Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Original research
Successful use of percutaneous interspinous spacers and adjunctive spinoplasty in a 9 year cohort of patients
  1. Luigi Manfre1,
  2. Aldo Eros De Vivo1,
  3. Hosam Al Qatami2,
  4. Ahmed Own3,
  5. Fausto Ventura1,
  6. Kevin Zhou4,
  7. Ronil V Chandra4,5,
  8. Joshua A Hirsch6
  1. 1 Department of Radiology, IOM Mediterranean Oncology Institute, Viagrande, Sicily, Italy
  2. 2 Neuroradiology, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Ad Dawhah, Qatar
  3. 3 Neuroradiology, Hamad General Hospital. Academic Health Sytem, Doha, Qatar
  4. 4 Interventional Neuroradiology, Monash Health, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
  5. 5 Monash University Faculty of Medicine Nursing and Health Sciences, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
  6. 6 NeuroInterventional Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Kevin Zhou, Interventional Neuroradiology, Monash Health, Clayton VIC 3168, Australia; kevin.zy.zhou{at}


Purpose Lumbar spinal canal stenosis and lumbar spinal foraminal stenosis are common, degenerative pathologies which can result in neurogenic claudication and have a negative impact on function and quality of life. Percutaneous interspinous devices (PIDs) are a recently-developed, minimally-invasive, alternative treatment option. This study details a 9 year single-centre experience with PIDs and examines the complementary use of spinous process augmentation (spinoplasty) to reduce failure rates.

Methods A retrospective cohort assessment of 800 consecutive patients who presented to a specialized spine hospital was performed with 688 receiving treatment. Inclusion was based on high-grade stenosis, failure of conservative management and electromyography. 256 had a PID alone while 432 had concurrent polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) augmentation of the adjacent spinous processes. The patients were followed up at 3 and 12 months using the Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI).

Results Both groups showed marked improvement in the patients’ ZCQ scores (3.2 to 1.3) and ODI scores (32 to 21), with strong satisfaction results (1.7). The symptom recurrence rate from complications for the group which received concurrent spinous process augmentation was reduced when compared with the PID alone cohort (<1% vs 11.3%).

Conclusion This study demonstrates the efficacy of percutaneous interspinous devices in treating lumbar spinal stenosis. It also provides evidence that concurrent spinous process augmentation reduces the rate of symptom recurrence.

  • spine
  • spinal cord
  • intervention
  • device
  • technique

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.


  • Twitter @JoshuaAHirsch

  • Contributors LM: conception, data collection and analysis, manuscript revision. AEDeV: conception, data collection and analysis, manuscript revision. HAlQ: conception, data collection and analysis, manuscript revision. AO: conception, data collection and analysis, manuscript revision. FV: conception, data collection and analysis, manuscript revision. KZ: data analysis, manuscript drafting and revision. RVC: data analysis, manuscript drafting and revision. JAH: conception, data collection and analysis, manuscript revision. All authors give final approval and accept accountability for this work.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent for publication Not required.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Data availability statement Data are available upon reasonable request.

Linked Articles

  • Commentary
    Junjian Huang John Shin Stefano Marcia Allan L Brook