Retrospective Comparison of Tubular Decompression ± Rhizotomy Versus TLIF in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Overview

This retrospective observational study examines clinical outcomes in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis who underwent minimally invasive tubular decompression, with or without subsequent multisegmental percutaneous rhizotomy, at the General University Hospital of Valencia over 25 years (2000-2025). The purpose of the study is to determine whether decompression alone provides sufficient long-term symptom improvement or whether additional spinal fusion (transfacetal TLIF) is needed in specific patient subgroups. By analyzing real-world data from routine clinical practice, this study aims to identify clinical, radiological, and demographic factors associated with the need for fusion surgery, particularly in older adults who may benefit from less invasive treatment strategies. No new interventions are performed as part of this study, and all data are obtained from existing medical records.

Lumbar spinal stenosis is a common and disabling condition, particularly in older adults, often leading to neurogenic claudication and reduced quality of life. Traditional open decompression and fusion procedures may provide symptom relief but are associated with greater surgical morbidity, longer recovery times, and increased risk of complications, especially in elderly patients with multiple comorbidities. Minimally invasive surgical techniques, including tubular unilateral decompression and targeted multisegmental percutaneous rhizotomy, have been progressively adopted to reduce surgical trauma while preserving spinal stability. Over the past 25 years, the Neurosurgery Department of the General University Hospital of Valencia has routinely applied a protocol in which patients with lumbar spinal stenosis undergo minimally invasive tubular decompression with microscopic assistance. Patients who continue to experience significant postoperative lumbar pain are considered for multisegmental facet rhizotomy as a second-step treatment. Transfacetal TLIF fusion has been reserved for cases presenting persistent instability, clinical deterioration, or inadequate response to the decompression-based strategy. This long-term clinical experience provides a unique opportunity to evaluate whether spinal fusion is truly required in all patients, or whether decompression alone-with or without adjunctive rhizotomy-offers sufficient clinical benefit. This study is a retrospective observational cohort analysis of patients treated for lumbar spinal stenosis between 2000 and 2025 at the General University Hospital of Valencia. All procedures were part of routine clinical care and were not assigned by a research protocol. The study aims to compare outcomes among three groups: patients who improved with tubular decompression alone, those who required additional multisegmental rhizotomy due to persistent lumbar pain, and those who ultimately required TLIF fusion. Clinical, radiological, and demographic factors associated with each clinical pathway will be analyzed to determine predictors of success or failure of minimally invasive decompression strategies. The primary objective is to identify the proportion of patients who required fusion surgery after initial minimally invasive decompression and to determine factors associated with the need for additional stabilization. Secondary objectives include evaluating postoperative functional improvement, assessing rates and types of postoperative complications, and examining the influence of degenerative spondylolisthesis or other anatomical variables on treatment outcomes. All data are obtained exclusively from existing medical records, surgical notes, imaging studies, and standardized functional assessments (e.g., ODI, JOA, VAS). No new interventions, procedures, or contact with patients are required. Data are coded and anonymized before analysis to ensure compliance with ethical and data-protection standards. Findings from this study may help refine patient-selection criteria for minimally invasive decompression techniques and reduce the need for fusion procedures, particularly in elderly populations where surgical risk must be minimized. The results may also guide the design of future prospective studies to validate the long-term effectiveness of these treatment pathways.