The long-term outcome of revision microdiscectomy for recurrent sciatica

M. B. Lequin,D. Verbaan,P. R. Schuurman,Saskia Tasche,W. C. Peul,W. P. Vandertop,G. J. Bouma

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-024-08199-5

IF: 2.721

2024-03-22

European Spine Journal

Abstract:To study the long-term outcome of revision microdiscectomy after classic microdiscectomy for lumbosacral radicular syndrome (LSRS).

clinical neurology,orthopedics

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Comparison of Discectomy Versus Sequestrectomy in Lumbar Disc Herniation: a Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies.

Jisheng Ran,Yejun Hu,Zefeng Zheng,Ting Zhu,Huawei Zheng,Yibiao Jing,Kan Xu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0121816

IF: 3.7

2015-01-01

PLoS ONE

Abstract:BACKGROUND:Lumbar disc removal is currently the standard treatment for lumbar disc herniation. No consensus has been achieved whether aggressive disc resection with curettage (discectomy) versus conservative removal of the offending disc fragment alone (sequestrectomy) provides better outcomes. This study aims to compare the reherniation rate and clinical outcomes between discectomy and sequestrectomy by literature review and a meta-analysis.METHODS:A systematic search of PubMed, Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library was performed up to June 1, 2014. Outcomes of interest assessing the two techniques included demographic and clinical baseline characteristics, perioperative variables, complications, recurrent herniation rate and post-operative functional outcomes.RESULTS:Twelve eligible trials evaluating discectomy vs sequestrectomy were identified including one randomized controlled study, five prospective and six retrospective comparative studies. By contrast to discectomy, sequestrectomy was associated with significantly less operative time (p<0.001), lower visual analogue scale (VAS) for low back pain (p<0.05), less post-operative analgesic usage (p<0.05) and better patients' satisfaction (p<0.05). Recurrent herniation rate, reoperation rate, intraoperative blood loss, hospitalization duration and VAS for sciatica were without significant difference.CONCLUSIONS:According to our pooled data, sequestrectomy entails equivalent reherniation rate and complications compared with discectomy but maintains a lower incidence of recurrent low back pain and higher satisfactory rate. High-quality prospective randomized controlled trials are needed to firmly assess these two procedures.
Clinical research of minimally invasive TLIF under quadrant system in lumbar revision surgery

KANG Hui,CAI Xian-hua,XU Feng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/J.issn.1005-7234.2013.05.011

2013-01-01

Abstract:Objective To explore the clinical effect of minimally invasive TLIF under quadrant system in lumbar revision surgery.Methods From March 2004 to June 2009,the clinical data of32 patients with failed back surgery syndrome(8 cases received primary surgical treatment by windowing of lamina for lumbar spinal stenosis,6 cases received primary surgical treatment with MED for LDH,15 cases received primary surgical treatment by windowing of lamina and discectomy for LDH,3 cases had recurrence of lunbar spondylolisthesis)were reviewed and analyzed.A total of 32segments were involved,including L4-5in 18 cases,L5-S1in 14 cases.32 cases of failed back surgery syndrome were treated with minimally invasive TLIF via bilateral muscle gap under MAST Quadrant retractor.VAS score system was used to evaluate back pain preoperation and 14 d and12 months postoperation.The clinical outcomes were assessed by the Oswestry disability index.Results All patients were followed up for 16-36 months(average 18 months).Preoperative VAS score was 7.59±0.79,VAS score was 2.41±0.91 at 14d postoperation,1.16±0.68 at 12 months postoperation.Oswestry disability index was 37.65 ±2.16 at preoperation,18.12±1.81 at 14 d postoperation,7.90±1.12 at 12 months postoperation.VAS score and Oswestry disability index had significant differences between preoperation and 14 d postoperation(P<0.05).VAS score and Oswestry disability index had significant differences between 14 d and 12 months postoperation(P <0.05).There were no leakage of cerebrospinal fluid and nerve root injury during the operation.Conclusion Minimally invasive TLIF for lumbar revision surgery under quadrant system is effective.
Clinical characteristics and efficacy of long-term revision surgery for later recurrent lumbar disc herniation after primary lumbar discectomy

