RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Interspinous process device versus standard conventional surgical decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: randomised controlled trial
JF British Journal of Sports Medicine
JO Br J Sports Med
FD BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and British Association of Sport and Exercise Medicine
SP 135
OP 135
DO 10.1136/bjsports-2014-f6415rep
VO 49
IS 2
A1 Wouter A Moojen
A1 Mark P Arts
A1 Wilco C H Jacobs
A1 Erik W van Zwet
A1 M Elske van den Akker-van Marle
A1 Bart W Koes
A1 Carmen L A M Vleggeert-Lankamp
A1 Wilco C Peul
YR 2015
UL http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/49/2/135.abstract
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.