A retrospective study.
To determine the feasibility and effectiveness of revisional percutaneous full endoscopic discectomy for recurrent herniation after conventional open disc surgery.
Overview of the Literature
Repeated open discectomy with or without fusion has been the most common procedure for recurrent lumbar disc herniation. Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy for recurrent herniation has been thought of as an impossible procedure. Despite good results with open revisional surgery, major problems may be caused by injuries to the posterior stabilized structures. Our team did revisional full endoscopic lumbar disc surgery on the basis of our experience doing primary full endoscopic disc surgery.
Between February 2004 and August 2009 a total of 41 patients in our hospital underwent revisional percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy using a YESS endoscopic system and a micro-osteotome (designed by the authors). Indications for surgery were recurrent disc herniation following conventional open discectomy; with compression of the nerve root revealed by Gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging; corresponding radiating pain which was not alleviated after conservative management over 6 weeks. Patients with severe neurologic deficits and isolated back pain were excluded.
The mean follow-up period was 16 months (range, 13 to 42 months). The visual analog scale for pain in the leg and back showed significant post-treatment improvement (p < 0.001). Based on a modified version of MacNab's criteria, 90.2% showed excellent or good outcomes. There was no measurable blood loss. There were two cases of recurrence of and four cases with complications.
Percutaneous full-endoscopic revisional disc surgery without additional structural damage is feasible and effective in terms of there being less chance of fusion and bleeding. This technique can be an alternative to conventional repeated discectomy.
Endoscopic discectomy; Interlaminar discectomy; Transforaminal discectomy; Percutaneous discectomy; Recurrent disc herniation; Lumbar spine
Spontaneous intracranial hypotension is often idiopathic. We report on a patient presenting with symptomatic intracranial hypotension and pain radiating to the right leg caused by a transdural lumbar disc herniation. Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of the brain revealed classic signs of intracranial hypotension, and an additional spinal MR confirmed a lumbar transdural herniated disc as the cause. The patient was treated with a partial hemilaminectomy and discectomy. We were able to find the source of cerebrospinal fluid leak, and packed it with epidural glue and gelfoam. Postoperatively, the patient's headache and log radiating pain resolved and there was no neurological deficit. Thus, in this case, lumbar disc herniation may have been a cause of spontaneous intracranial hypotension.
Spontaneous intracranial hypotension; Orthostatic headache; Lumbar disc herniation
The focus of this study was to examine the safety and effectiveness of three different discectomy techniques using a posterior approach for the treatment of herniated lumbar discs. There are only a small number of prospective randomised studies comparing posterior lumbar discectomy techniques, and no recent systematic review has been published on this matter. Using the Cochrane Collaboration guidelines, all randomised or “quasi-randomised” clinical trials, comparing classic, microsurgical, and endoscopic lumbar discectomies using a posterior approach were systematically reviewed. No statistically significant differences were found between these techniques regarding improvement in pain, sensory deficits, motor strength, reflexes, and patient satisfaction. Current data suggest that the microsurgical and endoscopic techniques are superior to the classic technique for the treatment of single level lumbar disc herniations with respect to volume of blood loss, systemic repercussions, and duration of hospital stay. All three surgical techniques were found to be effective for the treatment of single level lumbar disc herniations in patients without degenerative vertebral deformities. No conclusions could be drawn from the clinical randomised studies reviewed regarding the safety of the three techniques studied due to insufficient data on postoperative complications.
Various modalities of treatment from standard discectomy, microdiscectomy, percutaneous discectomy, and transforaminal endoscopic discectomy have been in use for lumbar intervertebral disc prolapse. The access to spine is kept to a minimum without stripping paraspinal muscles minimizing muscle damage by posterior interlaminar endoscopic approach. The aim of this study was to evaluate technical problems, complications, and overall initial results of microendoscopic discectomy.
Materials and Methods:
First 100 consecutive cases aged 19-65 years operated by microendoscopic dissectomy between August 2002 – December 2005 are reported. All patients with single nerve root lesions including sequestrated or migrated and selected central disc at L4-5 and L5-S1 were included. The patients with bilateral radiculopathy were excluded. All patients had preoperative MRI and first 11 patients had postoperative MRI to check the adequacy of decompression. Diagnostic selective nerve root blocks were done in selective cases to isolate the single root lesion when MRI was inconclusive (n=7). All patients were operated by a single surgeon with the Metrx system (Medtronics). 97 were operated by 18-mm ports, and only three patients were operated by 16-mm ports. Postoperatively, all patients were mobilized as soon as the pain subsided and discharged within 24–48 h postsurgery. Patients were evaluated for technical problems, complications, and overall results by modified Macnab criteria. Patients were followed up at 2, 6, and 12 weeks.
