Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Percutaneous Decompression of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis with a New Interspinous Device

  • Clinical Investigation
  • Published:
CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

This study was designed to evaluate the feasibility of the implantation of a new interspinous device (Falena) in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. The clinical outcomes and imaging results were assessed by orthostatic MR during an up to 6-month follow-up period.

Methods

Between October 2008 and February 2010, the Falena was implanted at a single level in 26 patients (17 men; mean age, 69 (range, 54–82) years) who were affected by degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. All of the patients were clinically evaluated before the procedure and at 1 and 3 months. Furthermore, 20 patients have completed a 6-month follow-up. Pain was assessed before and after the intervention using the Visual Analogue Scale score and the Oswestry Disability Index questionnaire. Orthostatic MR imaging was performed before the implantation and at 3 months to assess the correlation with the clinical outcome.

Results

The mean ODI score decreased from 48.9 before the device implantation to 31.2 at 1 month (p < 0.0001). The mean VAS score decreased from 7.6 before to 3.9 (p < 0.0001) at 1 month and 3.6 at 3 months after the procedure (p = 0.0115). These values were stable at 6 months evaluation. No postimplantation major complications were recorded. MRI evaluation documented in most cases an increased size of the spinal canal area. Similarly a bilateral foraminal area improvement was found. The variation of the intervertebral space height measured on the posterior wall was not significant.

Conclusions

In our preliminary experience with the Falena in a small cohort of patients, we obtained clinical and imaging results aligned to those reported with similar interspinous devices.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Graph 1
Graph 2
Graph 3
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hilibrand AS, Nashon R (1999) Lumbar spinal stenosis: diagnosis and treatment. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 7:239–249

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. De Villiers PD, Booysen EL (1976) Fibrous spinal stenosis: a report on 850 myelograms with a water-soluble contrast medium. J Bone Joint Surg Am 115:140–144

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bolender NF, Schonstrom NS, Spengler DM (1985) Role of computer tomography and myelography in the diagnosis of central spinal stenosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 67:240–246

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Spengler DM (1987) Degenerative stenosis of the lumbar spine. J Bone Joint Surg Am 69:305–308

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Amundsen T, Weber H, Lilleas F, Nordal HJ, Abdelnoor M, Magnaes B (1995) Lumbar spinal stenosis: clinical and radiologic features. Spine 20(10):1178–1186

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Minns RJ, Walsh WK (1997) Preliminary design and experimental studies of a novel soft implant for correcting sagittal plane instability in the lumbar spine. Spine 22:1819–1825

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Kim DH, Albert TJ (2007) Interspinous process spacer. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 15:200–207

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Christie SD, Song JK, Fessler RG (2005) Dynamic interspinous process technology. Spine 30:S73–S78

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bono CM, Vaccaro AR (2007) Interspinous process device in the lumbar spine. Spine 20:255–261

    Google Scholar 

  10. Dyck P (1979) The stoop-test in lumbar entrapment radiculopathy. Spine 4:89–92

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Chung SS, Lee CS, Kim SH (2000) Effect of low back posture on the morphology of the spinal canal. Skeletal Radiol 29:217–223

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Zucherman JF, Hsu KY, Hartjen CA et al (2004) A prospective randomized multicenter study for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis with the X Stop interspinous implant: 1-year results. Eur Spine J 13:22–31

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Zucherman JF, Hsu KY, Hartjen CA et al (2005) A multicenter, prospective, randomized trial evaluating the X STOP interspinous process decompression system for the treatment of neurogenic intermittent claudication: two-year follow-up results. Spine 30:1951–1958

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Lee J, Hida K, Seti T et al (2004) An interspinous process distractor (X STOP) for lumbar spinal stenosis in elderly patients: preliminary experience in 10 consecutive cases. J Spinal Disord 17:72–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Siddiqui M, Smith FW, Wardlaw D (2007) One-year results of X-STOP Interspinous Implant for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 32:1345–1348

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kuchta J, Sobottke R, Eysel P et al (2009) Two-year results of interspinous spacer (X-Stop) implantation in 175 patients with neurologic intermittent claudication due to lumbar spinal stenosis. Eur Spine J 18:823–829

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kondrashov DG, Hannibal M, Hsu KY et al (2006) Interspinous process decompression with the X-STOP device for lumbar spinal stenosis: a 4-year follow-up study. J Spinal Disord Tech 19:323–327

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Sobottke R, Schlüter-Brust K, Kaulhausen T et al (2009) Interspinous implants (X Stop, Wallis, Diam) for the treatment of LSS: is there a correlation between radiological parameters and clinical outcome? Eur Spine J 18:1494–1503

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Siddiqui M, Nicol M, Karadimas E et al (2005) The positional magnetic resonance imaging changes in the lumbar spine following insertion of a novel interspinous process distraction device. Spine 30:2677–2682

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflicts of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Diagnostic and Molecular Imaging, Interventional Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Radiation Therapy, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, viale Oxford 81, 00133, Rome, Italy

    Salvatore Masala, Roberto Fiori, Dario Alberto Bartolucci, Tommaso Volpi, Eros Calabria & Giovanni Simonetti

  2. Department of Neurosurgery, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, viale Oxford 81, 00133, Rome, Italy

    Federica Novegno

Authors
  1. Salvatore Masala
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Roberto Fiori
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dario Alberto Bartolucci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tommaso Volpi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Eros Calabria
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Federica Novegno
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Giovanni Simonetti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dario Alberto Bartolucci.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Masala, S., Fiori, R., Bartolucci, D.A. et al. Percutaneous Decompression of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis with a New Interspinous Device. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 35, 368–374 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-011-0167-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-011-0167-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation