Subscribe to RSS
![](/products/assets/desktop/img/oa-logo.png)
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1712490
Estenose degenerativa do canal lombar
Article in several languages: português | English![](https://www.thieme-connect.de/media/10.1055-s-00042410/202101/lookinside/thumbnails/10-1055-s-0040-1712490_1900214_pt-1.jpg)
Resumo
A estenose degenerativa do canal vertebral lombar é a causa mais frequente de dor lombar e/ou ciática no paciente idoso; sua epidemiologia, fisiopatogenia, manifestações e testes clínicos são revistos em ampla investigação bibliográfica atual. A importância da relação entre a clínica e o estudo por imagens, principalmente a ressonância magnética (RM), é ressaltada. Antes da indicação do tratamento, é necessário identificar a localização precisa da dor, bem como o diagnóstico diferencial entre a claudicação neurogênica e a vascular. O tratamento conservador associando medicações com as diversas técnicas fisioterápicas resolve o problema na maioria dos casos, já o teste terapêutico com os bloqueios, seja epidural, foraminal ou facetário, é realizado quando as dores não cedem com o tratamento conservador e antes da indicação da cirurgia. Os bloqueios costumam dar melhores resultados no alívio dos sintomas de ciatalgia e menos no quadro de claudicação neurogênica. A descompressão da cauda equina e/ou radicular associada ou não à artrodese é o padrão ouro quando a intervenção cirúrgica é necessária. A artrodese após a descompressão é necessária nos casos com instabilidade segmentar, como na espondilolistese degenerativa. Quando a estenose de canal acontece em múltiplos níveis e vem acompanhada de desvio de eixo, seja coronal e/ou sagital, deve ser realizada, além das descompressões e artrodese, a correção dos desvios de eixo, principalmente o eixo sagital, quando a correção da lordose lombar se impõe com técnicas que corrigem a lordose retificada para valores próximos à incidência pélvica.
Publication History
Received: 12 November 2019
Accepted: 02 March 2020
Article published online:
23 July 2020
© 2020. Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil
-
Referências
- 1 Eisenstein S. The morphometry and pathological anatomy of the lumbar spine in South African negroes and caucasoids with specific reference to spinal stenosis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1977; 59 (02) 173-180
- 2 Paine KW. Clinical features of lumbar spinal stenosis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1976; (115) 77-82
- 3 Grobler LJ, Robertson PA, Novotny JE, Ahern JW. Decompression for degenerative spondylolisthesis and spinal stenosis at L4-5. The effects on facet joint morphology. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1993; 18 (11) 1475-1482
- 4 Turner JA, Ersek M, Herron L, Deyo R. Surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis. Attempted meta-analysis of the literature. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1992; 17 (01) 1-8
- 5 Schönström N, Lindahl S, Willén J, Hansson T. Dynamic changes in the dimensions of the lumbar spinal canal: an experimental study in vitro. J Orthop Res 1989; 7 (01) 115-121
- 6 Amundsen T, Weber H, Lilleås F, Nordal HJ, Abdelnoor M, Magnaes B. Lumbar spinal stenosis. Clinical and radiologic features. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1995; 20 (10) 1178-1186
- 7 Kirkaldy-Willis WH, Wedge JH, Yong-Hing K, Reilly J. Pathology and pathogenesis of lumbar spondylosis and stenosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1978; 3 (04) 319-328
- 8 Liu X, Zhao X, Long Y, Huang K, Xie D, Wang F. et al. Facet Sagittal Orientation: Possible Role in the Pathology of Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2018; 43 (14) 955-958
- 9 Tomkins-Lane C, Melloh M, Lurie J. et al. ISSLS Prize Winner: Consensus on the Clinical Diagnosis of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Results of an International Delphi Study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2016; 41 (15) 1239-1246
- 10 Delamarter RB, Bohlman HH, Dodge LD, Biro C. Experimental lumbar spinal stenosis. Analysis of the cortical evoked potentials, microvasculature, and histopathology. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1990; 72 (01) 110-120
- 11 Rydevik B, Brown MD, Lundborg G. Pathoanatomy and pathophysiology of nerve root compression. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1984; 9 (01) 7-15
- 12 Genevay S, Atlas SJ, Katz JN. Variation in eligibility criteria from studies of radiculopathy due to a herniated disc and of neurogenic claudication due to lumbar spinal stenosis: a structured literature review. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2010; 35 (07) 803-811
- 13 Mamisch N, Brumann M, Hodler J, Held U, Brunner F, Steurer J. ; Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Outcome Study Working Group Zurich. Radiologic criteria for the diagnosis of spinal stenosis: results of a Delphi survey. Radiology 2012; 264 (01) 174-179
- 14 Gopinathan P. Lumbar spinal canal stenosis-special features. J Orthop 2015; 12 (03) 123-125
- 15 Castillo M, Keith Smith J, Mukherji Suresh K. The spine. In: Lee JKT, Segal SS, Stanley RJ, Heiken JP. editors. Computed body tomography with MRI correlation. 3rd. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven; 1998: 1451-1454
- 16 Verbiest H. Neurogenic Intermittent Claudication with Special Reference to Stenosis of the Lumbar Vertebral Canal in Hand Book of Clinical Radiology. Amsterdam: North Holand pub co.; 1976. ;611: e807
- 17 Onel D, Sari H, Dönmez C. Lumbar spinal stenosis: clinical/radiologic therapeutic evaluation in 145 patients. Conservative treatment or surgical intervention?. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1993; 18 (02) 291-298
- 18 Tomkins CC, Dimoff KH, Forman HS. et al. Physical therapy treatment options for lumbar spinal stenosis. J Back Musculoskeletal Rehabil 2010; 23 (01) 31-37
- 19 Donelson R, Silva G, Murphy K. Centralization phenomenon. Its usefulness in evaluating and treating referred pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1990; 15 (03) 211-213
- 20 Moore RA, Straube S, Wiffen PJ, Derry S, McQuay HJ. Pregabalin for acute and chronic pain in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009; (03) CD007076
- 21 Riew KD, Yin Y, Gilula L. et al. The effect of nerve-root injections on the need for operative treatment of lumbar radicular pain. A prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blind study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2000; 82 (11) 1589-1593
- 22 Johnsson KE, Udén A, Rosén I. The effect of decompression on the natural course of spinal stenosis. A comparison of surgically treated and untreated patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1991; 16 (06) 615-619
- 23 Zaina F, Tomkins-Lane C, Carragee E, Negrini S. Surgical Versus Nonsurgical Treatment for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2016; 41 (14) E857-E868
- 24 Kurd MF, Lurie JD, Zhao W. et al. Predictors of treatment choice in lumbar spinal stenosis: a spine patient outcomes research trial study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2012; 37 (19) 1702-1707
- 25 Atlas SJ, Keller RB, Wu YA, Deyo RA, Singer DE. Long-term outcomes of surgical and nonsurgical management of lumbar spinal stenosis: 8 to 10 year results from the maine lumbar spine study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2005; 30 (08) 936-943
- 26 Malmivaara A, Slätis P, Heliövaara M. et al; Finnish Lumbar Spinal Research Group. Surgical or nonoperative treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis? A randomized controlled trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2007; 32 (01) 1-8
- 27 Amundsen T, Weber H, Nordal HJ, Magnaes B, Abdelnoor M, Lilleâs F. Lumbar spinal stenosis: conservative or surgical management?: A prospective 10-year study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000; 25 (11) 1424-1435
- 28 Srinivas S, Paquet J, Bailey C. et al. Effect of spinal decompression on back pain in lumbar spinal stenosis: a Canadian Spine Outcomes Research Network (CSORN) study. Spine J 2019; 19 (06) 1001-1008
- 29 Rajasekaran S, Thomas A, Kanna RM, Prasad Shetty A. Lumbar spinous process splitting decompression provides equivalent outcomes to conventional midline decompression in degenerative lumbar canal stenosis: a prospective, randomized controlled study of 51 patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2013; 38 (20) 1737-1743
- 30 Cho DY, Lin HL, Lee WY, Lee HC. Split-spinous process laminotomy and discectomy for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: a preliminary report. J Neurosurg Spine 2007; 6 (03) 229-239
- 31 Lee CH, Choi M, Ryu DS. et al. Efficacy and Safety of Full-endoscopic Decompression via Interlaminar Approach for Central or Lateral Recess Spinal Stenosis of the Lumbar Spine: A Meta-analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2018; 43 (24) 1756-1764
- 32 Siepe CJ, Sauer D, Michael Mayer H. Full endoscopic, bilateral over-the-top decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis. Eur Spine J 2018; 27 (Suppl. 04) 563-565
- 33 Rosen DS, O'Toole JE, Eichholz KM. et al. Minimally invasive lumbar spinal decompression in the elderly: outcomes of 50 patients aged 75 years and older. Neurosurgery 2007; 60 (03) 503-509
- 34 Woo YH, Jung HT, Kim IB, Sun WS, Jung DW. Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Decompression for Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis. J Clin Exp Orthop 3: 42
- 35 Leone A, Guglielmi G, Cassar-Pullicino VN, Bonomo L. Lumbar intervertebral instability: a review. Radiology 2007; 245 (01) 62-77
- 36 da Costa LM, Hennemann AS, de Abreu MR, Antoneli PH. Correlação entre instabilidade radiográfica e presença do sinal de modic. Coluna/Columna 2011; 10 (02) 132-135
