Clinical Outcome of Muscle-Preserving Interlaminar Decompression (MILD) for Lumbar Spinal Canal Stenosis: Minimum 5-Year Follow-Up Study

• Published in: Spine Surgery and Related Research Vol. 3; no. 1; pp. 54 - 60
• Main Authors: Hatta, Yoichiro, Nagae, Masateru, Kubo, Toshikazu, Mikami, Yasuo, Takatori, Ryota, Tonomura, Hitoshi
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Japan The Japanese Society for Spine Surgery and Related Research 25.01.2019
• Subjects: interlaminar decompression; less-invasive surgery; lumbar spinal canal stenosis; microsurgery; midline approach; Original; lumbar spinal canal stenosis; microsurgery; interlaminar decompression; midline approach; less-invasive surgery
• DOI: 10.22603/ssrr.2017-0097
• ISSN: 2432-261X

Introduction: Favorable short-term outcomes have been reported following muscle-preserving interlaminar decompression (MILD), a less invasive decompression surgery for lumbar spinal canal stenosis (LSCS). However, there are no reports of mid- to long-term outcomes. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes five or more years after treatment of LSCS with MILD.Methods: Subjects were 84 cases with LSCS (44 males; mean age, 68.7 years) examined five or more years after MILD. All patients had leg pain symptoms, with claudication and/or radicular pain. The patients were divided into three groups depending on the spinal deformity: 44 cases were without deformity (N group); 20 had degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS group); and 20 had degenerative scoliosis (DLS group). The clinical evaluation was performed using Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scores, and revision surgeries were examined. Changes in lumbar alignment and stability were evaluated using plain radiographs.Results: The overall JOA score recovery rate was 65.5% at final follow-up. The recovery rate was 69.5% in the N group, 65.2% in the DS group, and 54.0% in the DLS group, with the rate of the DLS group being significantly lower. There were 16 revision surgery cases (19.0%): seven in the N group (15.9%), three in the DS group (15.0%) and six in the DLS group (30.0%). There were no significant differences between pre- and postoperative total lumbar alignment or dynamic intervertebral angle in any of the groups, slip percentage in the DS group, or Cobb angle in the DLS group.Conclusions: The mid-term clinical results of MILD were satisfactory, including in cases with deformity, and there was no major impact on radiologic lumbar alignment or stability. The clinical outcomes of cases with degenerative scoliosis were significantly less favorable and the revision rate was high. This should be taken into consideration when deciding on the surgical procedure.