李宏,李淳德,邑晓东,林景荣,刘洪,刘宪义,占方彪,张华峰

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1004-406X.2010.12.13

2010-01-01

Abstract:Objective:To evaluate the clinical characteristics and efficacy of long-term revision surgery for later recurrent lumbar disc herniation after discectomy.Method:35 cases with recurrent lumbar disc herniation of more than 5 years after primary discectomy who were treated from March 2001 to February 2008 were retrospective reviewed.There were 25 males and 10 females with the average age of 57.7 years old(range,45 to 68 years).The surgical segments included L3/4 in 3 cases,L4/5 in 22 cases and L5/S1 in 10 cases.The mean period between primary surgery and recurrence was 8.7 years(range,5.5 years to 29 years).The demographic and imaging data before and after operation were recorded.Prolo lumbar score and patient subjective satisfaction were used to evaluate the effect of reoperation and the related factors of recurrence were analyzed.Result:All 35 patients were followed up for at least 2 years with the mean follow-up of 4.7 years(range,2 years to 8 years).The surgical approach for primary discectomy included fenestration in 5 cases,semi-laminectomy in 8 cases and laminectomy in 22 cases,and the revision surgical approach was discectomy in 2 cases,PLF in 17 patients,PLIF in 8 patients and TLIF in 8 cases.During follow-up,the spinal sagittal imbalance was evident in 21 cases,30 patients had subsidence of intervertebral height,29 cases developed lumbar kyphosis or decrease of lordosis and 24 patients showed MODIC change.The average JOA score was 11.8 before operation and 20.4 after operation(P<0.05).Subjective satisfaction was excellent in 14 patients,good in 17,and fair in 4 cases.4 cases were complicated with cerebrospinal leakage and 3 cases with wound hydrops.No neurological deficit was noted.Conclusion:Patients with later recurrent lumbar disc herniation after primary lumbar discectomy are apt to develop lumbar sagittal imbalance.Appropriate surgical approach can ensure a good outcome.
Early outcomes of surgical treatment with microdiscectomy in patients with lumbar disc herniation

Dusan Rodic,Djula Djilvesi,Bojan Jelaca,Jovana Rodic,Nebojsa Lasica,Petar Vulekovic

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2298/mpns2308192r

2023-01-01

Medical Review

Abstract:Introduction. The treatment of patients with lumbar disc herniation can be conservative or surgical, depending on the patient?s characteristics, the disease, and treatment possibilities. This study aims to compare the intensity of pain, the presence of Las?gue?s sign, and the degree of neurological deficits in patients with lumbar disc herniation before and after the operation. Additionally, the degree of intervertebral disc degeneration, evaluated by magnetic resonance imaging findings on the outcome will be determined. Material and Methods. A retrospective study involved 50 patients aged 18 to 45 who underwent microdiscectomy procedure. Parameters including pain intensity on the visual-analog scale, Las?gue?s nerve stretching test, sensory deficits, motor deficits, and the degree of intervertebral disc degeneration according to the Pfirrmann grading system were assessed preoperatively and in the early postoperative period. Results. Intervertebral disc herniation most commonly occurred at the L4-5 and L5-S1 levels in our patients. Pain intensity significantly decreased from a preoperative score of 7.6 to 2.4 postoperatively. There was also a significant decrease in the number of patients with positive Las?gue?s sign. According to the Pfirrmann grading system, 38% of patients had mild degenerative changes in the intervertebral disc, while 62% had severe degenerative changes. Conclusion. Microdiscectomy is the gold standard in surgical treatment of lumbar disc herniation. In the early postoperative period, patients experience a significant reduction in pain intensity with subsequent improvement of sensory and motor deficits. Surgical treatment of lumbar disc herniation, when indicated appropriately, carries a high success rate.
Surgical vs. Conservative Management of Chronic Sciatica (>3 Months) Due to Lumbar Disc Herniation: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Ali Hammed,Almonzer Al-Qiami,Hamza Alsalhi,Amjad Almansi,Mahmoud Massoud,Ahmad Alzawahreh,Abdelrahman Hamouda,Christian Tanislav

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.59617

2024-05-04

Cureus

Abstract:Sciatica, characterized by leg or back symptoms along the sciatic nerve pathway, often manifests as a chronic condition lasting over 12 weeks. Decision-making between nonoperative treatment and immediate microdiscectomy for chronic sciatica remains challenging, due to the complex relationship between symptom duration, severity, and lumbar discectomy outcomes. In this systematic review, we conducted a comprehensive search across Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library, identifying relevant two-arm clinical trials up to September 2023. Rigorous screening and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers, with study quality evaluated using the risk of bias 2 (RoB) tool. This meta-analysis incorporated four studies comprising 352 participants. Our analysis revealed that conservative treatment was associated with a significant reduction in leg pain and improvement in, SF mental, and physical scores compared to surgical intervention. However surgical treatment demonstrated significant improvement in back pain. In conclusion, our findings suggest that surgical intervention may be more effective than non-surgical treatment for chronic sciatica-related back pain. Conservative treatment significantly reduces leg pain while improving mental and physical health outcomes. Ultimately, our findings support conservative as the initial approach unless surgery is warranted, particularly in cases with neurological deficits or cauda equina syndrome.
Mini-open Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation Following Posterior Instrumentation.

