4.5 Article

Interspinous spacers for lumbar foraminal stenosis: formal trials are justified

期刊

EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL
卷 22, 期 -, 页码 S47-S53

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00586-012-2650-z

关键词

Lumbar radiculopathy; Foraminal stenosis; Interspinous implant; X-STOP; Outcome measures; Oswestry disability index; SF-36; Ceiling/floor effects

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To determine whether preliminary evidence supports X-STOP implants as an effective treatment for lumbar radiculopathy secondary to foraminal stenosis, and if larger formal trials are warranted. Participants had a clinical diagnosis of lumbar radiculopathy supported by MRI findings of foraminal stenosis and relevant nerve root compression. Self-reported disability and pain were measured pre-operation, early and late post-operation using the widely used Oswestry Disablity Index (ODI) and the bodily pain scale of the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36BP). The statistical significance (paired samples t test; Wilcoxon signed ranks test), and clinical significance (Cohen's effect size; Standardised response means) of change scores was determined. Fifteen people had X-STOP implants. Data pre- early- and late post-operation were available for ten. Self-reported disability and pain improved substantially by the early post operative measurement. Mean change scores (ODI = 29; SF-36BP = -45), significant at the p < 0.05 but not significant at the p < 0.001, were very large and effect sizes exceeded notably criteria for large clinical improvements (> 0.80). Improvements were maintained at 2-3 years. Both scales had floor and ceiling effects implying changes may be underestimated. There were no surgical complications. In this small study, X-STOP appeared safe and effective. It is less invasive than other established surgical procedures, but does not jeopardise other options in the event of failure. Large scale clinical trials are justified but floor and ceiling effects suggest that the ODI and SF-36 may not be the best choice of outcome measures for those studies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据