The MIST Guidelines: The Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Consensus Group Guidelines for Minimally Invasive Spine Treatment

Timothy R. Deer, Jay S. Grider, Jason E. Pope, Steven Falowski, Tim J. Lamer, Aaron Calodney, David A. Provenzano, Dawood Sayed, Eric Lee, Sayed E. Wahezi, Chong Kim, Corey Hunter, Mayank Gupta, Rasmin Benyamin, Bohdan Chopko, Didier Demesmin, Sudhir Diwan, Christopher Gharibo, Leo Kapural, David KlothBrian D. Klagges, Michael Harned, Tom Simopoulos, Tory McJunkin, Jonathan D. Carlson, Richard W. Rosenquist, Timothy R. Lubenow, Nagy Mekhail

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) can lead to compression of neural elements and manifest as low back and leg pain. LSS has traditionally been treated with a variety of conservative (pain medications, physical therapy, epidural spinal injections) and invasive (surgical decompression) options. Recently, several minimally invasive procedures have expanded the treatment options. Methods: The Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Consensus Group convened to evaluate the peer-reviewed literature as the basis for making minimally invasive spine treatment (MIST) recommendations. Eleven consensus points were clearly defined with evidence strength, recommendation grade, and consensus level using U.S. Preventive Services Task Force criteria. The Consensus Group also created a treatment algorithm. Literature searches yielded 9 studies (2 randomized controlled trials [RCTs]; 7 observational studies, 4 prospective and 3 retrospective) of minimally invasive spine treatments, and 1 RCT for spacers. Results: The LSS treatment choice is dependent on the degree of stenosis; spinal or anatomic level; architecture of the stenosis; severity of the symptoms; failed, past, less invasive treatments; previous fusions or other open surgical approaches; and patient comorbidities. There is Level I evidence for percutaneous image-guided lumbar decompression as superior to lumbar epidural steroid injection, and 1 RCT supported spacer use in a noninferiority study comparing 2 spacer products currently available. Conclusions: MISTs should be used in a judicious and algorithmic fashion to treat LSS, based on the evidence of efficacy and safety in the peer-reviewed literature. The MIST Consensus Group recommend that these procedures be used in a multimodal fashion as part of an evidence-based decision algorithm.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)250-274
Number of pages25
JournalPain Practice
Volume19
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2019

Fingerprint

Spinal Stenosis
Consensus
Spine
Guidelines
Epidural Injections
Randomized Controlled Trials
Therapeutics
Pathologic Constriction
Surgical Decompression
Spinal Injections
Advisory Committees
Low Back Pain
Decompression
Observational Studies
Comorbidity
Leg
Steroids
Safety
Pain

Keywords

  • epidural injection
  • interspinous spacer
  • lumbar spinal stenosis
  • minimally invasive spine treatment
  • percutaneous image-guided lumbar decompression
  • systematic literature review

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

Cite this

Deer, T. R., Grider, J. S., Pope, J. E., Falowski, S., Lamer, T. J., Calodney, A., ... Mekhail, N. (2019). The MIST Guidelines: The Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Consensus Group Guidelines for Minimally Invasive Spine Treatment. Pain Practice, 19(3), 250-274. https://doi.org/10.1111/papr.12744

The MIST Guidelines : The Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Consensus Group Guidelines for Minimally Invasive Spine Treatment. / Deer, Timothy R.; Grider, Jay S.; Pope, Jason E.; Falowski, Steven; Lamer, Tim J.; Calodney, Aaron; Provenzano, David A.; Sayed, Dawood; Lee, Eric; Wahezi, Sayed E.; Kim, Chong; Hunter, Corey; Gupta, Mayank; Benyamin, Rasmin; Chopko, Bohdan; Demesmin, Didier; Diwan, Sudhir; Gharibo, Christopher; Kapural, Leo; Kloth, David; Klagges, Brian D.; Harned, Michael; Simopoulos, Tom; McJunkin, Tory; Carlson, Jonathan D.; Rosenquist, Richard W.; Lubenow, Timothy R.; Mekhail, Nagy.