Maiwulanjiang Mamuti,Shunwu Fan,Junhui Liu,Zhi Shan,Chongyan Wang,Shengyun Li,Fengdong Zhao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000001569

2016-01-01

Abstract:Study Design.A retrospective study.Objective.The aim of this study is to evaluate, clinically and radiographically, the efficacy of mini-open retroperitoneal anterior lumbar discectomy followed by anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) for recurrent lumbar disc herniation following primary posterior instrumentation.Summary of Background Data.Recurrent disc herniation following previous disc surgery occurs in 5 to 15% of cases. This is often treated by further surgical intervention where posterior approach is generally preferred. However, posterior surgery may be problematic if the initial surgery involved posterior instrumentation. An anterior approach may be indicated in these patients, and recent findings suggest that a mini-open procedure may have some benefits when compared with traditional open techniques and their associated morbidities.Methods.A total of 35 recurrent lumbar disc herniation patients (10 male, 25 female) following primary posterior instrumentation with an average age of 52.8 years (range: 34-70 yrs) who underwent the mini-open ALIF procedures between August 2001 and February 2012 were evaluated retrospectively. The ALIF was performed at the levels L4-L5 (n=14), L5-S1 (n=15), or both L4-L5 and L5-S1 (n=6). Visual Analog pain Scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) together with radiological results were assessed.Results.The mean operating time, intraoperative estimated blood loss, and hospital stay were 115minutes, 70mL, and 6 days, respectively. No blood transfusion was needed. Transient complication was recorded in two patients. Postoperative follow-up was a minimum 24.3 months. VAS score and ODI percentage decreased significantly from 7.90.8 and 78.8%12.4% pre-operatively to 1.4 +/- 0.6 and 21.7 +/- 4.2% at final follow-up, respectively. There was no neurological worsening and radicular pain improved significantly compared with pre-operation in all the patients. Computed tomographic reconstruction 12 and 24 months after surgery showed bony fusion, normal position, and morphology of the fusion cage in all patients.Conclusion.Mini-open retroperitoneal ALIF is an effective treatment for patients with recurrent lumbar disc herniation following primary posterior instrumentation.Level of Evidence: 4
Clinical outcome and relative factors of revision surgery for lumbar disc herniation

赵福江,陈仲强,李危石,齐强,郭昭庆,孙垂国

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1004-406X.2012.07.04

2012-01-01

Abstract:Objectives:To investigate the clinical outcome and relative factors of revision surgery for lumbar disc herniation.Methods:From January 2005 to November 2009,94 patients who underwent revision surgery for lumbar disc herniation were reviewed retrospectively.According to natural history,clinical signs,physical examination and imaging findings,the causes of revision surgery included 49(52.1%) disc recurrence,17(18.1%) lumbar canal stenosis,16(17.0%) inadequate decompression at primary surgery,7(7.4%) adjacent segment disease,5(5.3%) lumbar disc herniation at new level.Before revision surgery,the lumbar JOA score was 15.5±5.6,the VAS score for back pain and leg pain was 4.5±1.6 and 7.1±1.9 respectively.Posterior decompression,discectomy,pedicle screw fixation,and transverse process or interbody bone graft and fusion were performed in all cases.94 patients were followed up,and the surgical results were evaluated by VAS,JOA and patients satisfactory degree.Relative factors including sex,age,smoking,previous operation times,previous operation methods,period of pain-free interval after the last surgery,disease course of this time,neurologic deficit,number of fusion segments were investigated.Data were analyzed by multivariate nonconditiona1 Logistic regression analysis.Results:The revision surgical time ranged from 1.6h to 4.5h,with a mean of 2.4h,and the blood loss ranged from 200ml to 1500ml,with a mean of 538ml.No case was complicated with nerve injury in revision surgery.7 cases were complicated with cerebrospinal fluid leakage and 1 case was complicated with wound infection after operation,and all resolved after responsive management.All cases were followed up for 2-6.5 years,with a mean of 4.2 years.At final follow-up,the functional results showed excellent to good rate of 78.7%,the lumbar JOA score was 24.0±6.2,the VAS score for back and leg pain was 1.3±0.9 and 0.9±1.8 respectively,which showed significant differences(P<0.001).Neurologic deficit,disease course of this time were the most relative factors of prognosis(P<0.05),while gender,age,smoking,previous operation times,previous operation methods,period of pain-free interval after the last surgery,number of fusion segments were not the relative factors(P>0.05).Conclusions:Revision surgery for lumbar disc herniation is reliable,and neurologic deficit,disease course of this times are the relative factors of prognosis.
Comparison of clinical and radiographic outcomes between transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy and microdiscectomy: a follow-up exceeding five years

Xinyu Yang,Shijun Zhang,Junxiao Su,Sai Guo,Yakubu Ibrahim,Kai Zhang,Yonghao Tian,Lianlei Wang,Suomao Yuan,Xinyu Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14245/ns.2347026.513

