Neurogenic claudication is most frequently observed in patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. We describe a patient with lumbar epidural varices secondary to obstruction of the inferior vena cava by pathological lymph nodes presenting with this syndrome. Following a diagnosis of follicular lymphoma, successful chemotherapy led to the resolution of the varices and the symptoms of neurogenic claudication. The lumbar epidural venous plexus may have an important role in the pathogenesis of spinal stenosis. Although rare, epidural venous engorgement can induce neurogenic claudication without spinal stenosis. Further investigations should be directed at identifying an underlying cause

Purpose: Claudication is a common complaint of elderly patients. Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) and peripheral arterial disease (PAD) are the two main etiologies, producing neurogenic and vascular claudication respectively. Physicians initially diagnose claudication based on a “typical” symptom profile. The reliability of this symptom profile to accurately diagnose LSS or PAD as a cause of claudication is unknown, leading to the potentially unnecessary utilization of expensive and overly sensitive imaging modalities. Furthermore, clinicians rely on this symptom profile when directing treatment for patients with concurrent imaging positive for LSS and PAD. This study evaluates the reliability of various symptom attributes, which classically have characterized and differentiated the two. Method: Patients presenting at a tertiary care center’s vascular or spine clinics with a primary complaint of claudication were enrolled in the study. Diagnosis of either LSS or PAD was confirmed with imaging for each patient. They answered 14 questions characterizing their symptoms. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio (PLR and NLR) was determined for each symptom attribute. Results: The most sensitive symptom attribute to rule out LSS is “triggering of pain with standing alone” (0.96). Four symptom attributes demonstrated a high PLR and three had low NLR for diagnosing neurogenic claudication (PLR= 3.08, 2.51, 2.14, 2.9; NLR=0.06, 0.29, 0.15). In vascular patients, calf symptoms and alleviation of pain with simply standing had a high PLR and NLR (PLR= 3.08 and 4.85; NLR= 0.31 and 0.36). Conclusion: Only four of 14 “classic” symptom attributes are highly sensitive for ruling out LSS, and should be considered by primary care physicians before pursing expensive diagnostic imaging. Six symptom attributes should be relied upon to differentiate LSS and NLR. Numbness, pain triggered with standing alone, located in the buttock and thigh, and relieved following sitting, are symptom attributes which reliably characterize neurogenic claudication

1. A description is given of historical discoveries relating to intermittent claudication. Various theories that have been advanced are discussed. A hypothesis, based on the work of Lewis, is elaborated. 2. A classification of obliterative arterial disease is outlined. The three groups that are distinguished are: primary thrombosis of the popliteal artery; juvenile obliterative arteritis; and senile obliterative arteritis. 3. The methods adopted for assessment of the severity of disease, including study of the clinical features, arteriographic findings, results of novocain infiltration and examination of the patient on a walking machine, are reported. 4. Methods of treatment by Buerger's exercises, contrast baths, intermittent venous occlusion and suction pressure; by lumbar ganglionectomy ant paravertebral block with phenol; by vitamin E (α-tocopherol) therapy; by treatment with thiouracil antistin; by internal popliteal myoneurectomy and division of the external popliteal and posterior tibial nerves; and by tenotomy of the tendo Achillis, are discussed. 5. It is concluded that tenotomy of the tendo Achillis should replace myoneurectomy in Type 3 cases where the blood supply is so far reduced that vascular stability cannot be achieved, and that it might apply in Type 2 cases in which there is persistent pain at a steady level. 6. The results of treatment in 276 patients with intermittent claudication are recorded