In: Pain Practice, Vol. 19, No. 3, 01.03.2019, p. 250-274.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Deer, TR, Grider, JS, Pope, JE, Falowski, S, Lamer, TJ, Calodney, A, Provenzano, DA, Sayed, D, Lee, E, Wahezi, SE, Kim, C, Hunter, C, Gupta, M, Benyamin, R, Chopko, B, Demesmin, D, Diwan, S, Gharibo, C, Kapural, L, Kloth, D, Klagges, BD, Harned, M, Simopoulos, T, McJunkin, T, Carlson, JD, Rosenquist, RW, Lubenow, TR & Mekhail, N 2019, 'The MIST Guidelines: The Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Consensus Group Guidelines for Minimally Invasive Spine Treatment', Pain Practice, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 250-274. https://doi.org/10.1111/papr.12744
Deer, Timothy R. ; Grider, Jay S. ; Pope, Jason E. ; Falowski, Steven ; Lamer, Tim J. ; Calodney, Aaron ; Provenzano, David A. ; Sayed, Dawood ; Lee, Eric ; Wahezi, Sayed E. ; Kim, Chong ; Hunter, Corey ; Gupta, Mayank ; Benyamin, Rasmin ; Chopko, Bohdan ; Demesmin, Didier ; Diwan, Sudhir ; Gharibo, Christopher ; Kapural, Leo ; Kloth, David ; Klagges, Brian D. ; Harned, Michael ; Simopoulos, Tom ; McJunkin, Tory ; Carlson, Jonathan D. ; Rosenquist, Richard W. ; Lubenow, Timothy R. ; Mekhail, Nagy. / The MIST Guidelines : The Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Consensus Group Guidelines for Minimally Invasive Spine Treatment. In: Pain Practice. 2019 ; Vol. 19, No. 3. pp. 250-274.
@article{2ae87ac5a96a429686adb6bc23b0c5ef,
title = "The MIST Guidelines: The Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Consensus Group Guidelines for Minimally Invasive Spine Treatment",
abstract = "Background: Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) can lead to compression of neural elements and manifest as low back and leg pain. LSS has traditionally been treated with a variety of conservative (pain medications, physical therapy, epidural spinal injections) and invasive (surgical decompression) options. Recently, several minimally invasive procedures have expanded the treatment options. Methods: The Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Consensus Group convened to evaluate the peer-reviewed literature as the basis for making minimally invasive spine treatment (MIST) recommendations. Eleven consensus points were clearly defined with evidence strength, recommendation grade, and consensus level using U.S. Preventive Services Task Force criteria. The Consensus Group also created a treatment algorithm. Literature searches yielded 9 studies (2 randomized controlled trials [RCTs]; 7 observational studies, 4 prospective and 3 retrospective) of minimally invasive spine treatments, and 1 RCT for spacers. Results: The LSS treatment choice is dependent on the degree of stenosis; spinal or anatomic level; architecture of the stenosis; severity of the symptoms; failed, past, less invasive treatments; previous fusions or other open surgical approaches; and patient comorbidities. There is Level I evidence for percutaneous image-guided lumbar decompression as superior to lumbar epidural steroid injection, and 1 RCT supported spacer use in a noninferiority study comparing 2 spacer products currently available. Conclusions: MISTs should be used in a judicious and algorithmic fashion to treat LSS, based on the evidence of efficacy and safety in the peer-reviewed literature. The MIST Consensus Group recommend that these procedures be used in a multimodal fashion as part of an evidence-based decision algorithm.",
keywords = "epidural injection, interspinous spacer, lumbar spinal stenosis, minimally invasive spine treatment, percutaneous image-guided lumbar decompression, systematic literature review",
author = "Deer, {Timothy R.} and Grider, {Jay S.} and Pope, {Jason E.} and Steven Falowski and Lamer, {Tim J.} and Aaron Calodney and Provenzano, {David A.} and Dawood Sayed and Eric Lee and Wahezi, {Sayed E.} and Chong Kim and Corey Hunter and Mayank Gupta and Rasmin Benyamin and Bohdan Chopko and Didier Demesmin and Sudhir Diwan and Christopher Gharibo and Leo Kapural and David Kloth and Klagges, {Brian D.} and Michael Harned and Tom Simopoulos and Tory McJunkin and Carlson, {Jonathan D.} and Rosenquist, {Richard W.} and Lubenow, {Timothy R.} and Nagy Mekhail",
year = "2019",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/papr.12744",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "19",
pages = "250--274",
journal = "Pain Practice",
issn = "1530-7085",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The MIST Guidelines

T2 - The Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Consensus Group Guidelines for Minimally Invasive Spine Treatment

AU - Deer, Timothy R.

AU - Grider, Jay S.

AU - Pope, Jason E.