2024-02-01

Neurospine

Abstract:OBJECTIVE: To compare the long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes of transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy (TELD) versus microdiscectomy (MD).METHODS: The data of 154 patients with lumbar disc herniation (LDH) who underwent TELD (n = 89) or MD (n = 65) were retrospectively analyzed. The patients' clinical outcomes were evaluated using visual analogue scales for leg and low back pain, the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). The evolution of radiographic manifestations was observed during follow-up. Potential risk factors for a poor clinical outcome were investigated.RESULTS: During a mean follow-up of 5.5 years (range, 5-7 years), the recurrence rate was 4.49% in the TELD group and 1.54% in the MD group. All scores significantly improved from preoperatively to postoperatively in both groups (p < 0.01). The improvement in the ODI and JOA scores was significantly greater in the TELD than MD group (p < 0.05). Forty-seven patients (52.8%) in the TELD group and 32 (49.2%) in the MD group had Modic changes before surgery, most of which showed no changes at the last follow-up. The degeneration grades of 292 discs (71.0%) were unchanged at the last follow-up, while 86 (20.9%) showed improvement, mostly at the upper adjacent segment. No significant difference was observed in the intervertebral height index or paraspinal muscle-disc ratio.CONCLUSION: Both TELD and MD provide generally satisfactory long-term clinical outcomes for patients with LDH. TELD can be used as a reliable alternative to MD with less surgical trauma. Modic type II changes, decreased preoperative intervertebral height, and a high body mass index are predictors of a poor prognosis.

surgery,clinical neurology
Long Term Surgical and Radiological Outcome of Discoid Lateral Meniscus: An Updated Systematic Review

Mohan, Kriti,Bharti, Ajay,Kumar, Manish

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43465-024-01137-z

2024-04-25

Indian Journal of Orthopaedics

Abstract:This study aimed to reach a consensus for ideal surgical treatment of discoid lateral meniscus (DLM) and to evaluate its long term surgical and radiological outcome.

orthopedics
Lumbar disc herniation: long-term outcomes after mini-open discectomy

Tianhang Xie,Xi Yang,Yueming Song

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-019-04425-8

IF: 3.479

2019-10-17

International Orthopaedics

Abstract:We read the article entitled "Lumbar disc herniation: long-term outcomes after mini-open discectomy" [<a href="#CR1">1</a>] with great interest. The results described by the author have very important guiding significance for surgical treatment of lumbar disc herniation (LDH). But we also have some concerns regarding the study:<ol><li class="ListItem">1. The exclusion criteria include scoliosis (Cobb angle > 15°), is there a specific scoliosis classification? Are we to understand that all LDHs combined with scoliosis are not suitable for mini-open discectomy? Fusion or correction of deformity is necessary for such patients? Sciatic scoliosis is known as a nonstructural scoliosis secondary to nerve root irritation [<a href="#CR2">2</a>]. If the painful stimulus is removed, scoliosis should be improved. Almost 40 LDHs combined with scoliosis (Cobb angle 15o–40o) underwent discectomy in our institution. The scoliosis can gradually be corrected followed post-operative pain relief. So we think the sciatic scoliosis (Cobb angle > 15°) is not a contraindication of discectomy. </li><li class="ListItem">2. The authors stated that these results deteriorate gradually during the follow-up. Does this trend have a different distribution among the 552 patients? Are there differences in follow-up outcomes between different surgical segments and different age groups? That is the focus of the reader's attention. For a large sample study with 15-year follow-up, the author does not mention it. We observed 247 LDHs followed discectomy in our institution, we found these lumbar 4–5 disc herniations showing relatively poor results in 40–50 age group. But our sample size and the follow-up time is not enough. It's too early to make a conclusion. </li><li class="ListItem">3. In the discussion section, the authors state mini-open discectomy has a longer interval time between initial surgery and revision by comparing mini-invasive techniques. We think this is an inappropriate comparison. First, the spine mini-invasive technique is a very broad concept; microendoscopic discectomy (MED), percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar/transforaminal discectomy (PEID/PETD), and even the mini-open discectomy are all included. In the literature cited by the authors, the objects of comparison just are MED, PETD, and open discectomy. Second, risk factors [<a href="#CR3">3</a>] that had significant relation with recurrent LDH were smoking, disc protrusion, and diabetes. Not only because of surgery. And there is a similar surgical path and decompression method for mini-open discectomy, MED, and PEID. Intra-operative detail processing is critical to the results, including recurrence. So we think it is not appropriate to evaluate the mini-open discectomy by comparing the interval time between initial surgery and revision of mini-open discectomy and mini-invasive techniques. </li></ol>

orthopedics
Lumbar Total Disc Replacements for Degenerative Disc Disease: A Systematic Review of Outcomes With a Minimum of 5 years Follow-Up

David J. Wen,Javad Tavakoli,Joanne L. Tipper

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682241228756

2024-01-25

Global Spine Journal

Abstract:Global Spine Journal, Ahead of Print. Study DesignSystematic Review.ObjectivesTo systematically review the clinical outcomes, re-operation, and complication rates of lumbar TDR devices at mid-to long-term follow-up studies for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD).MethodsA systematic search was conducted on PubMed, SCOPUS, and Google Scholar to identify follow-up studies that evaluated clinical outcomes of lumbar TDR in patients with DDD. The included studies met the following criteria: prospective or retrospective studies published from 2012 to 2022; a minimum of 5 years post-operative follow-up; a study sample size >10 patients; patients >18 years of age; containing clinical outcomes with Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), complication or reoperation rates.ResultsTwenty-two studies were included with data on 2284 patients. The mean follow-up time was 8.30 years, with a mean follow-up rate of 86.91%. The study population was 54.97% female, with a mean age of 42.34 years. The mean VAS and ODI pain score improvements were 50.71 ± 6.91 and 30.39 ± 5.32 respectively. The mean clinical success and patient satisfaction rates were 74.79% ± 7.55% and 86.34% ± 5.64%, respectively. The mean complication and reoperation rates were 18.53% ± 6.33% and 13.6% ± 3.83%, respectively. There was no significant difference when comparing mid-term and long-term follow-up studies for all clinical outcomes.ConclusionsThere were significant improvements in pain reduction at last follow-up in patients with TDRs. Mid-term follow-up data on clinical outcomes, complication and reoperation rates of lumbar TDRs were maintained longer term.

