The Clinical, Functional, and Radiological Outcomes of Percutaneous Laser Disc Decompression in Disc-Related Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the clinical and radiological efficacy of percutaneous laser disc decompression (PLDD) in patients with disc-related lumbar spinal stenosis. Methods: Data from 96 patients who underwent PLDD between January 2023 and January 2025 were reviewed retrospectively. Pain intensity (visual analogue scale VAS), functional capacity (pain-free walking distance), patient satisfaction (global patient evaluation), and radiological canal diameter were assessed before the procedure and at 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively. Treatment response was determined based on a ≥2-point decrease in the VAS score, which is the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) criterion. Results: A marked improvement in VAS scores was observed from the early period following PLDD, with the mean VAS score decreasing from 8.02 to 5.02 ± 1.99 at 6 months (p < 0.001). The pain-free walking distance increased from 212.7 m to 345.8 m, resulting in a significant improvement in functional capacity (p < 0.001). A significant increase in the anteroposterior diameter of the spinal canal from 7.1 ± 1.7 mm to 7.9 ± 1.8 mm (p < 0.001) was observed, corresponding to a mean increase of 0.8 mm; however, the magnitude of this radiological change was modest and should be interpreted cautiously. A moderate correlation was found between radiological expansion and VAS change (r = 0.52). At 6 months, 72.9% of patients met the MCID criterion. Although ODI improved significantly over follow-up, the mean reduction remained below commonly accepted MCID thresholds, suggesting that the functional benefit may be modest. No major complications were observed; only short-term transient radicular irritation (2.1%) was seen. Conclusions: PLDD was associated with improvements in pain control, functional capacity, and modest radiological canal enlargement in this cohort of carefully selected patients with single-level, predominantly disc-driven lumbar spinal stenosis. However, because of the retrospective design and absence of a control group, no conclusions regarding comparative effectiveness can be drawn. PLDD should therefore be viewed as a selectively applicable minimally invasive option rather than a general treatment for all forms of lumbar spinal stenosis. The observed clinical benefit was limited to the 6-month follow-up available in this cohort, and its durability beyond this period remains uncertain. Prospective and comparative studies are required to better define its long-term role and its position relative to conservative treatment and surgery.