AU - Falowski, Steven

AU - Lamer, Tim J.

AU - Calodney, Aaron

AU - Provenzano, David A.

AU - Sayed, Dawood

AU - Lee, Eric

AU - Wahezi, Sayed E.

AU - Kim, Chong

AU - Hunter, Corey

AU - Gupta, Mayank

AU - Benyamin, Rasmin

AU - Chopko, Bohdan

AU - Demesmin, Didier

AU - Diwan, Sudhir

AU - Gharibo, Christopher

AU - Kapural, Leo

AU - Kloth, David

AU - Klagges, Brian D.

AU - Harned, Michael

AU - Simopoulos, Tom

AU - McJunkin, Tory

AU - Carlson, Jonathan D.

AU - Rosenquist, Richard W.

AU - Lubenow, Timothy R.

AU - Mekhail, Nagy

PY - 2019/3/1

Y1 - 2019/3/1

N2 - Background: Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) can lead to compression of neural elements and manifest as low back and leg pain. LSS has traditionally been treated with a variety of conservative (pain medications, physical therapy, epidural spinal injections) and invasive (surgical decompression) options. Recently, several minimally invasive procedures have expanded the treatment options. Methods: The Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Consensus Group convened to evaluate the peer-reviewed literature as the basis for making minimally invasive spine treatment (MIST) recommendations. Eleven consensus points were clearly defined with evidence strength, recommendation grade, and consensus level using U.S. Preventive Services Task Force criteria. The Consensus Group also created a treatment algorithm. Literature searches yielded 9 studies (2 randomized controlled trials [RCTs]; 7 observational studies, 4 prospective and 3 retrospective) of minimally invasive spine treatments, and 1 RCT for spacers. Results: The LSS treatment choice is dependent on the degree of stenosis; spinal or anatomic level; architecture of the stenosis; severity of the symptoms; failed, past, less invasive treatments; previous fusions or other open surgical approaches; and patient comorbidities. There is Level I evidence for percutaneous image-guided lumbar decompression as superior to lumbar epidural steroid injection, and 1 RCT supported spacer use in a noninferiority study comparing 2 spacer products currently available. Conclusions: MISTs should be used in a judicious and algorithmic fashion to treat LSS, based on the evidence of efficacy and safety in the peer-reviewed literature. The MIST Consensus Group recommend that these procedures be used in a multimodal fashion as part of an evidence-based decision algorithm.

AB - Background: Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) can lead to compression of neural elements and manifest as low back and leg pain. LSS has traditionally been treated with a variety of conservative (pain medications, physical therapy, epidural spinal injections) and invasive (surgical decompression) options. Recently, several minimally invasive procedures have expanded the treatment options. Methods: The Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Consensus Group convened to evaluate the peer-reviewed literature as the basis for making minimally invasive spine treatment (MIST) recommendations. Eleven consensus points were clearly defined with evidence strength, recommendation grade, and consensus level using U.S. Preventive Services Task Force criteria. The Consensus Group also created a treatment algorithm. Literature searches yielded 9 studies (2 randomized controlled trials [RCTs]; 7 observational studies, 4 prospective and 3 retrospective) of minimally invasive spine treatments, and 1 RCT for spacers. Results: The LSS treatment choice is dependent on the degree of stenosis; spinal or anatomic level; architecture of the stenosis; severity of the symptoms; failed, past, less invasive treatments; previous fusions or other open surgical approaches; and patient comorbidities. There is Level I evidence for percutaneous image-guided lumbar decompression as superior to lumbar epidural steroid injection, and 1 RCT supported spacer use in a noninferiority study comparing 2 spacer products currently available. Conclusions: MISTs should be used in a judicious and algorithmic fashion to treat LSS, based on the evidence of efficacy and safety in the peer-reviewed literature. The MIST Consensus Group recommend that these procedures be used in a multimodal fashion as part of an evidence-based decision algorithm.

KW - epidural injection

KW - interspinous spacer

KW - lumbar spinal stenosis

KW - minimally invasive spine treatment

KW - percutaneous image-guided lumbar decompression

KW - systematic literature review

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85057965696&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85057965696&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/papr.12744

DO - 10.1111/papr.12744

M3 - Article

C2 - 30369003

AN - SCOPUS:85057965696

VL - 19

SP - 250

EP - 274

JO - Pain Practice

JF - Pain Practice

SN - 1530-7085

IS - 3

ER -