Retrospective cohort study finds postlaminectomy syndrome increases cardiovascular risk in adults after lumbar fusion, suggesting need for closer monitoring.
Background Postlaminectomy syndrome (PLS) is a chronic pain condition characterized by persistent or recurrent symptoms after lumbar spine surgery. Although chronic pain states have been linked to autonomic dysregulation, inflammation, and increased cardiometabolic burden, the long-term cardiovascular implications of PLS remain unclear. Posterior lumbar fusion (PLF) is one of the most common lumbar procedures, providing a clinically relevant population in which to evaluate whether PLS signals broader cardiovascular vulnerability. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the TriNetX Global Collaborative Network. Adults aged ≥18 years who underwent PLF between 2015 and 2020 were identified by CPT codes. The exposed cohort included individuals with a new diagnosis of PLS (ICD-10 M96.1) occurring ≥6 months after fusion; matched controls were assigned an index encounter at the corresponding postoperative interval. Outcomes included major cardiac events (MCE), stroke, and MACE (MCE + stroke) within 5 years. Propensity score matching was performed based on demographics, comorbidities, and medication use. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Results After matching, 6384 patients were included in each cohort. PLS was associated with increased 5-year risk of MACE (12.3% vs 10.8%; OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.04–1.29) and MCE (9.9% vs 8.1%; OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.11–1.42). Stroke risk was not significantly different (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.92–1.34). Conclusions PLS after PLF is associated with elevated long-term cardiac risk. These findings suggest PLS may represent a marker of broader systemic vulnerability, warranting enhanced cardiovascular surveillance and multidisciplinary postoperative management.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: