The Analysis Study of Surgical Intervention of Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Comprehensive Systematic Review
Keywords:
degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis, laminectomy, minimally invasive spine surgery, endoscopic decompression, spinal fusion, surgical outcomesAbstract
Background: Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLS) is a progressive condition characterized by narrowing of the spinal canal, leading to nerve compression and significant morbidity. Surgical intervention is often required for patients with refractory symptoms. Various surgical techniques have been developed, including laminectomy, discectomy, interspinous spacers, minimally invasive lumbar decompression (MILD), endoscopic decompression, and pedicle screw-rod instrumentation with fusion. However, the optimal surgical approach remains a subject of debate. Methods: This systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA 2020 guidelines. A comprehensive search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Scopus to identify studies published between 2015 and 2025 that evaluated surgical interventions for DLS. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, or case-control studies assessing surgical outcomes, including pain relief, functional improvement, complication rates, and reoperation rates. Results: After screening and full-text review, eight studies met the inclusion criteria. The results suggest that minimally invasive and endoscopic techniques are associated with improved postoperative recovery, lower complication rates, and enhanced functional outcomes compared to traditional open procedures. Laminectomy remains a widely used standard approach, but fusion techniques offer additional stability in select cases. The studies demonstrated a low risk of bias overall, particularly among RCTs, while retrospective studies exhibited greater methodological limitations. Conclusion: Minimally invasive and endoscopic surgical approaches for DLS offer promising outcomes in terms of pain relief, functional improvement, and recovery time. However, patient-specific factors, surgeon expertise, and long-term follow-up remain critical in determining the optimal surgical technique. Further high-quality, multi-center RCTs are necessary to strengthen the evidence base and guide clinical decision-making.
References
Sudhir Diwan, Dawood Sayed, Timothy R Deer, Amber Salomons, Kevin Liang, An Algorithmic Approach to Treating Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: An Evidenced-Based Approach, Pain Medicine, Volume 20, Issue Supplement_2, December 2019, Pages S23–S31, https://doi.org/10.1093/pm/pnz133
Chen L, Guan B, Anderson DB, et al. Surgical interventions for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review with network meta-analysis. BMC Med. 2024;22(1):430. Published 2024 Oct 8. doi:10.1186/s12916-024-03653-z
Katz JN, Zimmerman ZE, Mass H, Makhni MC. Diagnosis and management of lumbar spinal stenosis: a review. JAMA. 2022;327:1688–1699.
Tomkins-Lane C, Melloh M, Lurie J, Smuck M, Battié MC, Freeman B, et al. ISSLS Prize Winner: Consensus on the Clinical Diagnosis of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Results of an International Delphi Study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2016;41:1239–1246.
Anderson DB, Beard DJ, Rannou F, Hunter DJ, Suri P, Chen L, et al. Clinical assessment and management of lumbar spinal stenosis: clinical dilemmas and considerations for surgical referral. Lancet Rheumatol. 2024;6:e727–e732.
Chen L, Sun Q, Chou R, Anderson DB, Shi B, Chen Y, et al. Low back pain-driven inpatient stays in the United States: a nationwide repeated cross-sectional analysis. Int J Surg. 2024;110:1411–1419.network meta-analysis. Orthop Surg. 2022;14:1281–1293.
Aygun H, Abdulshafi K. Unilateral Biportal Endoscopy Versus Tubular Microendoscopy in Management of Single Level Degenerative Lumbar Canal Stenosis: A Prospective Study. Clin Spine Surg. 2021;34(6):E323-E328. doi:10.1097/BSD.0000000000001122
Bae HW, Davis RJ, Lauryssen C, Leary S, Maislin G, Musacchio MJ Jr. Three-Year Follow-up of the Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial of Coflex Interlaminar Stabilization vs Instrumented Fusion in Patients With Lumbar Stenosis. Neurosurgery. 2016;79(2):169-181. doi:10.1227/NEU.0000000000001237
Chin KR, Seale JA, Spayde E, et al. Prospective 5-year follow-up of L5-S1 versus L4-5 midline decompression and interspinous-interlaminar fixation as a stand-alone treatment for spinal stenosis compared with laminectomies. J Spine Surg. 2023;9(4):398-408. doi:10.21037/jss-23-49
Hamawandi SA, Sulaiman II, Al-Humairi AK. Microdecompression versus Open Laminectomy and Posterior Stabilization for Multilevel Lumbar Spine Stenosis: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Pain Res Manag. 2019;2019:7214129. Published 2019 Nov 7. doi:10.1155/2019/7214129 Kang T,
Park SY, Kang CH, Lee SH, Park JH, Suh SW. Is biportal technique/endoscopic spinal surgery satisfactory for lumbar spinal stenosis patients?: A prospective randomized comparative study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2019;98(18):e15451. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000015451
Kotheeranurak V, Tangdamrongtham T, Lin GX, et al. Comparison of full-endoscopic and tubular-based microscopic decompression in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomized controlled trial. Eur Spine J. 2023;32(8):2736-2747. doi:10.1007/s00586-023-07678-5
Ko S, Oh T. Comparison of bilateral decompression via unilateral laminotomy and conventional laminectomy for single-level degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis regarding low back pain, functional outcome, and quality of life - A Randomized Controlled, Prospective Trial. J Orthop Surg Res. 2019;14(1):252. Published 2019 Aug 8. doi:10.1186/s13018-019-1298-3
Heo DH, Lee DC, Park CK. Comparative analysis of three types of minimally invasive decompressive surgery for lumbar central stenosis: biportal endoscopy, uniportal endoscopy, and microsurgery. Neurosurg Focus. 2019;46(5):E9. doi:10.3171/2019.2.FOCUS197
Anderson DB, Luca K, Jensen RK, Eyles JP, Van Gelder JM, Friedly JL, et al. A critical appraisal of clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine J. 2021;21:455–464.
Bussières A, Cancelliere C, Ammendolia C, Comer CM, Zoubi FA, Châtillon CE, et al. Non-surgical interventions for lumbar spinal stenosis leading to neurogenic claudication: a clinical practice guideline. J Pain. 2021;22:1015–1039.
Ho E, Ferreira M, Chen L, Simic M, Ashton-James C, Comachio J, et al. Psychological interventions for chronic non-specific low back pain: protocol of a systematic review with network meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2020;10:e034996.
Fan Y, Zhu L. Decompression alone versus fusion and Coflex in the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease: a network meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore). 2020;99:e19457.
Li W, Wei H, Zhang R. Different lumbar fusion techniques for lumbar spinal stenosis: a Bayesian network meta-analysis. BMC Surg. 2023;23:345.
Liang Z, Xu X, Chen X, Zhuang Y, Wang R, Chen C. Clinical evaluation of surgery for single-segment lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review and Bayesian
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Muliagus Rimbana Chekmat, Imam Hidayat (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors publishing here keep copyright but grant the journal first publication rights, under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License. They can distribute their work non-exclusively elsewhere with an acknowledgment of its first publication in this journal. Posting the work online before and during submission for earlier and greater citation is encouraged, reflecting Open Access benefits.
