10:E609‐16. - PubMed
Ammendolia 2012
    1. Ammendolia C, Stuber K, Bruin LK, Furlan AD, Kennedy CA, Rampersaud YR, et al. Nonoperative treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis with neurogenic claudication: a systematic review. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2012 May 1;37(10):E609‐16. - PubMed
Ammendolia 2013
    1. Ammendolia C, Stuber KJ, Rok E, Rampersaud R, Kennedy CA, Pennick V, et al. Nonoperative treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis with neurogenic claudication. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013 Aug 30;8:CD010712. - PMC - PubMed
Atlas 2006
    1. Atlas S, Delitto A. Spinal stenosis: surgical versus non surgical treatment. Spinal Stenosis: Surgical versus Non Surgical Treatment. Baltimore, Maryland: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2006; Vol. 443:198‐207. - PubMed
Benoist 2002
    1. Benoist M. The natural history of lumbar degenerative spinal stenosis. Joint, Bone, Spine 2002;69(50):450‐7. - PubMed
Binder 2002
    1. Binder DK, Schmidt MH, Weinstein PR. Lumbar spinal stenosis. Seminars In Neurology 2002;22(2):157‐66. - PubMed
Botwin 2007
    1. Botwin K, Brown LA, Fishman M, Rao S. Fluoroscopically guided caudal epidural steroid injections in degenerative lumbar spine stenosis. Pain Physician 2007;10(4):547‐58. - PubMed
Boutron 2005
    1. Boutron I, Moher D, Tugwell P, Giraudeau B, Poiraudeau S, Nizard R, et al. A checklist to evaluate a report of a non pharmacological trial (CLEAR NPT) was developed using consensus. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2005;58:1233‐40. - PubMed
Carragee 2010
    1. Carragee EJ. The increasing morbidity of elective spinal stenosis surgery: is it necessary?. JAMA 2010;303(13):1309‐10. - PubMed
Chad 2007
    1. Chad, DA. Lumbar spinal stenosis. Neurologic Clinics 2007;25(2):407‐18. - PubMed
Ciol 1996
    1. Ciol MA, Deyo RA, Howell E, Kreif S. An assessment of surgery for spinal stenosis: time trends, geographic variations, complications, and reoperations. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 1996;44(3):185‐90. - PubMed
Ciricillo 1993
    1. Ciricillo SF, Weinstein PR. Lumbar spinal stenosis. The Western Journal of Medicine 1993;158:171‐7. - PMC - PubMed
Deyo 2006
    1. Deyo RA, Mirza SK. Trends and variations in the use of spine surgery. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 2006;443:139‐46. - PubMed
Deyo 2010
    1. Deyo RA, Mirza SK, Martin BI. Trends, major medical complications, and charges associated with surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis in older adults. JAMA 2010;303:1259‐65. - PMC - PubMed
Deyo 2011
    1. Deyo RA, Martin BI, Kreuter W, Jarvik JG, Angier H, Mirza SK. Revision surgery following operations for lumbar stenosis. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery [American] 2011;93(21):1979‐86. - PMC - PubMed
Deyo 2014
    1. Deyo RA, Dworkin SF, Amtmann D, Andersson G, Borenstein D, Carragee E, et al. Focus article: report of the NIH Task Force on Research Standards for Chronic Low Back Pain. European Spine Journal 2014;23(10):2028‐45. - PubMed
Duffy 2014
    1. Duffy S, Misso K, Noake C, Ross J, Stirk L. Supplementary searches of PubMed to improve currency of MEDLINE and MEDLINE In‐Process searches via OvidSP. Kleijnen Systematic Reviews Ltd, York. Poster presented at the UK InterTASC Information Specialists' Sub‐Group (ISSG) Workshop; 9 July 2014; Exeter: UK (2014) (accessed 6.8.14). https://medicine.exeter.ac.uk/media/universityofexeter/medicalschool/res.... - PubMed
Fanuele 2000
    1. Fanuele JC, Birkmeyer NJ, Abdu MD, Tosteson TD, Weinstein JN. The impact of spinal problems on the health status of patients: have we underestimated the effect?. Spine 2000;25(12):1509‐14. - PubMed
Furlan 2009
    1. Furlan AD, Pennick V, Bombardier C, Tulder M, Editorial BCBRG. 2009 Updated method guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane Back Review Group. Spine 2009;34(18):1929‐41. - PubMed
Haig 2006
    1. Haig AJ, Tong HC, Yamakawa KS, Quint DJ, Hoff JT, Chiodo A, et al. Spinal stenosis, back pain, or no symptoms at all? A masked study comparing radiologic and electrodiagnostic diagnoses to the clinical impression. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2006;7(7):897‐903. - PubMed
Haig 2010
    1. Haig AJ, Tomkins CC. Diagnosis and management of lumbar spinal stenosis. JAMA 2010;303(1):71‐2. - PubMed
Higgins 2011
    1. Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. www.cochrane‐handbook.org.