Purpose and background. To evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a physical and psychological group intervention (BOOST programme) compared to physiotherapy assessment and advice (best practice advice [BPA]) for older adults with neurogenic claudication (NC) which is a debilitating spinal condition. Methods and results. A randomised controlled trial of 438 participants. The primary outcome was the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) at 12 months. Data was also collected at 6 months. Other outcomes included Swiss Spinal Stenosis Questionnaire (symptoms), ODI walking item, 6-minute walk test (6MWT) and falls. The analysis was intention-to-treat. We collected the EQ5D and health and social care use to estimate cost-effectiveness. Participants were, on average, 74.9 years old (SD 6.0). There was no significant difference in ODI scores between groups at 12 months (adjusted mean difference (MD): −1.4 [95% Confidence Intervals (CI) −4.03,1.17]), but, at 6 months, ODI scores favoured the BOOST programme (adjusted MD: −3.7 [95% CI −6.27, −1.06]). Symptoms followed a similar pattern. The BOOST programme resulted in greater improvements in walking capacity (6MWT MD 21.7m [95% CI 5.96, 37.38]) and ODI walking item (MD −0.2 [95% CI −0.45, −0.01]) and reduced falls risk (odds ratio 0.6 [95% CI 0.40, 0.98]) compared to BPA at 12 months. Probability that the BOOST programme is cost-effective ranged from 67%–89% across cost-effectiveness thresholds. Conclusions. The BOOST programme improves mobility and reduces falls in older adults with NC compared to BPA at 12 months follow-up. It is good value for the NHS. Future iterations of the programme will consider ways to reduce symptoms and disability long-term. Conflicts of interest: No conflicts of interest. Sources of funding: National Institute of Health Research – Programme for Applied Research NIHR - PTC-RP-PG-0213-20002: Better Outcomes for Older people with Spinal Trouble (BOOST). Publication and presentations: The clinical effectiveness paper has just been accepted for publication in the Journal of Gerontology Series A. The health economic analysis is not yet published. It was presented at the Physiotherapy UK conference and the International Back and Neck Pain Forum in 2021

Introduction: Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a condition involving the narrowing of either the spinal canal or neural foramina and may lead to intermittent neurogenic claudication (INC). Traditionally LSS is been treated by conservative therapy followed by decompression and, if required, stabilizing of the lumbar spine for non-responders. Current results indicate that decompression may lead to increase of biomechanical stresses at levels adjacent to the operated level causing degenerative disorders. In the last years dynamic devices represent an alternative for the more invasive decompression surgery. Currently a registry is maintained to collect data on patients implanted with the X STOP. Methods: Patients who were diagnosed with LSS and planned for an implantation of the X STOP were included in the study. Diagnosis was confirmed by CT or MRI scans. Outcome was measured by the Zurich Claudication Questionnaire measuring symptom severity (SS), physical function (PF), and patient satisfaction (PS). An analysis was performed for the patient who completed the pre-operative and either the 1-year follow-up or 2-year follow-up assessment. Results: 283 patients participated in the study by completing either the questionnaires by the patient or data forms by the specialist. From these 89 patients completed the pre-operative and 1-year assessment and 20 completed the pre-operative and 2-year assessment. The results showed a clinical significant change for the domains SS and PF for both 1-year follow-up and 2-year follow-up. For the domain PS the mean score is 1.81 (very satisfied = 1, somewhat satisfied = 2). The clinically significant success rate based on clinically improvement in 2 of the 3 domains is 71.9% and 65.0 % after respectively 1-year and 2-year follow-up. Discussion: Our results suggest that intermediate term clinical outcomes of X STOP IPD surgery are stable over time although it may indicate that over time a decrease in clinical significant improvement may be observed. As INC caused by LSS is an ongoing degenerative disease, this may be explained by the ongoing degenerative process

Purpose: Lumbar spinal stenosis is the most common indication for spine surgery in the elderly. XStop IPD is an attractive alternative to traditional laminectomy or laminectomy with fusion as it avoids a longer procedure and anaesthesia with significantly less blood loss. The purpose of this study is to prospectively evaluate clinical outcomes, complications and functional evaluation of symptom severity, physical function and patient satisfaction following XStop IPD procedure. Method: Preoperative and postoperative clinical data as well as SF 36, visual analog scale and Roland Morris questionnaire data collected on 16 consecutive patients over 60 years undergoing XStop IPD at L3-4 and L4-5 levels or both levels. All patients had symptomatic lumbar spine stenosis with intermittent neurogenic claudication. Evaluations were made pre-operatively and post-operatively at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months. All patients had clinical radiographic data as well as data on visual analog scale SF 36 and the Roland Morris back questionnaire. Results: Patients ages ranged from 58 to 86 years with an average age of 74.25 years. In 75 percent of patients there were two or more significant co-morbidities with 18.75 percent requiring 2 level surgery. Four of the 16 patients had lumbar degenerative scoliosis with cobb angle less than 25 degrees. 50.25% the patients had grade I spondylolisthesis. No patient had previous spine surgery. In 31.25 percent of patients there was a history of diabetes. BMI ranged from 20 to 40. Seventy five percent of patients were discharged home within 24 hours. Ninety percent of patients reported relief of their leg pain at their first follow up visit within two weeks of the surgery. There were no significant complications. One-year follow up in six patients demonstrated improvements in VAS, Roland Morris criteria and SF 36 while the remaining patients have up to nine months of follow-up clinical data. Conclusion: We present our early results of this prospective study. There were significant improvements in functional outcomes. We therefore recommend the use of XStop IPD for elderly patients with multiple co-morbidities suffering from symptomatic lumbar spine stenosis with neurogenic claudication

