EC Orthopaedics

Introduction: Tandem stenosis is not uncommon to see in clinic, the traditional way of treating it is to do a staged decompression usually starting with the cervical spine followed by the lumbar stenosis. However, newer technique in minimally invasive surgery including endoscopic decompression is evolving rapidly and it’s utilization in managing such disease is noticed to decrease patient morbidity, shorten hospital stay and early return to daily activity.

Case Summary: 66 years old gentleman presented to us with chronic severe left leg pain and mild lower back pain that worsen over the past 6 months. In addition to that he was complaining of left sided forearm pain. Both symptoms were not responding to conservative therapy anymore. He was on anticoagulant post aneurysmal surgery that could not be stopped for a long time.

Outcome: Following both decompressions, the patient was very happy. Immediate reduction in analgesia was noticed. Soon after the surgery, the patient returned to his normal daily life activities with no issues.

Conclusion: Simultaneous decompression of tandem stenosis in feasible and safe. It saves the patient second trip to operative theatre. However, it could be technically demanding and requires high knowledge and skill to manage such patients.

 Keywords: Cervical; Lumbar; UBE; Radiculopathy; Decompression

1. Kou Y., et al. “Endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis”. World Neurosurgery 152 (2021): e352-e368.
2. Hartvigsen J., et al. “What low back pain is and why we need to pay attention”. Lancet10137 (2018): 2356-2367.
3. Maher C., et al. “Non-specific low back pain”. Lancet 10070 (2017): 736-747.
4. Li P., et al. “Comparison of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic decompression and short-segment fusion in the treatment of elderly degenerative lumbar scoliosis with spinal stenosis”. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 1 (2021): 906.
5. Choi CM. “Biportal endoscopic spine surgery (BESS): considering merits and pitfalls”. Journal of Spine Surgery 2 (2020): 457-465.
6. Heo Dong Hwa., et al. “Comparative analysis of three types of minimally invasive decompressive surgery for lumbar central stenosis: biportal endoscopy, uniportal endoscopy, and microsurgery”. Neurosurgical Focus5 (2019): E9.
7. Kim Hyeun Sung., et al. “Percutaneous full endoscopic bilateral lumbar decompression of spinal stenosis through uniportalcontralateral approach: Techniques and preliminary results”. World Neurosurgery 103 (2017): 201-209.
8. Mobbs Ralph Jasper., et al. “Outcomes after decompressive laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis: comparison between minimally invasive unilateral laminectomy for bilateral decompression and open laminectomy: clinical article”. Journal of Neurosurgery. Spine2 (2014): 179-186.
9. Pao Jwo-Luen., et al. “Clinical outcomes of microendoscopic decompressive laminotomy for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis”. European Spine Journal: Official Publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society5 (2009): 672-678.
10. Fernandes Pedro Ricardo DE Oliveira., et al. “Caution is needed in interpreting the results of comparative studies regarding oncological operations by minimally invasive versus laparotomic access”. Revista do Colegio Brasileiro de Cirurgioes 47 (2020): e20202458.
11. Abumi K., et al. “Biomechanical evaluation of lumbar spinal stability after graded facetectomies”. Spine 11 (1990): 1142-1147.
12. Park Sang-Min., et al. “Biportal endoscopic versus microscopic lumbar decompressive laminectomy in patients with spinal stenosis: a randomized controlled trial”. The Spine Journal: Official Journal of the North American Spine Society2 (2020): 156-165.
13. Wang D., et al. “Comparison of outcomes between unilateral biportal endoscopic and percutaneous posterior endoscopic cervical keyhole surgeries”. Medicina3 (2023): 437.