While the open laminectomy has been traditionally the treatment of choice for lumbar stenosis, the MISS approaches are rapidly evolving into the modern surgical solution. This paper will review and summarize the available literature www.selleckchem.com/products/ldk378.html on clinical outcomes and complications of minimally invasive surgical decompression of lumbar stenosis with the use of the tubular retractor systems. 2. Methods We performed a literature search on MEDLINE/PUBMED to review current reports describing clinical outcomes or complications associated with the minimally invasive surgical decompression of lumbar stenosis. Keywords included microendoscopic decompression, minimally invasive, spine surgery, lumbar stenosis, and microsurgical decompression. The period included from 1991 to 2012 with restriction to articles in English.

From the initial search, 157 articles were obtained and filtered. Only articles describing the MISS technique with tubular retractors in treating lumbar stenosis were reviewed in detail. Papers that were excluded include those that performed open laminectomies, unilateral hemilaminectomy for bilateral decompression without using tubular retractors, and bilateral approaches for decompression. All remaining articles were reviewed and listed in Table 1. Table 1 Summary of current papers, outcomes, and complications of MEDS for lumbar stenosis. 3. Results A total of twelve articles were obtained that met our initial inclusion and exclusion criteria. For the purpose of this paper, the individual papers are identified by the first date of publication.

The papers were a mixture of retrospective data and prospectively collected data. All of the patients in the papers had lumbar stenosis treated by microendoscopic decompression for stenosis (MEDS) through a tubular retractor system. The perioperative data included EBL, operative time, length of hospital stay, and mean follow-up time. The functional outcomes were self-reported by the patients via ODI, JOA, SF-36, VAS, or RMDQ questionnaires. The relevant outcomes data for each article is presented here in Section 3 but will be elaborated on in Section 4. In 2002, Khoo and Fessler [29, 40] were the first authors to describe MEDS for lumbar stenosis. 25 consecutive patients were treated with MEDS and retrospectively compared to a historical control group of 25 consecutive patients treated with open laminectomies for lumbar decompression.

For the MEDS group compared to the open laminectomy group, there was a statistical decrease in operative blood loss (68cc versus 193cc), postoperative narcotic requirement (31.8eq versus 73.7eq), and length of hospital stay (42hr versus 94hr) Brefeldin_A [29, 40]. After a one year follow-up, 90% of the patients in the MEDS group reported improved or complete resolution of their pain symptoms. Castro-Menendez et al.