Purpose. To observe the safety and efficacy of a minimally destructive decompressive technique without fusion in patients with lumbar stenosis secondary to degenerative spondylolisthesis. Methods. 30 patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) were consecutively managed by a single consultant spinal surgeon. All patients presented with neurogenic claudication secondary to DS. All patients were managed operatively with lumbar decompression utilising an approach technique of “spinous process osteotomy” (1). Briefly, this approach requires only unilateral muscle stripping with preservation of the interspinous ligament. A standard centrolateral decompression is then performed. Data consisting of VAS back and leg pain and ODI were collected pre and post-operatively. Results. The majority of patients were women (23) with a median age of 66 years. 29 patients had grade 1 slip and 1 patient grade 2. The index level was predominantly L4/5 (25 pts; 83%) and L3/4 in the remainder (5 pts; 17%). 5 patients were noted to have a coronal plane deformity as well as DS. 3 patients underwent 2 levels of decompression. Median length of stay was 2 days (range: 1 to 13 days). 2 patients suffered a dural tear during surgery (both with scoliosis). Of these, one required a second operation to repair a pseudomeningocele. All patients improved post op (Range: 3 months to 23 months; mean 8 months). ODI significantly improved post operatively (p < 0.05). One patient, however, developed a severe recurrence of symptoms at 3 months. Repeat imaging confirmed an increased slip and recurrent stenosis. This patient underwent re-decompression supplemented with instrumented fusion. Conclusion. The technique described above facilitates a safe method of decompression alone without fusion in patients with DS, even in patients with scoliosis. The procedure is safe, successful and easy to learn. Post-operative recovery is rapid with a short hospital stay. In spite of preserving the interspinous ligament, 1/30 patients (3 %) progressed to a greater sagittal slip requiring fusion

Aims. To compare the efficacy of decompression alone (DA) with i) decompression and fusion (DF) and ii) interspinous process device (IPD) in the treatment of lumbar stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis. Outcomes of interest were both patient-reported measures of postoperative pain and function, as well as the perioperative measures of blood loss, operation duration, hospital stay, and reoperation. Methods. Data were obtained from electronic searches of five online databases. Included studies were limited to randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) which compared DA with DF or IPD using patient-reported outcomes such as the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ), or perioperative data. Patient-reported data were reported as part of the systematic review, while meta-analyses were conducted for perioperative outcomes in MATLAB using the DerSimonian and Laird random-effects model. Forest plots were generated for visual interpretation, while heterogeneity was assessed using the I. 2. -statistic. Results. A total of 13 articles met the eligibility criteria. Of these, eight compared DA with DF and six studies compared DA with IPD. Patient-rated outcomes reported included the ODI and ZCQ, with mixed results for both types of comparisons. Overall, there were few statistically significant and no clinically significant differences in patient-rated outcomes. Study quality varied greatly across the included articles. Meta-analysis of perioperative outcomes revealed DF to result in greater blood loss than DA (MD = 406.74 ml); longer operation duration (MD = 108.91 min); and longer postoperative stay in hospital (MD = 2.84 days). Use of IPD in comparison to DA led to slightly reduced operation times (MD = –25.18 min), but a greater risk of reoperation compared to DA (RR = 2.70). Conclusion. Currently there is no evidence for the use of DF or IPD over DA in both patient-rated and perioperative outcomes. Indeed, both procedures can potentially lead to greater cost and risk of complications, and therefore, a stronger evidence base for their use should be established before they are promoted as routine options in patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis

The rate of arterial injury in trauma patients with pelvic ring fractures has been cited as high as 15%. Addressing this source of hemorrhage is essential in the management of these patients as mortality rates are reported as 50%. Percutaneous techniques to control arterial bleeding, such as embolization and REBOA, are being employed with increasing frequency due to their assumed lower morbidity and invasiveness than open exploration or cross clamping of the aorta. There are promising results with regards to the mortality benefits of angioembolization. However, there are concerns with regards to morbidity associated with embolization of the internal iliac vessels and its branches including surgical wound infection, gluteal muscle necrosis, nerve injury, bowel infarction, and thigh / buttock claudication. The primary aim of this study is to determine whether pelvic arterial embolization is associated with surgical site infection (SSI) in trauma patients undergoing pelvic ring fixation. This observational cohort study was conducted using US trauma registry data from the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Trauma Database for the year of 2018. Patients over the age of 18 who were transported through emergency health services to an ACS Level 1 or 2 trauma hospital and sustained a pelvic ring fracture treated with surgical fixation were included. Patients who were transferred between facilities, presented to the emergency department with no signs of life, presented with isolated penetrating trauma, and pregnant patients were excluded from the study. The primary study outcome was surgical site infection. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to estimate treatment effects of angioembolization of pelvic vessels on surgical site infection, adjusting for known risk factors for infection. Study analysis included 6562 trauma patients, of which 508 (7.7%) of patients underwent pelvic angioembolization. Overall, 148 (2.2%) of patients had a surgical site infection, with a higher risk (7.1%) in patients undergoing angioembolization (unadjusted odds ratio (OR) 4.0; 95% CI 2.7, 6.0; p < 0 .0001). Controlling for potential confounding, including patient demographics, vitals on hospital arrival, open fracture, ISS, and select patient comorbidities, pelvic angioembolization was still significantly associated with increased odds for surgical site infection (adjusted OR 2.0; 95% CI 1.3, 3.2; p=0.003). This study demonstrates that trauma patients who undergo pelvic angioembolization and operative fixation of pelvic ring injuries have a higher surgical site infection risk. As the use of percutaneous hemorrhage control techniques increase, it is important to remain judicious in patient selection

Aims. Patients may present with concurrent symptomatic osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip and degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine, with surgical treatment being indicated for both. Whether arthroplasty of the hip or spinal surgery should be performed first remains uncertain. Materials and Methods. Clinical scenarios were devised for a survey asking the preferred order of surgery and the rationale for this decision for five fictional patients with both OA of the hip and degenerative lumbar disorders. These were symptomatic OA of the hip and: 1) lumbar spinal stenosis with neurological claudication; 2) lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis with leg pain; 3) lumbar disc herniation with leg weakness; 4) lumbar scoliosis with back pain; and 5) thoracolumbar disc herniation with myelopathy. This survey was sent to 110 members of The Hip Society and 101 members of the Scoliosis Research Society. The choices of the surgeons were compared among scenarios and between surgical specialties using the chi-squared test. The free-text comments were analyzed using text-mining. Results. Responses were received from 51 hip surgeons (46%) and 37 spine surgeons (37%). The percentages of hip surgeons recommending ‘hip first’ differed significantly among scenarios: 59% for scenario 1; 73% for scenario 2; 47% for scenario 3; 47% for scenario 4; and 10% for scenario 5 (p < 0.001). The percentages of spine surgeons recommending ‘hip first’ were 49% for scenario 1; 70% for scenario 2; 19% for scenario 3; 78% for scenario 4; and 0% for scenario 5. There were significant differences between the groups for scenarios 3 (more hip surgeons recommended ‘hip first’; p = 0.012) and 4 (more hip surgeons recommended ‘spine first’; p = 0.006). Conclusion. In patients with coexistent OA of the hip and degenerative disorders of the spine, the question of ‘hip or spinal surgery first’ elicits relatively consistent answers in some clinical scenarios, but remains controversial in others, even for experienced surgeons. The nature of neurological symptoms can influence surgeons’ decision-making. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B(6 Supple B):37–44

Abstract. Objective. Flexible stabilisation has been utilised to maintain spinal mobility in patients with early-stage lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). Previous literature has not yet established any non-fusion solution as a viable treatment option for patients with severe posterior degeneration of the lumbar spine. This feasibility study evaluates the mean five-year outcomes of patients treated with the TOPS (Total Posterior Spine System) facet replacement system in the surgical management of lumbar spinal stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis. Methods. Ten patients (2 males, 8 females, mean age 59.6) were enrolled into a non-randomised prospective clinical study. Patients were evaluated with standing AP, lateral, flexion and extension radiographs and MRI scans, back and leg pain visual analog scale (VAS) scores, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ) and the SF-36 questionnaires, preoperatively, 6 months, one year, two years and latest follow-up at a mean of five years postoperatively (range 55–74 months). Flexion and extension standing lumbar spine radiographs were obtained at 2 years to assess range of motion (ROM) at the stabilised segment. Results. The clinical outcome scores for the cohort improved significantly across all scoring systems. Radiographs at 2 years did not reveal any loss of position or loosening of metal work. There were two incidental durotomies and no failures at 5 years with no patient requiring revision surgery. Conclusions. The TOPS implant maintains clinical improvement and motion in the surgical management of LSS and spondylolisthesis, indicating it can be considered an option for these indications

Background. Neurogenic claudication is a well recognised symptom of spinal stenosis. Pain in the lower limbs and back limit walking speed and distance. Outcome of treatment should be easily measurable, but in practice is not. Walking tests are difficult to perform reliably. It is possible to measure speed and endurance with a treadmill, but this is expensive, of doubtful reliability, and many elderly patients are reasonably worried about falling off. Commonly used back pain outcome questionnaires are probably invalid for this population, and few questionnaires have been designed specifically for this complaint. The purpose of this study was to evaluate 3 questionnaires (Swiss Spinal Stenosis Score (SSS), Oxford Claudication Score (OCS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI)) and a Shuttle Walking Test (SWT). The Shuttle Walking Test, developed originally in respiratory medicine, shows promise as both a clinical measure and outcome measure for patients with neurogenic claudication. In an internal study, we have found that none of our patients selected for surgery can manage more than 200 metres. A fit adult can usually manage about 600 metres on this test. Study Design: Shuttle Walking Test (SWT), Swiss Spinal Stenosis Score (SSS), Oxford Claudication Score (OCS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were administered to patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) and neurogenic claudication. Objective: To determine reliability of SWT, SSS (Q1–12), OCS and ODI in LSS assessment. Methods: Thirty two clinic patients with LSS were assessed twice with one week between assessments to determine reliability. Retrospective data from 17 patients assessed before and 18 months after surgery for LSS were used to investigate use of reliability in a clinical setting. Results: Test-retest reliability was 0.92 for SWT, 0.92 for SSS, 0.83 for OCS and 0.89 for ODI (Intraclass correlation coefficient). Mean scores (percent) were SSS 51, OCS 45 and ODI 40. For 95% certainty of change between assessments for a single patient, SSS would need to change by 15, OCS by 20 and ODI by 16. Mean SWT was 150m, with change of 76m required for 95% confidence. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.91 for SSS, 0.90 for OCS and 0.89 for ODI. Change in ODI correlated most strongly with patient satisfaction after surgery (_=0.80, p< 0.001). Conclusions: Fluctuations in patient’s symptoms result in wide individual confidence intervals. Performance of SSS, OCS and ODI questionnaires are broadly similar. The condition specific SSS is most precise but not much better than the non-specific ODI. SWT gives a snapshot of physical function which is acceptable for group analysis. Use of SWT for individual assessment after surgery is feasible but multiple testing would improve sensitivity for change

Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine the safety and efficacy and evaluate several radiographic parameters after implantation of coflex™ for the primary diagnosis of spinal stenosis (1 or 2 levels) in patients with neurogenic claudication and low back pain between the ages of 40 and 80 years old. Methods: Retrospective data were gathered on 589 patients from 5 sites with 429 patients having contemporaneous clinical and radiographic follow-up. Clinical analysis was performed on 209 patients with spinal stenosis using VAS and objective examination measures to determine safety and efficacy of the coflex in relieving neurogenic claudication, radiculopathy and back pain. The median follow-up was 20 months (range 6 to 121 months) For the 209 patients, radiographic data was collected for evaluation of spinal segment motion (index and adjacent levels), implant position, migration and bony remodeling at the bone-implant interface. All device complications were recorded and independently reviewed by Medical Metrics, Inc. (Houston, TX) and an independent orthopaedic spinal surgeon (KP). Results: Moderate to severe low back pain improved in 75% of patients, while leg pain improved in 88% of patients. Claudication improved in 91% of patients and improvement in walking distance occurred in 79% of the patients. These results were achieved at 1 year and did not deteriorate over the long-term. Patient satisfaction was 88%. Complete radiographs with excellent quality were available for 180 implanted coflex devices. Sagittal rotation and translation measurements were essentially the same for all diagnoses, follow-up time points and levels of implantation. No expulsions and only 1 migration (> 5 mm) was observed. Mild and moderate bone-implant interface remodeling was noted in 15.4 %. No broken or permanently deformed implants were noted. Conclusions: coflex interspinous stabilization after microsurgical decompression for spinal stenosis demonstrates excellent short term and long term results for back pain, neurogenic claudication and patient satisfaction

The April 2015 Spine Roundup360 looks at: Hyperostotic spine in injury; App based back pain control; Interspinous process devices should be avoided in claudication; Robot assisted pedicle screws: fad or advance?; Vancomycin antibiotic power in spinal surgery; What to do with that burst fracture?; Increasing complexity of spinal fractures in major trauma pathways; Vitamin D and spinal fractures

Patients with neurogenic claudication from lumbar canal stenosis non-responsive to non-surgical treatment are usually managed with spinal decompression with or without fusion. Flexion at stenotic segments relieves symptoms by increasing canal cross-sectional area, intervertebral foraminal height. Interspinous spacers work by causing flexion at the treated segement. We used COFLEX¯ [Paradigm Spine] a titanium interspinous spacer along with interlaminar decompression where indicated. To compare the clinical and radiological results of patients undergoing interlaminar decompression with or without use of COFLEX¯. Pre and post-operative assessment and comparison of clinical outcomes of Oswestry disability index(ODI), Visual analog Scale(VAS), Short Form-36(SF-36) and radiological outcomes of disc heights of operated and adjacent levels, intervertebral foraminal heights, sagittal angles of the operated segment. All consecutive patients undergoing spinal decompression at one or more levels from Jan to Dec 2008 were included. Patients with clinically symptomatic back pain for a duration longer than claudication pain were offered interspinous spacer at L4/5 level or above. In first group(n-20), patients were treated with inter-laminar decompression and COFLEX¯ with a standard posterior approach. In second group(n-25) inter-laminar decompression for the involved segment was performed. All patients are on follow-up. Clinical and radiological outcomes were compared at 6 months and 1 year. Statistically significant(p<0.001) improvements in ODI, VAS(back), VAS(leg) and SF-36 in patients in whom COFLEX¯ was used. Radiological parameters also showed significant improvements(p<0.05). Use of COFLEX¯ spacer is justified in patients with symptomatic disc degeneration with neurogenic claudication when treated operatively

The February 2013 Spine Roundup. 360 . looks at: complications with anterior decompression and fusion; lumbar claudication and peripheral vascular disease; increasing cervical instability in rheumatoids; kyphoplasty; cervical stenosis; exercise or fusion for chronic lower back pain; lumbar disc arthroplasty and adjacent level changes; and obese disc prolapses

