European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society
-
Redundant nerve roots of the cauda equina in lumbar spinal canal stenosis, an MR study on 500 cases.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate magnetic resonance (MR)-detected redundant nerve roots (RNRs) of the cauda equina in patients with lumbar spinal canal stenosis. ⋯ With an occurrence rate of 15%, RNRs of the cauda equina are not uncommon in cases with lumbar spinal canal stenosis. Advanced age, a canal stenosis at L2-4, and the presence of a sharp intracanal protuberance in the site of the stenosis are the related risk factors. Patients' age and the location of RNRs may be of prognostic value.
-
The Metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) secondary to lung cancer (LC) has worse prognosis when compared to MSCC related to other solid tumors. The purpose of this study is to identify the survival time and the prognostic factors in the MSCC secondary to LC. ⋯ The prognosis of the MSCC secondary to LC was poor. Considering the small number of studies identified, further research is needed to identify prognostic factors that are independent of the MSCC secondary to LC.
-
To compare the effectiveness of techniques of posterior decompression that limit the extent of bony decompression or to avoid removal of posterior midline structures of the lumbar spine versus conventional facet-preserving laminectomy for the treatment of patients with degenerative lumbar stenosis. ⋯ The evidence provided by this systematic review for the effects of unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression, bilateral laminotomy and split-spinous process laminotomy compared with conventional laminectomy on functional disability, perceived recovery and leg pain is of low or very low quality. Therefore, further research is necessary to establish whether these techniques provide a safe and effective alternative for conventional laminectomy. Proposed advantages of these techniques regarding the incidence of iatrogenic instability and postoperative back pain are plausible, but definitive conclusions are limited by poor methodology and poor reporting of outcome measures among included studies.