The mean follow up was 12 months (range 3 months – 4 years). Open conversion was required in one patient with suspected root damage. Peroperatively single facet removal was done in 5 initial cases. Minor dural punctures occurred in seven cases and root damage in one case. The average surgical time was 70 min (range 25-210 min). Average blood loss was 20-30 ml. Technical difficulties encountered in initial 25 cases were insertion of guide pin, image orientation, peroperative dissection and bleeding problems, and reaching wrong levels suggestive of a definitive learning curve. Postoperative MRI (n=11) showed complete decompression. Overall 91% of patients had good-to-excellent results, with four patients having recurrence of whom three were reoperated. Four patients had postoperative discitis. One of the patients required fusion for discitis and rest were managed conservatively. One patient had root damage to L5 root that had paresthesia in L5 region even on 4 years of follow-up.
Microendoscopic discectomy is minimally invasive procedure for discectomy with early encouraging results. Once definite learning curve was over and expertise is acquired, the results of this procedure are acceptable safe and effective.
Lumbar discectomy; microendo system; endoscopic lumbar discectomy
Open discectomy remains the standard method for treatment of lumbar disc herniation, but can traumatize spinal structure and leaves symptomatic epidural scarring in more than 10% of cases. The usual transforaminal approach may be associated with difficulty reaching the epidural space due to anatomical peculiarities at the L5–S1 level. The endoscopic interlaminar approach can provide a direct pathway for decompression of disc herniation at the L5–S1 level. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical results of endoscopic interlaminar lumbar discectomy at the L5–S1 level and compare the technique feasibility, safety, and efficacy under local and general anesthesia (LA and GA, respectively).
One hundred twenty-three patients with L5–S1 disc herniation underwent endoscopic interlaminar lumbar discectomy from October 2006 to June 2009 by two spine surgeons using different anesthesia preferences in two medical centers. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores for back pain and leg pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) sores were recorded preoperatively, and at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Results were compared to evaluate the technique feasibility, safety, and efficacy under LA and GA.
VAS scores for back pain and leg pain and ODI revealed statistically significant improvement when they were compared with preoperative values. Mean hospital stay was statistically shorter in the LA group. Complications included one case of dural tear with rootlet injury and three cases of recurrence within 1 month who subsequently required open surgery or endoscopic interlaminar lumbar discectomy. There were no medical or infectious complications in either group.
Disc herniation at the L5–S1 level can be adequately treated endoscopically with an interlaminar approach. GA and LA are both effective for this procedure. However, LA is better than GA in our opinion.
General anesthesia; interlaminar approach; local anesthesia; lumbar disc herniation; percutaneous endoscopic discectomy
Factors as age, sex, smoking, duration of leg pain, working status, type/level of disc herniation and psychosocial factors have been demonstrated to be of importance for short-term results after lumbar discectomy. There are few studies with long-term follow-up. In this prospective study of lumbar disc herniation patients undergoing surgery, the result was evaluated at 2 and 5–10 (mean 7.3) years after surgery. Predictive factors for satisfaction with treatment and objective outcome were investigated. Out of the included 171 patients undergoing lumbar discectomy, 154 (90%) patients completed the 2-year follow-up and 140 (81%) completed the long-term follow-up. Baseline data and questionnaires about leg- and back pain intensity (VAS), duration of leg pain, disability (Oswestry Disability Index), depression (Zung Depression Scale), sick leave and employment status were obtained preoperatively, at 2-year- and long-term follow-up. Primary outcome included patient satisfaction with treatment (at both time points) and assessment of an independent observer at the 2-year follow-up. Secondary outcomes at 2-year follow-up were improvement of leg and back pain, working capacity and the need for analgesics or sleeping pills. In about 70% of the patients excellent or good overall result was reported at both follow-ups, with subjective outcome measurements. The objective evaluation after 2 years was in agreement with this result. Time on sick leave was found to be a clinically important predictor of the primary outcomes, with a potential of changing the probability of a satisfactory outcome (both objective and subjective) from around 50% (sick leave >3 months) to 80% (sick leave <2 months). Time on sick leave was also an important predictor for several of the secondary outcomes; e.g. working capacity and the need for analgesics.
Disc herniation; Surgery; Long-term follow-up; Clinical outcome; Predictive factor
Lumbar disc herniation (LDH) is a common cause of low back and radicular leg pains. This study aimed to evaluate the Persian Discectomy Successful Score (PDSS) in patients diagnosed with lumbar disc herniation undergoing discectomy. The PDSS first was developed based on the JOA score. It is a linear transformation of patients’ pre-operative JOA score that can predict the successful rate of surgery outcome in advance (PDSS= -1.036 × preoperative JOA + 23.635).
A total of 103 patients with lumbar disc herniation submitted for discectomy operation were entered into the study during two years of study. A sensitivity analysis was carried out to examine the accuracy of the PDSS. For the analysis of the results, patients’ pre- and post-operative JOA score was used as gold standard to calculate the actual difference observed (JOA pre-operation minus JOA post-operation = DJOA) and to compare this measure (difference) with estimation derived from the PDSS.