clinical neurology,orthopedics
Inferior long-term outcomes after surgery for lumbar disc herniation in patients with prior lumbar spine surgery

Miika Roiha,Johan Marjamaa,Jari Siironen,Anniina Koski-Palkén

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-024-05932-3

2024-01-25

Acta Neurochirurgica

Abstract:Previous lumbar spine surgery is a frequent exclusion criterion for studies evaluating lumbar surgery outcomes. In real-life clinical settings, this patient population is important, as a notable proportion of patients evaluated for lumbar spine surgery have undergone prior lumbar surgery already previously. Knowledge about the long-term outcomes after microdiscectomy on patients with previous lumbar surgery and how they compare to those of first-time surgery is lacking.

surgery,clinical neurology
Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Reoperation for Recurrent Sciatica Symptoms: A Retrospective Analysis of Outcomes and Prognostic Factors in 94 Patients.

Junlong Wu,Chao Zhang,Kang Lu,Changqing Li,Yue Zhou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2017.10.077

IF: 2.21

2017-01-01

World Neurosurgery

Abstract:BACKGROUND:Recurrent symptoms of sciatica after previous surgical intervention is a relatively common and troublesome clinical problem. Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression has been proved to be an effective method for recurrent lumbar disc herniation. However, the prognostic factors and outcomes of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar reoperation (PELR) for recurrent sciatica symptoms were still unknown. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes and prognostic factors of patients who underwent PELR for recurrent sciatica symptoms. METHODS:From 2009 to 2015, 94 patients who underwent PELR for recurrent sciatica symptoms were enrolled. The primary surgeries include transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (n = 16), microendoscopic discectomy (n = 31), percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression (PELD, n = 17), and open discectomy (n = 30). The mean follow-up period was 36 months, and 86 (91.5%) patients had obtained at least 24 months' follow-up. RESULTS:Of the 94 patients with adequate follow-up, 51 (54.3%) exhibited excellent improvement, 23 (24.5%) had good improvement, and 7 (7.4%) had fair improvement according to modified Macnab criteria. The average re-recurrence rate was 9.6%, with no difference among the different primary surgery groups (PELD, 3/17; microendoscopic discectomy, 2/31; open discectomy, 3/30; transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion, 1/16). There was a trend toward greater rates of symptom recurrence in the primary group of PELD who underwent percutaneous endoscopic lumbar reoperation compared with other groups, but this did not reach statistical significance (P > 0.05). Multivariate analysis suggested that age, body mass index, and surgeon level was independent prognostic factors. Obesity (hazard ratio 13.98, 95% confidence interval 3.394-57.57; P < 0.001) was the risk factor affecting re-recurrence according to logistic regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS:PELR is a safe and effective treatment for recurrent sciatica symptoms regardless of different primary operation type. Obesity, inferior surgeon level, and patient age older than 40 years were associated with a worse prognosis. Obesity was also a strong and independent predictor of re-recurrence sciatica symptoms after percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression.
Surgical versus conservative treatment for lumbar disc herniation: a prospective cohort study

Marinella Gugliotta,Bruno R da Costa,Essam Dabis,Robert Theiler,Peter Jüni,Stephan Reichenbach,Hans Landolt,Paul Hasler

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012938

IF: 3.006

2016-12-01

BMJ Open

Abstract:OBJECTIVES: Evidence comparing the effectiveness of surgical and conservative treatment of symptomatic lumbar disc herniation is controversial. We sought to compare short-term and long-term effectiveness of surgical and conservative treatment in sciatica symptom severity and quality of life in patients with lumbar disc herniation in a routine clinical setting.METHODS: A prospective cohort study of a routine clinical practice registry consisting of 370 patients. Outcome measures were the North American Spine Society questionnaire and the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey to assess patient-reported back pain, physical function, neurogenic symptoms and quality of life. Primary outcomes were back pain at 6 and 12 weeks. Standard open discectomy was assessed versus conservative interventions at 6, 12, 52 and 104 weeks. We filled in missing outcome variable values with multiple imputation, accounted for repeated measures within patients with mixed-effects models and adjusted baseline group differences in relevant prognostic indicators by inverse probability of treatment weighting.RESULTS: Surgical treatment patients reported less back pain at 6 weeks than those receiving conservative therapy (-0.97; 95% CI -1.89 to -0.09), were more likely to report ≥50% decrease in back pain symptoms from baseline to 6 weeks (48% vs 17%, risk difference: 0.34; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.47) and reported less physical function disability at 52 weeks (-3.7; 95% CI -7.4 to -0.1). The other assessments showed minimal between-group differences with CIs, including the null effect.CONCLUSIONS: Compared with conservative therapy, surgical treatment provided faster relief from back pain symptoms in patients with lumbar disc herniation, but did not show a benefit over conservative treatment in midterm and long-term follow-up.