- 37 Hansraj KK, O'Leary PF, Cammisa Jr FP. et al. Decompression, fusion, and instrumentation surgery for complex lumbar spinal stenosis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001; 200 (384) 18-25
- 38 Schroeder GD, Kepler CK, Kurd MF. et al. Rationale for the Surgical Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2015; 40 (21) E1161-E1166
- 39 Mardjetko SM, Connolly PJ, Shott S. Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. A meta-analysis of literature 1970-1993. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1994; 19 (20, Suppl) 2256S-2265S
- 40 McAnany SJ, Baird EO, Qureshi SA, Hecht AC, Heller JG, Anderson PA. Posterolateral Fusion Versus Interbody Fusion for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2016; 41 (23) E1408-E1414
- 41 Hammad A, Wirries A, Ardeshiri A, Nikiforov O, Geiger F. Open versus minimally invasive TLIF: literature review and meta-analysis. J Orthop Surg Res 2019; 14 (01) 229
- 42 Pakzaban P. Modified Mini-open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Description of Surgical Technique and Assessment of Free-hand Pedicle Screw Insertion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2016; 41 (18) E1124-E1130
- 43 Ge DH, Stekas ND, Varlotta CG. et al. Comparative Analysis of Two Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Techniques: Open TLIF Versus Wiltse MIS TLIF. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2019; 44 (09) E555-E560
- 44 Zucherman JF, Hsu KY, Hartjen CA. et al. 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 (Phila Pa 1976) 2005; 30 (12) 1351-1358
- 45 Kuchta J, Sobottke R, Eysel P, Simons P. Two-year results of interspinous spacer (X-Stop) implantation in 175 patients with neurologic intermittent claudication due to lumbar spinal stenosis. Eur Spine J 2009; 18 (06) 823-829
- 46 Richter A, Schütz C, Hauck M, Halm H. Does an interspinous device (Coflex) improve the outcome of decompressive surgery in lumbar spinal stenosis? One-year follow up of a prospective case control study of 60 patients. Eur Spine J 2010; 19 (02) 283-289
- 47 Strömqvist BH, Berg S, Gerdhem P. et al. X-stop versus decompressive surgery for lumbar neurogenic intermittent claudication: randomized controlled trial with 2-year follow-up. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2013; 38 (17) 1436-1442
- 48 Poetscher AW, Gentil AF, Ferretti M, Lenza M. Interspinous process devices for treatment of degenerative lumbar spine stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2018; 13 (07) e0199623
- 49 Gazzeri R, Galarza M, Alfieri A. Controversies about interspinous process devices in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spine diseases: past, present, and future. BioMed Res Int 2014; 2014: 975052
- 50 Gazzeri R, Galarza M, Neroni M. et al. Failure rates and complications of interspinous process decompression devices: a European multicenter study. Neurosurg Focus 2015; 39 (04) E14
- 51 Yong-Hing K, Kirkaldy-Willis WH. The pathophysiology of degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Orthop Clin North Am 1983; 14 (03) 491-504
- 52 Roussouly P, Gollogly S, Berthonnaud E, Dimnet J. Classification of the normal variation in the sagittal alignment of the human lumbar spine and pelvis in the standing position. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2005; 30 (03) 346-353
- 53 Glassman SD, Berven S, Bridwell K, Horton W, Dimar JR. Correlation of radiographic parameters and clinical symptoms in adult scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2005; 30 (06) 682-688
- 54 Kim YJ, Bridwell KH, Lenke LG, Rhim S, Cheh G. An analysis of sagittal spinal alignment following long adult lumbar instrumentation and fusion to L5 or S1: can we predict ideal lumbar lordosis?. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2006; 31 (20) 2343-2352
- 55 Rose PS, Bridwell KH, Lenke LG. et al. Role of pelvic incidence, thoracic kyphosis, and patient factors on sagittal plane correction following pedicle subtraction osteotomy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009; 34 (08) 785-791
- 56 Mundis GM, Akbarnia BA, Phillips FM. Adult deformity correction through minimally invasive lateral approach techniques. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2010; 35 (26, Suppl) S312-S321
- 57 Phillips FM, Isaacs RE, Rodgers WB. et al. Adult degenerative scoliosis treated with XLIF: clinical and radiographical results of a prospective multicenter study with 24-month follow-up. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2013; 38 (21) 1853-1861
- 58 Amaral R, Marchi L, Oliveira L. et al. Opção minimamente invasiva lateral para artrodese intersomática tóraco-lombar. Coluna/Columna 2011; 10 (03) 239-243
- 59 Abbasi H, Miller L, Abbasi A, Orandi V, Khaghany K. Minimally invasive scoliosis surgery with oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion: single surgeon feasibility. Cureus 2017; 9 (06) e1389