Introduction: As the population ages, more elderly patients suffer from spinal stenosis requiring lumbar fusion. However, there are few and conflicting results regarding the clinical outcome of lumbar fusion. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficiency of posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in over-75-year-old patients and analyze the relative effectiveness of lumbar spinal fusion surgery compared with decompression surgery for spinal stenosis.

Methods: This retrospective review evaluated 25 patients aged 75 to 93 who were diagnosed with spinal stenosis and underwent PLIF for 24 months. The control group included 25 patients who were matched for age, gender, level, race, and severity of stenosis, matched and who underwent decompressive laminectomy and flavectomy without fusion (DLF).

Results: The fusion rate in the PLIF group was 32.0%, 84.0%, and 96.0% at 6, 12, and 24 months, respectively. During the follow-up period, 4 (16%) and 2 (8%) patients underwent revision surgery in the DLF and PLIF groups, respectively. The back pain in the DLF group decreased from 5.6 to 2.1 at 6 months and then substantially increased to 3.4 at 24 months. The decrease in back pain score after treatment was greater in the PLIF group compared to the DLF group (P<.01) with a statistically significant difference in the trend in the two groups over time (P<.01).

Conclusions: Even in elderly patients, lumbar surgery appears to be a safe and justifiable treatment for spinal stenosis. Lumbar fusion surgery rather than decompressive surgery was recommended for those patients who mainly complained of back pain.

Patient Care: This study showed that even in elderly patients, lumbar surgery appears to be a safe and justifiable treatment for spinal stenosis. Lumbar fusion with instrumentation may be needed rather than decompression only in patients who complained mainly of back pain.

Learning Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficiency of PLIF in over-75-year-old patients and to analyze the relative effectiveness of lumbar spinal fusion surgery compared with decompression surgery for spinal stenosis.

References: 1. Acosta FL, Cloyd JM, Aryan HE, Ames CP: Perioperative complications and clinical outcomes of multilevel circumferential lumbar spinal fusion in the elderly. J Clin Neurosci 16: 69-73, 2009 2. American_Society_of_Anesthesiologists ASA Physical Status Classification System. http://www.asahq.org/Home/For-Members/Clinical-Information/ASA-Physical-Status-Classification-System, 2011 Accessed 25-Sep-2012 3. Arinzon ZH, Fredman B, Zohar E, Shabat S, Feldman JS, Jedeikin R, Gepstein RJ: Surgical management of spinal stenosis: a comparison of immediate and long term outcome in two geriatric patient populations. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 36: 273-279, 2003 4. Becker P, Bretschneider W, Tuschel A, Ogon M: Life quality after instrumented lumbar fusion in the elderly. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35: 1478-1481, 2010 5. Carreon LY, Puno RM, Dimar JR, 2nd, Glassman SD, Johnson JR: Perioperative complications of posterior lumbar decompression and arthrodesis in older adults. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85-A: 2089-2092, 2003 6. Deyo RA, Ciol MA, Cherkin DC, Loeser JD, Bigos SJ: Lumbar spinal fusion. A cohort study of complications, reoperations, and resource use in the Medicare population. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 18: 1463-1470, 1993 7. Endres S: Instrumented posterolateral fusion - clinical and functional outcome in elderly patients. Ger Med Sci 9: Doc09, 01-07, 2011 8. Grob D, Humke T, Dvorak J: Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Decompression with and without arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 77: 1036-1041, 1995 9. Kilincer C, Steinmetz MP, Sohn MJ, Benzel EC, Bingaman W: Effects of age on the perioperative characteristics and short-term outcome of posterior lumbar fusion surgery. J Neurosurg Spine 3: 34-39, 2005 10. Lee GY, Lee JW, Choi HS, Oh KJ, Kang HS: A new grading system of lumbar central canal stenosis on MRI: an easy and reliable method. Skeletal Radiol 40: 1033-1039, 2011 11. North_American_Spine_Society Evidence-Based Clinical Guidelines for Multidisciplinary Spine Care. http://www.spine.org/Documents/Lumbar Stenosis11.pdf pp63-64 2011, Accessed 25-Sep-2012 12. Okuda S, Oda T, Miyauchi A, Haku T, Yamamoto T, Iwasaki M: Surgical outcomes of posterior lumbar interbody fusion in elderly patients. Surgical technique. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89 Suppl 2 Pt.2: 310-320, 2007 13. Raffo CS, Lauerman WC: Predicting morbidity and mortality of lumbar spine arthrodesis in patients in their ninth decade. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 31: 99-103, 2006 14. Yone K, Sakou T: Usefulness of Posner's definition of spinal instability for selection of surgical treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis. J Spinal Disord 12: 40-44, 1999 15. Zhou ZJ, Zhao FD, Fang XQ, Zhao X, Fan SW: Meta-analysis of instrumented posterior interbody fusion versus instrumented posterolateral fusion in the lumbar spine. J Neurosurg Spine 15: 295-310, 2011