medicine, general & internal
Clinical outcome of biportal endoscopic revisional lumbar discectomy for recurrent lumbar disc herniation

Min-Seok Kang,Jin-Ho Hwang,Dae-Jung Choi,Hoon-Jae Chung,Jong-Hwa Lee,Hyong-Nyun Kim,Hyun-Jin Park

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-020-02087-6

IF: 2.6

2020-11-23

Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research

Abstract:Abstract Background Although literature provides evidence regarding the superiority of surgery over conservative treatment in patients with lumbar disc herniation, recurrent lumbar disc herniation (RLDH) was the indication for reoperation in 62% of the cases. The major problem with revisional lumbar discectomy (RLD) is that the epidural scar tissue is not clearly isolated from the boundaries of the dura matter and nerve roots; therefore, unintended durotomy and nerve root injury may occur. The biportal endoscopic (BE) technique is a newly emerging minimally invasive spine surgical modality. However, clinical evidence regarding BE-RLD remains limited. We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes after performing open microscopic (OM)-RLD and BE-RLD to evaluate the feasibility of BE-RLD. Methods This retrospective study included 36 patients who were diagnosed with RLDH and underwent OM-RLD and BE-RLD. RLDH is defined as the presence of herniated disc material at the level previously operated upon in patients who have experienced a pain-free phase for more than 6 months. BE-RLD was performed as follows: two independent surgical ports were made inside the medial pedicular line of the target segment and on the intact upper and lower laminas. Peeling off the soft tissue from the vertebral lamina helps to easily identify the traversing nerve root and the recurrent disc material without dealing with the fibrotic scar tissue. Clinical outcomes were obtained using a visual analog scale (VAS) and the modified Macnab criteria before and at 2 days, 2 and 6 weeks, and 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Results The data of 20 and 16 patients who underwent OM-RLD and BE-RLD, respectively, were evaluated. The demographic and perioperative data were comparable between the groups. During the year following the surgery, in the BE-RLD group, the VAS scores at each point were significantly improved over the baseline and remained improved up to 2 weeks after surgery ( p < 0.05); however, no statistical difference between the two groups was observed after 6 weeks of surgery ( p > 0.05). According to the modified Macnab criteria on the follow-up, the excellent or good satisfaction rates reported at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months after surgery were 81.25%, 81.25%, 75%, and 81.25%, respectively, in the BE-RLD group, and 50%, 75%, 75%, and 80%, respectively, in the OM-RLD group. Conclusion BE-RLD yielded similar outcomes to OM-RLD, including pain improvement, functional improvement, and patient satisfaction, at 1 year after surgery. However, faster pain relief, earlier functional recovery, and better patient satisfaction were observed when applying BE-LRD. Trial registration Retrospectively registered

orthopedics
Long-term clinical outcomes of selective segmental transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion combined with posterior spinal fusion for degenerative lumbar scoliosis.

Yi Zhu,Bo Wang,Huimin Wang,Zhaohui Jin,Zhenqi Zhu,Haiying Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.12711

IF: 1.7

2014-01-01

ANZ Journal of Surgery

Abstract:BackgroundThe purpose of the current study was to investigate the long-term clinical outcomes of this technique for degenerative scoliosis (DS). MethodsThe records of 95 consecutive patients with DS who underwent selective segmental transforaminal interbody fusion combined with posterior-instrumented spinal fusion in our department from January 1999 to December 2007 were analysed retrospectively. Average follow-up was 7.8 years. Recorded clinical outcomes included Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores and overall patient satisfaction. Radiographic measurements included coronal Cobb angle, apical vertebra translation, Nash-Moe grade, lumbar lordosis (LL) and thoracolumbar kyphosis. Comparison of the clinical and radiographic parameters before surgery and at final follow-up was studied. Linear correlation analysis was applied to analyse the relationship between the clinical and radiological results. ResultsAverage ODI and VAS pain scores were significantly improved at final follow-up compared with baseline (P = 0.038; P = 0.005). Specifically, the average ODI score was 32.2 8.6 before surgery and 11.1 +/- 6.8 at final follow-up; the average VAS score was 8.9 +/- 2.0 before surgery and 2.0 +/- 1.2 at final follow-up; patient satisfaction was 88.2% (84/95) at final follow-up. In addition, Cobb angle, apical vertebra translation and Nash-Moe grade were all statistically significantly decreased compared with preoperative values (P = 0.019; P = 0.035; P = 0.001). Although LL had significantly increased (P = 0.022), thoracolumbar kyphosis did not exhibit a significant change (P = 0.64). There was significant correlation between LL and decreased ODI scores (r = 0.62, P = 0.01). Eleven patients (11.6%) underwent reoperation during the study period. ConclusionSelective segmental transforaminal interbody fusion combined with posterior-instrumented spinal fusion appears to have reasonable long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes for the treatment of DS.
Posterior Dynamic Stabilization with Limited Rediscectomy for Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation

Lei Luo,Chen Zhao,Pei Li,Liehua Liu,Qiang Zhou,Fei Luo,Lichuan Liang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/1288246

2021-01-01

Abstract:Objective. Recurrent lumbar disc herniation (RLDH) is the most common cause of sciatica after primary discectomy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of transpedicular dynamic stabilization (TDS) combined with limited rediscectomy in the treatment of single-level RLDH. Methods. We retrospectively evaluated a consecutive series of 24 middle-aged patients who underwent TDS (Dynesys system) combined with limited rediscectomy (i.e., removing only extruded or loose disc fragments) for single-level Carragee type II and type IV RLDH between April 2012 and September 2017. Clinical results were evaluated with visual analog scale (VAS) for leg and low back pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, and complications. Imaging data include lumbar segment motion and intervertebral height. Results. The mean follow-up period was 38 months. The VAS and ODI scores were significantly improved at the last follow-up. The average range of motion (ROM) at the stabilized segment was 6.4 degrees before surgery and 4.2 degrees at the last follow-up, with a 78.6% mean preservation (P < 0.05). Intervertebral height at the stabilized segment decreased slightly after surgery (P < 0.05). However, there was no further decline at the last follow-up. There were no cases of reherniation, screw loosening, or segmental instability. Conclusions. TDS combined with limited rediscectomy resulted in an effective procedure in middle-aged patients with Carragee type II and type IV RLDH. It was able to stabilize the operated segment with partial motion preservation. Moreover, it could maintain disc height and decrease the risk of recurrence in patients with a large posterior annular defect.
Repeat Discectomy or Instrumented Surgery for Recurrent Lumbar Disk Herniation: An Overview of French Spine Surgeons' Practice

Pierre-Cyril Cômes,Amandine Gavotto,Zineb Zouakia,Guillaume Lonjon,Aymeric Amelot,Grégory Edgard-Rosa,Bertrand Debono

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682241249102

2024-04-25

Global Spine Journal

Abstract:Global Spine Journal, Ahead of Print. Study designRetrospective multicenter cohort study.ObjectiveRecurrent lumbar disc herniation (ReLDH) is a common condition requiring surgical intervention in a large proportion of cases. Evidence regarding the appropriate choice between repeat microdiscectomy (RD) and instrumented surgery (IS) is lacking. To understand the indications for either of the procedures and compare the results, we aimed to provide an overview of spine surgeon practice in France.MethodsThis retrospective, multicenter analysis included adults who underwent surgery for ReLDHs between December 2020 and May 2021. Surgeons were asked which of the following factors determined their therapeutic choice: radio-clinical considerations, non-discal anatomical factors, patient preference, or surgeon background. Data on preoperative clinical status and radiologic findings were collected. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were assessed and compared using propensity scores preoperatively and at 3 and 12 months postoperatively.ResultsThe study included 150 patients (72 IS and 78 RD). Radioclinical elements, anatomical data, patient preferences, and surgeon background influenced the choice of RD in 57.7%, 1.3%, 25.6%, and 15.4% of the cases, respectively, and IS in 34.7%, 6.9%, 13.9%, and 44.5% of the cases, respectively. At 12 months, patient satisfaction, return to work, and changes in PROMs were not significantly different between the groups.ConclusionsThe decision-making process included both objective and subjective factors, resulting in patient satisfaction in 80.3% to 81.5% of cases, with significant clinical improvement in radicular symptoms in 75.8% to 91.8% of cases, and quality of life in 75.8% to 84.9% of cases, depending on the procedure performed.

clinical neurology,orthopedics
Minimally invasive surgery for lumbar disc herniation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Steven J Kamper,Raymond W J G Ostelo,Sidney M Rubinstein,Jorm M Nellensteijn,Wilco C Peul,Mark P Arts,Maurits W van Tulder

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-013-3161-2

Abstract:Purpose: Assessing the benefits of surgical treatments for sciatica is critical for clinical and policy decision-making. To compare minimally invasive (MI) and conventional microdiscectomy (MD) for patients with sciatica due to lumbar disc herniation. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials including patients with sciatica due to lumbar disc herniation. Conventional microdiscectomy was compared separately with: (1) Interlaminar MI discectomy (ILMI vs. MD); (2) Transforaminal MI discectomy (TFMI vs. MD). Outcomes: Back pain, leg pain, function, improvement, work status, operative time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, complications, reoperations, analgesics and cost outcomes were extracted and risk of bias assessed. Pooled effect estimates were calculated using random effect meta-analysis. Results: Twenty-nine studies, 16 RCTs and 13 non-randomised studies (n = 4,472), were included. Clinical outcomes were not different between the surgery types. There is low quality evidence that ILMI takes 11 min longer, results in 52 ml less blood loss and reduces mean length of hospital stay by 1.5 days. There were no differences in complications or reoperations. The main limitations were high risk of bias, low number of studies and small sample sizes comparing TF with MD. Conclusions: There is moderate to low quality evidence of no differences in clinical outcomes between MI surgery and conventional microdiscectomy for patients with sciatica due to lumbar disc herniation. Studies comparing transforaminal MI with conventional surgery with sufficient sample size and methodological robustness are lacking.
Long-Term Results of Total Lumbar Disc Replacement: A Prospective Analysis with 5 to 10 Years Follow-Up

