mild® Lumbar Decompression for the Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

More than 1.2 million people are undergoing treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) in the United States. Yet, therapeutic options for these patients are limited to either conservative treatments or highly invasive surgeries. A new image-guided interlaminar decompression procedure, mild®, offers significant relief for many of these patients by debulking dorsal element hypertrophy while preserving structural stability. mild can be performed without general anesthesia and offers a short recovery period. A meta-analysis of four clinical patient series from multiple institutions in the United States evaluated over 250 patients for safety and clinical efficacy of the mild procedure. Clinical efficacy was evaluated at baseline and at three-month follow-up using validated patient reported outcomes (PRO) instruments including the ten-point Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Acute safety and patient outcomes was compared to the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT). No device or procedure-related serious adverse events (SAEs) have been recorded with the mild procedure. Outcome metrics for patients treated with mild demonstrated statistically significant symptomatic improvement over baseline. When compared to open surgery, mild efficacy results compare favorably, and complication rates are much lower. mild is a safe and effective procedure that decompresses LSS in a minimally invasive manner while preserving the structural stability of the spine.

[1]  Jeffrey C. Wang,et al.  Magnetic resonance imaging grading of interspinous ligament degeneration of the lumbar spine and its relation to aging, spinal degeneration, and segmental motion. , 2010, Journal of neurosurgery. Spine.

[2]  D. Caraway,et al.  MiDAS I (mild Decompression Alternative to Open Surgery): a preliminary report of a prospective, multi-center clinical study. , 2010, Pain physician.

[3]  J. Weinstein,et al.  Surgical Versus Nonoperative Treatment for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Four-Year Results of the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial , 2010, Spine.

[4]  M. Tsai,et al.  Three-Dimensional Image Analysis of the Temporal Bone in Patients with Unilateral Attic Cholesteatoma , 2010, The neuroradiology journal.

[5]  J. Abbas,et al.  Ligamentum Flavum Thickness in Normal and Stenotic Lumbar Spines , 2010, Spine.

[6]  Brett Hanscom,et al.  Surgical versus nonsurgical therapy for lumbar spinal stenosis. , 2008, The New England journal of medicine.

[7]  Markku Heliövaara,et al.  Surgical or Nonoperative Treatment for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis?: A Randomized Controlled Trial , 2007, Spine.

[8]  Robert Booth,et al.  Pathomechanism of Ligamentum Flavum Hypertrophy: A Multidisciplinary Investigation Based on Clinical, Biomechanical, Histologic, and Biologic Assessments , 2005, Spine.

[9]  Kern Singh,et al.  The Biomechanics and Biology of the Spinal Degenerative Cascade , 2005 .

[10]  M. Mariconda,et al.  Unilateral laminectomy for bilateral decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis: a prospective comparative study with conservatively treated patients. , 2002, Journal of spinal disorders & techniques.

[11]  M. Abdelnoor,et al.  Lumbar spinal stenosis: conservative or surgical management?: A prospective 10-year study. , 2000, Spine.

[12]  W. Kirkaldy-Willis,et al.  Pathology and Pathogenesis of Lumbar Spondylosis and Stenosis , 1978, Spine.

[13]  T. Deer,et al.  New image-guided ultra-minimally invasive lumbar decompression method: the mild procedure. , 2010, Pain physician.