Evidence mapPaperPMID 40820115Full record

ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2025

Decompression only versus decompression plus fusion for spinal canal stenosis of adjacent segment during primary single-segment lumbar fusion surgery.

Fabrice Scheurer, Mazda Farshad, Thorsten Jentzsch

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in 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, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Fabrice ScheurerUniversity Spine Center Zurich (UWZH), Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zurich.
Mazda FarshadUniversity Spine Center Zurich (UWZH), Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zurich.
Thorsten JentzschUniversity Spine Center Zurich (UWZH), Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zurich, . thorsten.jentzsch@balgrist.ch.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe aim was to investigate if spinal canal stenosis in the adjacent segment of a primary single-segment fusion surgery should be treated by decompression only or decompression plus fusion.

methodsThis study is a retrospective cohort study. Inclusion criteria were all adult patients with spinal canal stenosis without relevant foraminal stenosis in the adjacent segment when undergoing primary single-segment lumbar fusion surgery with a followup of at least 1 year. One group was treated with decompression only of the adjacent segment, while the other group underwent decompression plus fusion of the adjacent segment. The primary outcome was the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) pre- and postoperatively. Secondary outcomes were visual analogue scale (VAS) back/leg and revision surgery.

resultsThere were no differences in baseline data when comparing the decompression only group (n = 53) with the decompression plus fusion group (n = 68) regarding age, gender, body mass index, American Society of Anaesthesiologists classification, Frailty Index, and smoking. The change of ODI from pre- to postoperatively at 3 months was significantly better for the decompression only group (- 28 [IQR 20] versus - 22 [IQR 20], p = 0.047, linear regression coefficient 7 [95% confidence interval 1.2-12.3], p = 0.02). This difference is diluted to similar ODI values at final followup after 15 (IQR 15) months. Other clinical outcomes and revision rates were similar in both groups.

conclusionsPatients with lumbar spinal canal stenosis without foraminal stenosis in the adjacent segment show no significant difference with adjacent segment decompression versus additional fusion when undergoing a primary single-level fusion. Decompression only of the adjacent segment could potentially be favored to opt for a slightly better short-term clinical outcome after 3 months.

Indexed as

Decompression, SurgicalLumbar VertebraeSpinal FusionSpinal StenosisAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeDecompressionFusionImplantsLaminotomyLumbarPatient-reported outcome measuresSpineStenosis

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.