View clinical trials related to Spinal Stenosis.
Filter by:To evaluate clinical, radiologic and patient-reported outcomes who have been treated 1 or 2 levels with the coflex® Interlaminar Technology or decompression with or without fusion.
The purpose of this trial is to assess whether the Total Posterior Spine System (TOPS System) is more effective than transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) when used to stabilize a single lumbar level (L2 - L5) following surgical decompression in patients diagnosed with (1) at least moderate lumbar spinal stenosis, and (2) Grade 1 spondylolisthesis (or retrolisthesis), and (3) thickening of the ligamentum flavum or scarring of the facet joint capsule. Success will be assessed by means of a composite endpoint that measures improvement in in patient reported outcomes and the absence of any major device related complications.
The purpose of this study is to determine the effects of different rates of Caudal Epidural Steroid Injection (CESI) on clinical outcomes of the patients.
Prospective, multicenter non comparative and observational study (post-market clinical follow-up). Patients operated with PASS OCT® manufactured by MEDICREA® INTERNATIONAL between July 2016 and July 2017. The inclusion period will be 12 months and the follow-up 24 months
Surgical stress induces stress hormone release and sympathetic hyperactivation. Dexmedetomidine has sympatholytic effect and attenuates stress responses. This study investigate the effect of dexmedetomidine on stress responses and autonomic nervous system balance in patients undergoing major spine surgery.
There is no international consensus on evaluation and surgical treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis (LSS). The indication for operative treatment is relative, and the variation in surgical rates and procedures is significant, both within and between countries. Understanding practice-based variety is critical since these differences may reflect a disparity in quality of the health care in different institutions, regions, or countries. Norway, Sweden, and Denmark do all have National spine registers for research and quality assessment. Comparing indications for surgery, selected procedure, patient reported outcomes, and factors predicting outcome after surgery for LSS between these countries could provide information about optimal indications and strategy for surgery. Register-based studies have advantages such as large sample sizes and high external validity, but also limitations such as lower follow-up rates, and inferior data quality compared to clinical trials. Hypotheses: Between these three countries, there are no differences in (i) indications for surgery, (ii) patient-reported outcome after surgery or (iii) risk factors associated to outcome are similar.
The average life expectancy in Denmark is increasing resulting in an increasing part of the population having age-related disease, ex lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). LSS causes constriction of the nerves in the lumbar spine resulting in pain in the legs and lower back, especially when standing and walking, known as neurogenic claudicatio(Goh KJ FAU - Khalifa et al.). LSS occurs in a combination of degenerative changes in the lower back, including hypertrophy of the ligamentum flavum, arthrosis of the facet joints and bulging of the disc. Current treatment of LSS is varied ranging from non-operative conservative treatment to operation. Operative intervention shows very good results according to physical ability and pain(Christensen FB et al.;Hee HT and Wong;McGregor AH FAU - Hughes and Hughes;Xu et al.), but the most optimal treatment is still debated. Nevertheless, a decompression and, if needed, a spinal fusion is recommended. The investigators want to se whether i-FACTOR improves clinical outcomes compared to using allograft in spinal fusion in the elderly, and thereby find an improved methods operating this difficult patient population. The hypothesis is, that there is no difference in clinical outcomes whether you use i-FACTOR or allograft i non-instrumented spinal fusion surgery in patients with spinal stenosis due to degenerative listhesis.
The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical efficacy, incidence of ventral epidural spreading and provocation of concordant paresthesia, amount of radiation exposure and total procedure time between transforaminal and parasagittal interlaminar epidural injection.
The rate of success 12 months after surgery is reported to be 60-65% in patients with lumbar disc herniation and 60-70% in patients with spinal stenosis. At the Back Center Copenhagen, patients with persistent low back pain caused by lumbar disc herniation and spinal stenosis are treated by a multidisciplinary team comprising rheumatologists, physiotherapists, chiropractors, and social workers according to current guidelines. Therefore we have a unique opportunity to report the long term outcome in candidates for surgery, regardless of whether they have surgery or not, after having received optimal but unsuccessful nonsurgical treatment. The purpose of this study is to answer the following questions: 1) What is the proportion of patients operated upon after referral to surgical evaluation with positive MRI findings, persistent low back pain, and poor outcome following non-operative treatment? 2) What was the outcome in these patients 2 years following referral? 3) Where any baseline variables predictive of good or poor postsurgical outcome? 4) Where there any difference in outcome in patients with or without surgery?
Appropriate fluid management is an important part of anesthesia in patients undergoing surgery, and several dynamic indices have been suggested to have high predictability for fluid responsiveness in patients receiving mechanical ventilation. Among various surgical positions, the prone position is known to cause unique physiologic and hemodynamic changes and affect the predictability and cut-off values of dynamic indices for fluid responsiveness. A previous study reported that pulse pressure variation (PPV) and corrected flow time were able to predict fluid responsiveness with relatively high accuracy in patients undergoing spine surgery in the prone position using a Wilson frame. However, the Jackson frame is known to have less effects on the cardiovascular system compared to the Wilson frame, and therefore may be physiologically more appropriate in patients undergoing surgery in the prone position. The pleth variability index (PVI) is a dynamic index that can be monitored non-invasively in patients under mechanical ventilation. The present study aims evaluate the validity of PPV and pleth variability index (PVI) as predictors of fluid responsiveness in the supine and prone positions in patients undergoing posterior lumbar spinal fusion using the Jackson table.