PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Wouter A Moojen AU - Mark P Arts AU - Wilco C H Jacobs AU - Erik W van Zwet AU - M Elske van den Akker-van Marle AU - Bart W Koes AU - Carmen L A M Vleggeert-Lankamp AU - Wilco C Peul TI - Interspinous process device versus standard conventional surgical decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: randomised controlled trial AID - 10.1136/bjsports-2014-f6415rep DP - 2015 Jan 01 TA - British Journal of Sports Medicine PG - 135--135 VI - 49 IP - 2 4099 - http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/49/2/135.short 4100 - http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/49/2/135.full SO - Br J Sports Med2015 Jan 01; 49 AB - STUDY QUESTION Is interspinous process device implantation more effective in the short term (eight weeks) than conventional surgical decompression for patients with intermittent neurogenic claudication due to lumbar spinal stenosis? SUMMARY ANSWER The use of interspinous implants did not result in a better outcome than conventional decompression, but the reoperation rate was significantly higher. WHAT IS KNOWN AND WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS Bony decompression and treatment with interspinous process devices are superior to conservative and non-surgical treatment for intermittent neurogenic claudication due to lumbar spinal stenosis. Interspinous implants surgery is not superior to bony decompression, and the reoperation rate is significantly higher.