Iversen 2001
    1. Iversen MD, Katz JN. Examination findings and self‐reported walking capacity in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. Physical Therapy 2001;81(7):1296‐306. - PubMed
Johnsson 1987
    1. Johnsson KE, Rosén I, Udén A. Neurophysiologic investigation of patients with spinal stenosis. Spine 1987;12(5):483‐7. - PubMed
Kovacs 2011
    1. Kovacs F, Urrútia G, Alarcón JD. Surgery versus conservative treatment for symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Spine 2011;36(20):E1335–51. - PubMed
Lurie 2003
    1. Lurie JD, Birkmeyer NJ, Weinstein JN. Rates of advanced spinal imaging and spine surgery. Spine 2003;28(6):616‐20. - PubMed
Negrini 2006
    1. Negrini S, Giovannoni S, Minozzi S, Barneschi G, Bonaiuti D, Bussotti A, et al. Diagnostic therapeutic flow‐charts for low back pain patients: the Italian clinical guidelines. Europa Medicophysica 2006;42(2):151‐70. - PubMed
Negrini 2010
    1. Negrini S, Zaina F, Romano M, Atanasio S, Fusco C, Trevisan C. Rehabilitation of lumbar spine disorders: an evidence‐based clinical practice approach. In: Frontera WR, Delisa JA, Gans BM, Walsh NE, Robinson LR editor(s). DeLisa’s Physical & Rehabilitation – Principles and Practice. 5th Edition. Baltimore, Maryland: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2010:837‐82.
Porter 1996
    1. Porter RW. Spinal stenosis and neurogenic claudication. Spine 1996;21(17):2046‐52. - PubMed
Postacchini 1999
    1. Postacchini F. Surgical management of lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 1999;15(24):1043‐7. - PubMed
Sobottke 2010
    1. Sobottke R, Röllinghoff M, Siewe J, Schlegel U, Yagdiran A, Spangenberg M, et al. Clinical outcomes and quality of life 1 year after open microsurgical decompression or implantation of an interspinous stand‐alone spacer. Minimally Invasive Neurosurgery 2010;53(4):179‐83. - PubMed
Stucki 1995
    1. Stucki G, Liang MH, Fossel AH, Katz JN. Relative responsiveness of condition‐specific and generic health status measures in degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1995;48(11):1369‐78. - PubMed
Taylor 1994
    1. Taylor VM, Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Kreuter W. Low back pain hospitalization. Recent United States trends and regional variations. Spine 1994;19(11):1207‐12; discussion 13. - PubMed
Tomkins 2009
    1. Tomkins CC, Battié MC, Rogers T, Jiang H, Petersen S. A criterion measure of walking capacity in lumbar spinal stenosis and its comparison with a treadmill protocol. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009;34(22):2444‐9. - PubMed
Tomkins 2010
    1. Tomkins CC, Dimoff KH, Forman HS, Gordon ES, McPhail J, Wong JR, et al. Physical therapy treatment options for lumbar spinal stenosis. Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation 2010;23(1):31‐7. - PubMed
Tomkins‐Lane 2012
    1. Tomkins‐Lane CC, Holz SC, Yamakawa KS, Phalke VV, Quint DJ, Miner J, et al. Predictors of walking performance and walking capacity in people with lumbar spinal stenosis, low back pain, and asymptomatic controls. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2012;93(4):647‐53. - PMC - PubMed
Tomkins‐Lane 2012b
    1. Tomkins‐Lane CC, Haig AJ. A review of activity monitors as a new technology for objectifying function in lumbar spinal stenosis. Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation 2012;25(3):177‐85. - PubMed
Tomkins‐Lane 2015
    1. Tomkins‐Lane CC, Lafave LM, Parnell JA, Rempel J, Moriartey S, Andreas Y, et al. The spinal stenosis pedometer and nutrition lifestyle intervention (SSPANLI): development and pilot. The Spine Journal 2015;15(4):577‐86. - PubMed
van Tulder 2003
    1. Tulder M, Furlan A, Bombardier C, Bouter L, Editorial Board Cochrane Back Review Group. Updated method guidelines for systemic reviews in the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group. Spine 2003;28(12):1290‐9. - PubMed
Watters 2008
    1. Watters WC, Baisden J, Gilbert TJ, Kreiner S, Resnick DK, Bono CM, et al. Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: an evidence‐based clinical guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. The Spine Journal 2008;8(2):305‐10. - PubMed
Weinstein 2007
    1. Weinstein JN, Lurie JD, Tosteson TD, Hanscom B, Tosteson AN, Blood EA, et al. Surgical versus non surgical treatment for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. New England Journal of Medicine 2007;356(22):2257‐70. - PMC - PubMed
Whitman 2003
    1. Whitman JM, Flynn TW, Fritz JM. Nonsurgical management of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a literature review and a case series of three patients managed with physical therapy. Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Clinics of North America 2003;14:77‐101. - PubMed