Search

Introduction: Long-term clinical outcomes of microendoscopic laminotomy (MEL) for patients with multilevel radiographic lumbar spinal canal stenosis (LSS) have not been widely explored. The clinical significance and natural progression of additional untreated levels (e.g., remaining radiographic (RR)-LSS not addressed by selective MEL) remain unknown. This retrospective study aimed to investigate the long-term clinical outcomes of selective MEL in LSS patients and compare outcomes between patients with and without remaining RR-LSS to determine the efficacy of this procedure. Methods: Forty-nine patients at a single center underwent posterior spinal microendoscopic decompression surgery for neurogenic claudication or radicular leg pain in moderate-to-severe spinal stenosis. The patients were categorized into the RR-LSS-positive and RR-LSS-negative cohorts based on unaddressed levels of stenosis. Pre-operative and 10-year follow-up evaluations, including the Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score, visual analog scale (VAS) score for low back pain and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and satisfaction, were compared between the groups. Additionally, the need for reoperation was determined. Results: MEL significantly improved JOA scores, lumbar VAS, and ODI over the 10-year postoperative period. Pre-operative characteristics and postoperative outcomes were not significantly different between the cohorts. Overall, 18.4% (9/49) of patients required reoperation during the follow-up period. The reoperation rate in the RR-LSS-positive (13.8%; 4/29) group was similar to that in the RR-LL-negative (15.0%; 3/20) group. Conclusions: MEL is effective for lumbar stenosis, with improved clinical outcomes up to 10 years following surgery. Selective MEL, addressing only symptomatic levels in multilevel stenosis, with residual remaining lumbar stenosis, is similarly effective without increased reoperation rates. Surgeons may consider more limited selective decompression in patients with multilevel stenosis, avoiding the risk and invasiveness of extensive procedures. Level of Evidence: Level III.