C. J. Siepe,F. Heider,K. Wiechert,C. Mehren,A. Korge,M. H. Mayer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0034-1376566

2014-05-01

Global Spine Journal

Abstract:Introduction The role of fusion of lumbar motion segments for the treatment of intractable low back pain (LBP) from degenerative disc disease (DDD) remains controversially debated. Total lumbar disc replacement (TDR) has been used as an alternative in a highly selected patient cohort. However, the amount of long-term follow-up (FU) data on TDR is limited. Materials and Methods Visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI) and patient satisfaction rates were acquired within the framework of an ongoing prospective clinical trial. The patient's professional activity/employment status, complications, and reoperations were recorded. A comparison was performed between mono- and bisegmental cases. Results The initial cohort consisted of 201 patients; 181 patients were available for final FU (90.0% FU rate) after a mean FU of 7.4 years (range, 5.0-10.8 years). VAS and ODI scores revealed a highly significant improvement from baseline levels at all postoperative stages ( p < 0.0001). VAS scores demonstrated a slight (VAS 2.6-3.3) but statistically significant deterioration from 48 months onward ( p < 0.05). Patient satisfaction rates remained stable throughout the entire postoperative course, with 63.6% of patients reporting a “highly satisfactory” or a “satisfactory outcome” (22.7%), while 13.7% of patients were not satisfied. The overall complication rate was 14.4% ( n = 26/181). The incidence of revision surgeries for general and/or device related complications was 7.2% ( n = 13/181). Results for two-level TDR were significantly inferior in comparison with one-level cases and were associated with higher complication (11.9 vs. 27.6%; p = 0.03) and inferior satisfaction rates ( p < 0.003). Conclusion Despite the fact that the current data comprise the early experiences and learning curve associated with a new surgical technique, the results demonstrate satisfactory and maintained mid- to long-term clinical results after a mean FU of 7.4 years. Patient safety was proven with acceptable complication and reoperation rates. Fear of excessive late complications or reoperations following the primary TDR procedure cannot be substantiated with the present data. In carefully selected cases, TDR can be considered a viable treatment alternative to lumbar fusion for which spine communities around the world seem to have accepted mediocre clinical results as well as obvious and significant drawbacks. Disclosure of Interest None declared

clinical neurology,orthopedics

The long-term outcome of revision microdiscectomy for recurrent sciatica

Comparison of Discectomy Versus Sequestrectomy in Lumbar Disc Herniation: a Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies.

Clinical research of minimally invasive TLIF under quadrant system in lumbar revision surgery

Clinical characteristics and efficacy of long-term revision surgery for later recurrent lumbar disc herniation after primary lumbar discectomy

Early outcomes of surgical treatment with microdiscectomy in patients with lumbar disc herniation

Surgical vs. Conservative Management of Chronic Sciatica (>3 Months) Due to Lumbar Disc Herniation: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Mini-open Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation Following Posterior Instrumentation.

Clinical outcome and relative factors of revision surgery for lumbar disc herniation

Comparison of clinical and radiographic outcomes between transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy and microdiscectomy: a follow-up exceeding five years

Long Term Surgical and Radiological Outcome of Discoid Lateral Meniscus: An Updated Systematic Review

Lumbar disc herniation: long-term outcomes after mini-open discectomy

Lumbar Total Disc Replacements for Degenerative Disc Disease: A Systematic Review of Outcomes With a Minimum of 5 years Follow-Up

Inferior long-term outcomes after surgery for lumbar disc herniation in patients with prior lumbar spine surgery

Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Reoperation for Recurrent Sciatica Symptoms: A Retrospective Analysis of Outcomes and Prognostic Factors in 94 Patients.

Surgical versus conservative treatment for lumbar disc herniation: a prospective cohort study

Clinical outcome of biportal endoscopic revisional lumbar discectomy for recurrent lumbar disc herniation

Long-term clinical outcomes of selective segmental transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion combined with posterior spinal fusion for degenerative lumbar scoliosis.

Posterior Dynamic Stabilization with Limited Rediscectomy for Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation

Repeat Discectomy or Instrumented Surgery for Recurrent Lumbar Disk Herniation: An Overview of French Spine Surgeons' Practice

Minimally invasive surgery for lumbar disc herniation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Long-Term Results of Total Lumbar Disc Replacement: A Prospective Analysis with 5 to 10 Years Follow-Up