Decompression Alone or Decompression and Fusion in Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

Overview

Journal EClinicalMedicine

Specialty General Medicine

Date 2022 Jul 22

PMID 35865739

Authors

Fei-Long Wei

Cheng-Pei Zhou

Quan-You Gao

Ming-Rui Du

Hao-Ran Gao

Kai-Long Zhu

Tian Li

Ji-Xian Qian

Xiao-Dong Yan

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Clinically, there are substantive practice variations in surgical management of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. We aimed at evaluating whether decompression alone outcomes for patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis are comparable to those of decompression with fusion.

Methods: In this meta-analysis, the Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to February 16th, 2022. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies comparing decompression alone with decompression and fusion for patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis were included in this study. There were no language limitations. Odds ratio (OR), mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to report results in the random-effects model. Main outcomes included Oswestry disability index (ODI), pain, clinical satisfaction, complication and reoperation rates. The study protocol was published in PROSPERO (CRD42022310645).

Findings: Thirty-three studies (6 RCTs and 27 cohort studies) involving 94 953 participants were included. Differences in post-operative ODI between decompression alone and decompression with fusion were not significant. A small difference for back (MD, 0.13; [95% CI, 0.08 to 0.18]; :0.00%) and leg pain (MD, 0.30; [95% CI, 0.09 to 0.51]; :48.35%) was observed on the 3rd post-operative month. The results did not reveal significant differences in leg pain and back pain between decompression alone and fusion groups on the 6th, 12th, and 24th post-operative months. Difference in clinical satisfaction between decompression alone and decompression with fusion were not significant from RCTs (OR, 0.26; [95% CI, 0.03 to 1.92]; :83.27%). Complications (OR, 1.54; [95% CI, 1.16 to 2.05]; :48.88%), operation time (MD, 83.39; [95% CI, 55.93 to 110.85]; :98.75%), intra-operative blood loss (MD, 264.58; [95% CI, 174.99 to 354.16]; :95.61%) and length of hospital stay (MD, 2.85; [95% CI, 1.60 to 4.10]; :99.49%) were higher with fusion.

Interpretation: Clinical effectiveness of decompression alone was comparable to that of decompression with fusion for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Decompression alone is recommended for patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.

Funding: This work was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 81871818), Tangdu Hospital Seed Talent Program (Fei-Long Wei), Natural Science Basic Research Plan in Shaanxi Province of China (No.2019JM-265) and Social Talent Fund of Tangdu Hospital (No.2021SHRC034).

Citing Articles

Repair mechanisms of bone system tissues based on comprehensive perspective of multi-omics.

Yu H, Yang S, Jiang T, Li T, Duan H, Li M Cell Biol Toxicol. 2025; 41(1):45.

PMID: 39966216 PMC: 11836151. DOI: 10.1007/s10565-025-09995-5.

Spondylolisthesis and Scoliosis Progression and Associated Revision Rates Following Bilateral Lumbar Spine Microscopic Decompression.

Wong W, Tan A, Loi K, Gengatharan D, Sim C, Chen H Spine Surg Relat Res. 2025; 9(1):30-35.

PMID: 39935981 PMC: 11808231. DOI: 10.22603/ssrr.2024-0137.

Surgeon Recommendation and Outcomes of Decompression With vs Without Fusion in Patients With Degenerative Spondylolisthesis.

Seip A, Hellum C, Fagerland M, Solberg T, Brox J, Storheim K JAMA Netw Open. 2025; 8(1):e2453466.

PMID: 39777439 PMC: 11707628. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.53466.

National Trends in Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis With Stenosis Treated With Fusion Versus Decompression.

Ball J, Gallo M, Kebaish K, Hang N, Ton A, Hernandez F Neurospine. 2025; 21(4):1068-1077.

PMID: 39765242 PMC: 11744538. DOI: 10.14245/ns.2448624.312.

What Radiographic and Spinopelvic Parameters do Spine Surgeons Consider in Decision-Making for Treatment of Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis?.

Cabrera J, Virk M, Cho S, Muthu S, Ambrosio L, Yoon S Global Spine J. 2024; :21925682241306105.

PMID: 39630131 PMC: 11618860. DOI: 10.1177/21925682241306105.

