Perioperative medicine & outcomes
Comparison analysis of safety outcomes and the rate of subsequent spinal procedures between interspinous spacer without decompression versus minimally invasive lumbar decompression
Authors' conclusion
These results showed ISD and MILD procedures have an equivalent safety profile. However, ISDs demonstrated lower rates of open decompression and MILD.
Study context
- Population
- Medicare patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis receiving ISD or minimally invasive lumbar decompression (MILD) as first surgical intervention, 2017 to 2021matched cohorts
- Participants
- 3,614 vs 3,614
- Exposure
- ISD vs MILD
- ISDn = 3,614
- MILDn = 3,614reference
- Outcome
- Safety outcomes and rate of subsequent spinal procedures
Methodological detailspropensity-score matched (1:1), Medicare claims database
- Propensity-score matched (1:1)
- Medicare claims database
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
Subsequent spinal procedures
- Risk of any intervention lower with ISD vs MILD
- 21%
- Risk of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS)-related intervention lower with ISD vs MILD
- 28%
- Risk of open decompression lower with ISD vs MILD
- 21%
- Risk of MILD lower with ISD vs MILD
- 81%
- No significant difference in risk of fusion or ISD
- all p≥0.241
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Safety
Postoperative complications; life-threatening complications within 30 days
- No significant differences between cohorts
- all p≥0.241
Original publication
Comparison analysis of safety outcomes and the rate of subsequent spinal procedures between interspinous spacer without decompression versus minimally invasive lumbar decompression. Reg Anesth Pain Med. Published 29 May 2023. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →