Login / Register Submit Your Article
Open Access Review

Effect of the decompression only compared to decompression with on lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis: A meta-analysis

by Theodor Georg 1 orcid
1
Emergency department, Sana Hospital Offenbach, Starkenburgring 66, 63069 Offenbach am Main, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
IJCMR  2025 3(4):64; https://doi.org/10.61466/ijcmr3040004
Received: 10 March 2025 / Accepted: 12 July 2025 / Published Online: 1 August 2025
View Full-Text
Download PDF

Abstract

Background:

A meta-analysis study was completed to measure how to forecast the effect of the decompression only compared to decompression with fusion on lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis.

Methods:

Until October 2024, an inclusive literature study was accomplished, and 1865 related studies were reviewed. The 31 nominated studies encompassed 31678 participants with lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis at the beginning of the study. The odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to look at the outcome of the decompression only compared to decompression with fusion on lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis dichotomous, or continuous methods with either a fixed or random model.

Results:

In individuals with lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis, decompression had significantly lower visual analog scale back score (MD, -0.57; 95% CI,-0.91- -0.23, p=0.001), visual analog scale leg score (MD, -0.26; 95% CI, -.49- -0.03, p=0.03), Oswestry Disability Index score (MD, -2.42; 95% CI, -4.75- -0.08, p=0.04), operation time (MD, -82.60; 95% CI, -130.06- -35.14, p<0.001) intraoperative blood loss (MD, -261.93; 95% CI, -360.49- -163.36, p<0.001), and length of hospital stay (MD, -20.09; 95% CI, -29.55- -10.64, p<0.001) compared to decompression with fusion treatment. However, no significant difference was found between decompression and decompression with fusion treatment in European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions score (MD, -0.01; 95% CI, -0.04-0.01, p=0.28) Short-Form 36 physical component summary (MD, -0.73; 95% CI, -2.70-1.24, p=0.47), Short-Form 36 mental component summary score (MD, 0.08; 95% CI, -2.94-3.10, p=0.96), patient satisfaction (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.25-1.09, p=0.08), overall complication rate (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.68-1.26, p=0.61), and overall reoperation rate (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.85-2.13, p=0.21) in individuals with lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis.

Conclusions:

In individuals with lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis, decompression had significantly lower visual analog scale back score, visual analog scale leg score, Oswestry Disability Index score, operation time, intraoperative blood loss and length of hospital stay, however, no significant difference was in European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions score Short-Form 36 physical component summary, Short-Form 36 mental component summary score, patient satisfaction overall complication rate and overall reoperation compared to decompression with fusion treatment. To validate this finding more studies are required, and care is essential to be implemented when interconnecting with its values, since many comparisons had law number of selected studies. 

Keywords: lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis; visual analog scale back score; visual analog scale leg score; Oswestry Disability Index score; fusion; decompression;
Copyright: © 2025 by Georg. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) (Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
Cite This Paper
APA Style
Georg, T. (2025). Effect of the decompression only compared to decompression with on lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Clinical Medical Research, 3(4), 64. doi:10.61466/ijcmr3040004
ACS Style
Georg, T. Effect of the decompression only compared to decompression with on lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Clinical Medical Research, 2025, 3, 64. doi:10.61466/ijcmr3040004
AMA Style
Georg T.. Effect of the decompression only compared to decompression with on lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Clinical Medical Research; 2025, 3(4):64. doi:10.61466/ijcmr3040004
Chicago/Turabian Style
Georg, Theodor 2025. "Effect of the decompression only compared to decompression with on lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis: A meta-analysis" International Journal of Clinical Medical Research 3, no.4:64. doi:10.61466/ijcmr3040004

Share and Cite

ACS Style
Georg, T. Effect of the decompression only compared to decompression with on lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Clinical Medical Research, 2025, 3, 64. doi:10.61466/ijcmr3040004
AMA Style
Georg T.. Effect of the decompression only compared to decompression with on lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Clinical Medical Research; 2025, 3(4):64. doi:10.61466/ijcmr3040004
Chicago/Turabian Style
Georg, Theodor 2025. "Effect of the decompression only compared to decompression with on lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis: A meta-analysis" International Journal of Clinical Medical Research 3, no.4:64. doi:10.61466/ijcmr3040004
APA style
Georg, T. (2025). Effect of the decompression only compared to decompression with on lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Clinical Medical Research, 3(4), 64. doi:10.61466/ijcmr3040004

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

References

  1. Matz, P.G., Meagher, R.J., Lamer, T., et al., Guideline summary review: an evidence-based clinical guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. The Spine Journal, 2016. 16(3): p. 439-448.
  2. Koreckij, T.D. and Fischgrund, J.S., Degenerative Spondylolisthesis. Clinical Spine Surgery, 2015. 28(7): p. 236-241.
  3. Steiger, F., Becker, H.J., Standaert, C.J., et al., Surgery in lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis: indications, outcomes and complications. A systematic review. European Spine Journal, 2014. 23(5): p. 945-973.
  4. Weinstein, J.N., Lurie, J.D., Tosteson, T.D., et al., Surgical Compared with Nonoperative Treatment for Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: Four-Year Results in the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT) Randomized and Observational Cohorts. JBJS, 2009. 91(6): p. 1295-1304.
  5. Weinstein, J.N., Lurie, J.D., Tosteson, T.D., et al., Surgical versus Nonsurgical Treatment for Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis. New England Journal of Medicine, 2007. 356(22): p. 2257-2270.
  6. Schroeder, G.D., Kepler, C.K., Kurd, M.F., et al., Rationale for the Surgical Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis. Spine, 2015. 40(21): p. E1161-E1166.
  7. Kepler, C.K., Vaccaro, A.R., Hilibrand, A.S., et al., National Trends in the Use of Fusion Techniques to Treat Degenerative Spondylolisthesis. Spine, 2014. 39(19): p. 1584-1589.
  8. Sengupta, D.K. and Herkowitz, H.N., Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: Review of Current Trends and Controversies. Spine, 2005. 30(6S): p. S71-S81.
  9. Schulte, T.L., Ringel, F., Quante, M., et al., Surgery for adult spondylolisthesis: a systematic review of the evidence. European Spine Journal, 2016. 25(8): p. 2359-2367.
  10. Försth, P., Ólafsson, G., Carlsson, T., et al., A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Fusion Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis. N Engl J Med, 2016. 374(15): p. 1413-23.
  11. Ghogawala, Z., Dziura, J., Butler, W.E., et al., Laminectomy plus Fusion versus Laminectomy Alone for Lumbar Spondylolisthesis. New England Journal of Medicine, 2016. 374(15): p. 1424-1434.
  12. Stroup, D.F., Berlin, J.A., Morton, S.C., et al., Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. JAMA, 2000. 283(15): p. 2008-2012.
  13. Shafiey, A.S. and Ahmed, H., Effect of Budesonide and Systemic Corticosteroids on Hospital Admissions and Length of Stay: A Meta-analysis. Int. J. Clin. Med. res., 2025. 3(2): p. 24-29.
  14. Liberati, A., Altman, D.G., Tetzlaff, J., et al., The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J. Clin. Epidemiol., 2009. 62(10): p. e1-e34.
  15. Wong, Z., A meta-analysis examining the impact of antibiotic prophylaxis on surgical site wound infection during third molar surgery. Int. J. Clin. Med. res., 2024. 2(4): p. 127-134.
  16. Gupta, S., Rout, G., Patel, A.H., et al., Efficacy of generic oral directly acting agents in patients with hepatitis C virus infection. J. Viral. Hepat., 2018. 25(7): p. 771-778.
  17. Sheikhbahaei, S., Trahan, T.J., Xiao, J., et al., FDG-PET/CT and MRI for Evaluation of Pathologic Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Patients With Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies. Oncologist, 2016. 21(8): p. 931-9.
  18. Elshazly, H., Effectiveness of Postoperative Systemic Antibiotic Prophylaxis Following Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Device Implantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Int. J. Clin. Med. res., 2024. 2(5): p. 144-154.
  19. Higgins, J.P., Thompson, S.G., Deeks, J.J., et al., Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. Bmj, 2003. 327(7414): p. 557-560.
  20. Herkowitz, H.N. and Kurz, L.T., Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis. A prospective study comparing decompression with decompression and intertransverse process arthrodesis. JBJS, 1991. 73(6): p. 802-808.
  21. Bridwell, K.H., Sedgewick, T.A., O'Brien, M.F., et al., The Role of Fusion and Instrumentation in the Treatment of Degenerative Spondylolisthesis with Spinal Stenosis. Clinical Spine Surgery, 1993. 6(6): p. 461-472.
  22. Ghogawala, Z., Benzel, E.C., Amin-Hanjani, S., et al., Prospective outcomes evaluation after decompression with or without instrumented fusion for lumbar stenosis and degenerative Grade I spondylolisthesis. Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, 2004. 1(3): p. 267-272.
  23. Matsudaira, K., Yamazaki, T., Seichi, A., et al., Spinal stenosis in grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a comparative study of outcomes following laminoplasty and laminectomy with instrumented spinal fusion. Journal of Orthopaedic Science, 2005. 10(3): p. 270-276.
  24. Park, J.H., Hyun, S.-J., Roh, S.W., et al., A comparison of unilateral laminectomy with bilateral decompression and fusion surgery in the treatment of grade I lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. Acta Neurochirurgica, 2012. 154(7): p. 1205-1212.
  25. Kleinstueck, F.S., Fekete, T.F., Mannion, A.F., et al., To fuse or not to fuse in lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis: do baseline symptoms help provide the answer? European Spine Journal, 2012. 21(2): p. 268-275.
  26. Kim, S., Mortaz Hedjri, S., Coyte, P.C., et al., Cost-utility of lumbar decompression with or without fusion for patients with symptomatic degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. The Spine Journal, 2012. 12(1): p. 44-54.
  27. Rampersaud, Y.R., Fisher, C., Yee, A., et al., Health-related quality of life following decompression compared to decompression and fusion for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a Canadian multicentre study. Can J Surg, 2014. 57(4): p. E126-33.
  28. Sigmundsson, F.G., Jönsson, B., and Strömqvist, B., Outcome of decompression with and without fusion in spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis in relation to preoperative pain pattern: a register study of 1,624 patients. The Spine Journal, 2015. 15(4): p. 638-646.
  29. Sato, S., Yagi, M., Machida, M., et al., Reoperation rate and risk factors of elective spinal surgery for degenerative spondylolisthesis: minimum 5-year follow-up. The Spine Journal, 2015. 15(7): p. 1536-1544.
  30. Lattig, F., Fekete, T.F., Kleinstück, F.S., et al., Lumbar Facet Joint Effusion on MRI as a Sign of Unstable Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: Should it Influence the Treatment Decision? Clinical Spine Surgery, 2015. 28(3): p. 95-100.
  31. Alvin, M.D., Lubelski, D., Abdullah, K.G., et al., Cost-Utility Analysis of Instrumented Fusion Versus Decompression Alone for Grade I L4–L5 Spondylolisthesis at 1-Year Follow-up: A Pilot Study. Clinical Spine Surgery, 2016. 29(2): p. E80-E86.
  32. Ahmad, S., Hamad, A., Bhalla, A., et al., The outcome of decompression alone for lumbar spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis. European Spine Journal, 2017. 26(2): p. 414-419.
  33. Ulrich, N.H., Burgstaller, J.M., Pichierri, G., et al., Decompression Surgery Alone Versus Decompression Plus Fusion in Symptomatic Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Swiss Prospective Multicenter Cohort Study With 3 Years of Follow-up. Spine, 2017. 42(18): p. E1077-E1086.
  34. Inui, T., Murakami, M., Nagao, N., et al., Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: Changes in Surgical Indications and Comparison of Instrumented Fusion With Two Surgical Decompression Procedures. Spine, 2017. 42(1): p. E15-E24.
  35. Austevoll, I.M., Gjestad, R., Brox, J.I., et al., The effectiveness of decompression alone compared with additional fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis: a pragmatic comparative non-inferiority observational study from the Norwegian Registry for Spine Surgery. European Spine Journal, 2017. 26(2): p. 404-413.
  36. Inose, H., Kato, T., Yuasa, M., et al., Comparison of Decompression, Decompression Plus Fusion, and Decompression Plus Stabilization for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Prospective, Randomized Study. Clinical Spine Surgery, 2018. 31(7): p. E347-E352.
  37. Vorhies, J.S., Hernandez-Boussard, T., and Alamin, T., Treatment of Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis With Fusion or Decompression Alone Results in Similar Rates of Reoperation at 5 Years. Clinical Spine Surgery, 2018. 31(1): p. E74-E79.
  38. Yagi, M., Fujita, N., Okada, E., et al., Comparisons of direct costs, outcomes, and cost-utility of decompression surgery with fusion versus decompression alone for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Journal of Orthopaedic Science, 2018. 23(4): p. 653-657.
  39. Chan, A.K., Bisson, E.F., Bydon, M., et al., Laminectomy alone versus fusion for grade 1 lumbar spondylolisthesis in 426 patients from the prospective Quality Outcomes Database. Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine SPI, 2019. 30(2): p. 234-241.
  40. Pieters, T.A., Li, Y.I., Towner, J.E., et al., Comparative Analysis of Decompression Versus Decompression and Fusion for Surgical Management of Lumbar Spondylolisthesis. World Neurosurgery, 2019. 125: p. e1183-e1188.
  41. Kayalar, A.E., Onen, M.R., Gerilmez, A., et al., A simple cost-effectiveness analysis of bilateral decompression via unilateral approach versus instrumented total laminectomy and fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis. Turk Neurosurg, 2019. 29(5): p. 643-650.
  42. Chan, A.K., Bisson, E.F., Bydon, M., et al., A comparison of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and decompression alone for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Neurosurgical Focus, 2019. 46(5): p. E13.
  43. Kim, S.-K., Park, S.-w., Lim, B.-c., et al., Comparison of Reoperation after Fusion and after Decompression for Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Single-Center Experience of 987 Cases. J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg, 2020. 81(05): p. 392-398.
  44. Austevoll, I.M., Gjestad, R., Solberg, T., et al., Comparative Effectiveness of Microdecompression Alone vs Decompression Plus Instrumented Fusion in Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis. JAMA Network Open, 2020. 3(9): p. e2015015-e2015015.
  45. de Dios, E., Heary, R.F., Lindhagen, L., et al., Laminectomy alone versus laminectomy with fusion for degenerative cervical myelopathy: a long-term study of a national cohort. European Spine Journal, 2022. 31(2): p. 334-345.
  46. Karlsson, T., Försth, P., Skorpil, M., et al., Decompression alone or decompression with fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomized clinical trial with two-year MRI follow-up. The Bone & Joint Journal, 2022. 104-B(12): p. 1343-1351.
  47. Karlsson, T., Försth, P., Öhagen, P., et al., Decompression alone or decompression with fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis: five-year clinical results from a randomized clinical trial. The Bone & Joint Journal, 2024. 106-B(7): p. 705-712.
  48. Kgomotso, E.L., Hellum, C., Fagerland, M.W., et al., Decompression alone or with fusion for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (Nordsten-DS): five year follow-up of a randomised, multicentre, non-inferiority trial. BMJ, 2024. 386: p. e079771.
  49. Brooks, R., EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Policy, 1996. 37(1): p. 53-72.
  50. Fairbank, J.C.T. and Pynsent, P.B., The Oswestry Disability Index. Spine, 2000. 25(22): p. 2940-2953.
  51. Ware, J.E.J., SF-36 Health Survey Update. Spine, 2000. 25(24): p. 3130-3139.
  52. Copay, A.G., Glassman, S.D., Subach, B.R., et al., Minimum clinically important difference in lumbar spine surgery patients: a choice of methods using the Oswestry Disability Index, Medical Outcomes Study questionnaire Short Form 36, and Pain Scales. The Spine Journal, 2008. 8(6): p. 968-974.
  53. Hägg, O., Fritzell, P., and Nordwall, A., The clinical importance of changes in outcome scores after treatment for chronic low back pain. European Spine Journal, 2003. 12(1): p. 12-20.
  54. Ostelo, R.W.J.G., Deyo, R.A., Stratford, P., et al., Interpreting Change Scores for Pain and Functional Status in Low Back Pain: Towards International Consensus Regarding Minimal Important Change. Spine, 2008. 33(1): p. 90-94.
  55. Abdu, W.A., Lurie, J.D., Spratt, K.F., et al., Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: Does Fusion Method Influence Outcome? Four-Year Results of the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial. Spine, 2009. 34(21): p. 2351-2360.
  56. Ye, Y.-p., Chen, D., and Xu, H., The comparison of instrumented and non-instrumented fusion in the treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis: a meta-analysis. European Spine Journal, 2014. 23(9): p. 1918-1926.
  57. Wang, Y.X.J., Káplár, Z., Deng, M., et al., Lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis epidemiology: A systematic review with a focus on gender-specific and age-specific prevalence. Journal of Orthopaedic Translation, 2017. 11: p. 39-52.
  58. Joaquim, A.F., Milano, J.B., Ghizoni, E., et al., Is There a Role for Decompression Alone for Treating Symptomatic Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis?: A Systematic Review. Clinical Spine Surgery, 2016. 29(5): p. 191-202.
  59. Sansur, C.A., Reames, D.L., Smith, J.S., et al., Morbidity and mortality in the surgical treatment of 10,242 adults with spondylolisthesis: Presented at the 2009 Joint Spine Section Meeting Clinical article. Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine SPI, 2010. 13(5): p. 589-593.
  60. Mannion, A.F., Leivseth, G., Brox, J.-I., et al., ISSLS Prize Winner: Long-Term Follow-up Suggests Spinal Fusion Is Associated With Increased Adjacent Segment Disc Degeneration But Without Influence on Clinical Outcome: Results of a Combined Follow-up From 4 Randomized Controlled Trials. Spine, 2014. 39(17): p. 1373-1383.