References

Austevoll I, Gjestad R, Solberg T, Storheim K, Brox J, Hermansen E . Comparative Effectiveness of Microdecompression Alone vs Decompression Plus Instrumented Fusion in Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis. JAMA Netw Open. 2020; 3(9):e2015015. PMC: 7489859. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.15015. View

Wei F, Gao Q, Heng W, Zhu K, Yang F, Du R . Association of robot-assisted techniques with the accuracy rates of pedicle screw placement: A network pooling analysis. EClinicalMedicine. 2022; 48:101421. PMC: 9193845. DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2022.101421. View

Chen Z, Xie P, Feng F, Chhantyal K, Yang Y, Rong L . Decompression Alone Versus Decompression and Fusion for Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Meta-Analysis. World Neurosurg. 2017; 111:e165-e177. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2017.12.009. View

Kuo C, Merchant M, Kardile M, Yacob A, Majid K, Bains R . In Degenerative Spondylolisthesis, Unilateral Laminotomy for Bilateral Decompression Leads to Less Reoperations at 5 Years When Compared to Posterior Decompression With Instrumented Fusion: A Propensity-matched Retrospective Analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2019; 44(21):1530-1537. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003121. View

Fairbank J, Pynsent P . The Oswestry Disability Index. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000; 25(22):2940-52; discussion 2952. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200011150-00017. View

Herkowitz H, Kurz L . Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis. A prospective study comparing decompression with decompression and intertransverse process arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1991; 73(6):802-8. View

Sigmundsson F, Jonsson B, Stromqvist B . Outcome of decompression with and without fusion in spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis in relation to preoperative pain pattern: a register study of 1,624 patients. Spine J. 2014; 15(4):638-46. DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2014.11.020. View

Ulrich N, Burgstaller J, Pichierri G, Wertli M, Farshad M, Porchet F . Decompression Surgery Alone Versus Decompression Plus Fusion in Symptomatic Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Swiss Prospective Multicenter Cohort Study With 3 Years of Follow-up. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2017; 42(18):E1077-E1086. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002068. View

Park J, Hyun S, Roh S, Rhim S . A comparison of unilateral laminectomy with bilateral decompression and fusion surgery in the treatment of grade I lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2012; 154(7):1205-12. DOI: 10.1007/s00701-012-1394-1. View

10.

Liberati A, Altman D, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche P, Ioannidis J . The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ. 2009; 339:b2700. PMC: 2714672. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.b2700. View

11.

Ghogawala Z, Dziura J, Butler W, Dai F, Terrin N, Magge S . Laminectomy plus Fusion versus Laminectomy Alone for Lumbar Spondylolisthesis. N Engl J Med. 2016; 374(15):1424-34. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1508788. View

12.

Yone K, Sakou T, Kawauchi Y, Yamaguchi M, Yanase M . Indication of fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis in elderly patients and its significance. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1996; 21(2):242-8. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199601150-00016. View

13.

Jacobsen S, Sonne-Holm S, Rovsing H, Monrad H, Gebuhr P . Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: an epidemiological perspective: the Copenhagen Osteoarthritis Study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007; 32(1):120-5. DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000250979.12398.96. View

14.

Stang A . Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Eur J Epidemiol. 2010; 25(9):603-5. DOI: 10.1007/s10654-010-9491-z. View

15.

Vorhies J, Hernandez-Boussard T, Alamin T . Treatment of Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis With Fusion or Decompression Alone Results in Similar Rates of Reoperation at 5 Years. Clin Spine Surg. 2017; 31(1):E74-E79. DOI: 10.1097/BSD.0000000000000564. View

16.

Badhiwala J, Leung S, Jiang F, Wilson J, Akbar M, Nassiri F . In-hospital Course and Complications of Laminectomy Alone Versus Laminectomy Plus Instrumented Posterolateral Fusion for Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Retrospective Analysis of 1804 Patients from the NSQIP Database. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2020; 46(9):617-623. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003858. View

17.

Staartjes V, Schroder M . Effectiveness of a Decision-Making Protocol for the Surgical Treatment of Lumbar Stenosis with Grade 1 Degenerative Spondylolisthesis. World Neurosurg. 2017; 110:e355-e361. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2017.11.001. View

18.

Bridwell K, Sedgewick T, OBrien M, Lenke L, Baldus C . The role of fusion and instrumentation in the treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis. J Spinal Disord. 1993; 6(6):461-72. DOI: 10.1097/00002517-199306060-00001. View

19.

Inose H, Kato T, Sasaki M, Matsukura Y, Hirai T, Yoshii T . Comparison of decompression, decompression plus fusion, and decompression plus stabilization: a long-term follow-up of a prospective, randomized study. Spine J. 2021; 22(5):747-755. DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2021.12.014. View

20.

Forsth P, Olafsson G, Carlsson T, Frost A, Borgstrom F, Fritzell P . A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Fusion Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis. N Engl J Med. 2016; 374(15):1413-23. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1513721. View