Introduction: Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is diagnosed by a history of claudication, clinical investigation, treadmill test, and cross sectional area (CSA) in MRI or CT. Because commonly used radiological findings not always correlate with clinical symptoms, additional parameters with high specificity and sensitivity are needed. Methods: Prospective study of dorsal lumbar nerve root sedimentation in MRI scans in supine position of 2 groups of 100 consecutive patients each between 01/2007 – 12/2007. Patients in group 1 had non-specific low back pain (LBP), no claudication, and a CSA above 120 mm2 (LBP group); patients in group 2 showed claudication with or without LBP and a CSA below 80 mm2 (LSS group). We excluded patients with a previous spine surgery. In addition to the sedimentation sign, in both groups VAS, ODI, and walking distance in the treadmill test were measured. Results: The sedimentation sign was positive in 94 patients in the LSS group but in no patient in the LBP group, showing a specificity of 100%, a sensitivity of 94%, and an accuracy of 97%. There was no difference between segmental levels L1 – L5. Walking distance in the LSS group was shorter than in the LBP group (67 m vs. > 1000 m; p< 0.001). There were no significant differences between both groups regarding VAS and ODI. Conclusion: In patients without LSS during MRI in supine position lumbar nerve roots sediment due to gravity to the dorsal part of the dural sac leading to a positive sedimentation sign. This sedimentation is not observed in patients with LSS. Therefore, a negative sedimentation sign is a predictor of LSS in patients without prior spine surgery with a high specificity and sensitivity. Level S1 and below were excluded in our study because nerve roots S1 and S2 leave the dural sac in a ventral position inhibiting sedimentation to the dorsal part of the dural sac. The sedimentation sign is a reliable additional diagnostic parameter in patients with LSS

Purpose of the study: To study clinical, radiological and pathological features of this rare condition and to observe the effect of surgery on the relief of presenting symptoms. Materials, Methods and Results: between February 1989 to May 1999, more than 200 spinal operations were carried out at Oswestry, amongst which we found 11 patients with 13 symptomatic lumbar synovial cysts. Nine patients were female and 2 were male. Among the symptoms produced, sciatica was present in 10 out of 11 patients, neurologic claudication was present in 6 patients and only one patient had neurologic deficit. All the patients suffered with back pain, which was either of facetal origin or mechanical back pain. Radiological investigations revealed that all patients had evidence of facet arthrosis. Seven patients had degenerative spondylolisthesis. Degenerative disc disease was also seen in 7 patients. The contents of the cysts varied from serous fluid to chalky white material to gelatinous grey material. One cyst contained calcium pyrophosphate crystals. Another cyst contained hydroxyapatite crystals. Seven cysts which contained deposition of bone debris in the cyst wall also revealed an (giant cell and macrophage) inflammatory reaction to this bone debris. In all patients complete resolution of sciatica, neurologic claudication and neurologic deficit was observed after surgery. However, after a minimum follow up of two years the back pain persisted in all but one patient. Conclusion: Lumbar synovial cyst is a rare condition, more common in females, elderly, and occurs most commonly in association with degenerative disease of the spine, although it can also be caused by other conditions like trauma, or rheumatoid arthritis. When they cause compression of the dura or nerve roots, they present with symptoms like sciatica and neurologic claudication, which resolve promptly after surgery. However, patients also have a long history of back pain from the associated degenerative spinal disease which usually does not resolve unless it is addressed separately and patients need to be warned regarding this

Hypothesis. Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is diagnosed by a history of claudication, clinical investigation, cross-sectional area (CSA) of the dural sac on MRI or CT, and walking distance on the treadmill test. As radiological findings do not always correlate with clinical symptoms, additional diagnostic signs are needed. In patients without LSS, we observe the sedimentation of lumbar nerve roots to the dorsal part of the dural sac on supine MRI scans. In patients with LSS, this sedimentation is rarely seen. We named this phenomenon ‘sedimentation sign’ and defined the absence of sedimenting nerve roots as positive sedimentation sign for the diagnosis of LSS. We hypothesised that the new sedimentation sign discriminates between non-specific low back pain (LBP) and LSS. Methods and analysis. This prospective case-control study included 200 patients in an orthopaedic in- and outpatient clinic. Patients in the LBP group (n=100) had low back pain, a cross-sectional area (CSA) of the dural sac >120mm. 2. , and a walking distance >1000m; patients in the LSS group (n=100) showed claudication, a CSA < 80mm. 2. , and a walking distance < 200m. Results. A positive sedimentation sign was identified in 94 patients in the LSS group but in no patient in the LBP group. There was no difference in the detection of the sign between segmental levels L1 - L5 in the LSS group. Conclusion. Our findings show that a positive sedimentation sign exclusively and reliably occurs in patients with LSS, suggesting its usefulness in clinical practice. If future accuracy studies confirm the sign's high specificity, a positive sedimentation sign can rule in LSS, and with a high sensitivity, a negative sedimentation sign can rule out LSS. The sedimentation sign is potentially a valuable tool to identify patients who will benefit from spinal surgery