A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

[Minimally invasive decompression techniques for spinal cord stenosis]. | LitMetric

[Minimally invasive decompression techniques for spinal cord stenosis].

Orthopade

Zentrum für Wirbelsäulenchirurgie und Schmerztherapie, Zentrum für Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie, St. Elisabeth Gruppe - Katholische Kliniken Rhein-Ruhr, St. Anna Hospital Herne/Universitätsklinikum Marien Hospital Herne/Marien Hospital Witten, Herne, Deutschland.

Published: October 2019

Background: Lumbar spinal canal stenosis is frequently found among elderly patients and significantly limits their quality of life. Non-surgical therapy is an initial treatment option; however, it does not eliminate the underlying pathology. Surgical decompression of the spinal canal has now become the treatment of choice.

Objective: Minimalization of surgical approach strategies with maintaining sufficient decompression of the spinal canal and avoiding disadvantages of macrosurgical techniques, monolateral paravertebral approach with bilateral intraspinal decompression, specific surgical techniques.

Materials And Methods: Minimally invasive decompression techniques using a microscope or an endoscope are presented and different surgical strategies depending on both the extent (mono-, bi-, and multisegmental) and the location of the stenosis (intraspinal central, lateral recess, foraminal) are described.

Results: Minimally invasive microscopic or endoscopic decompression procedures enable sufficient widening of the spinal canal. Disadvantages of macrosurgical procedures (e. g., postoperative instability) can be avoided. The complication spectrum overlaps partially with that of macrosurgical interventions, albeit with significantly less marked severity. Subjective patient outcome is clearly improved.

Conclusions: Referring to modern minimally invasive decompression procedures, surgery of lumbar spinal canal stenosis represents a rational and logical treatment alternative, since causal treatment of the pathology is only possible with surgery.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00132-019-03732-7DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

spinal canal
20
invasive decompression
12
minimally invasive
12
decompression techniques
8
lumbar spinal
8
canal stenosis
8
decompression spinal
8
disadvantages macrosurgical
8
decompression procedures
8
decompression
7

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!