The mean age of patients was 47.4 ± 9.7 (ranging from 17 to 79) years and were followed for at least three months. The difference between pre and postoperative JOA score (15.4 ± 3.7) was statistically significant (P less than 0.0001). The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of the PDSS was 93.87%, 80%, and 93.2%, respectively. The PDSS had a positive predictive value of 98.9% and a negative predictive value of 40%.
It seems that the preoperative JOA is able to predict discectomy results in patients with lumbar disc herniation. To confirm the findings of this study, a longitudinal study is recommended.
Discectomy Successful, lumbar disc herniation, Evaluation measure
Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy is a relatively new technique. Very few studies have reported the clinical outcome of percutaneous endoscopic discectomy in terms of quality of life and return to work.
55 patients with percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy done from 2002 to 2006 had their clinical outcomes reviewed in terms of the North American Spine Score (NASS), Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 scores (SF-36) and Pain Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and return to work.
The mean age was 35.6 years, the mean operative time was 55.8 minutes and the mean length of follow-up was 3.4 years. The mean hospital stay for endoscopic discectomy was 17.3 hours. There was significant reduction in the severity of back pain and lower limb symptoms (NASS and VAS, p < 0.05) at 6 months and 2 years. There was significant improvement in all aspects of the Quality of Life (SF-36, p < 0.05) scores except for general health at 6 months and 2 years postoperation. The recurrence rate was 5% (3 patients). 5% (3 patients) subsequently underwent lumbar fusion for persistent back pain. All patients returned to their previous occupation after surgery at a mean time of 24.3 days.
Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy is associated with improvement in back pain and lower limb symptoms postoperation which translates to improvement in quality of life. It has the advantage that it can be performed on a day case basis with short length of hospitalization and early return to work thus improving quality of life earlier.
Posterior endoscopic discectomy is an established method for treatment of lumbar disc herniation. Many studies have not been reported in literature for lumbar discectomy by Destandau Endospine System. We report a series of 300 patients operated for lumbar dissectomy by Destandau Endospine system.
Materials and Methods:
A total of 300 patients suffering from lumbar disc herniations were operated between January 2002 and December 2008. All patients were operated as day care procedure. Technique comprised localization of symptomatic level followed by insertion of an endospine system devise through a 15 mm skin and fascial incision. Endoscopic discectomy is then carried out by conventional micro disc surgery instruments by minimal invasive route. The results were evaluated by Macnab's criteria after a minimum followup of 12 months and maximum up to 24 months.
Based on modified Macnab's criteria, 90% patients had excellent to good, 8% had fair, and 2% had poor results. The complications observed were discitis and dural tear in five patients each and nerve root injury in two patients. 90% patients were able to return to light and sedentary work with an average delay of 3 weeks and normal physical activities after 2 months.
Edoscopic discectomy provides a safe and minimal access corridor for lumbar discectomy. The technique also allows early postoperative mobilization and faster return to work.
Endoscope; endoscopic discectomy; endospine; facetectomy; laminotomy; radiculopathy
Low back pain is common during pregnancy. However, the prevalence of symtomatic lumbar disc herniation is rare, and cauda equina syndrome due to disc herniation during pregnancy is even rarer. We report a rare case of lumbar disc herniation causing cauda equina syndrome during third trimester of pregnancy which successfully treated by endoscopic discectomy. This case shows that endoscopic discectomy can be the treatment option for the lumbar disc herniation during pregnancy.
Lumbar disc herniation; Pregnancy; Endoscopic discectomy
Existing studies on micro-endoscopic lumbar discectomy report similar outcomes to those of open and microdiscectomy and conflicting results on complications. We designed a randomised controlled trial to investigate the hypothesis of different outcomes and complications obtainable with the three techniques. 240 patients aged 18–65 years affected by posterior lumbar disc herniation and symptoms lasting over 6 weeks of conservative management were randomised to micro-endoscopic (group 1), micro (group 2) or open (group 3) discectomy. Exclusion criteria were less than 6 weeks of pain duration, cauda equina compromise, foraminal or extra-foraminal herniations, spinal stenosis, malignancy, previous spinal surgery, spinal deformity, concurrent infection and rheumatic disease. Surgery and follow-up were made at a single Institution. A biomedical researcher independently collected and reviewed the data. ODI, back and leg VAS and SF-36 were the outcome measures used preoperatively, postoperatively and at 6-, 12- and 24-month follow-up. 212/240 (91%) patients completed the 24-month follow-up period. VAS back and leg, ODI and SF36 scores showed clinically and statistically significant improvements within groups without significant difference among groups throughout follow-up. Dural tears, root injuries and recurrent herniations were significantly more common in group 1. Wound infections were similar in group 2 and 3, but did not affect patients in group 1. Overall costs were significantly higher in group 1 and lower in group 3. In conclusion, outcome measures are equivalent 2 years following lumbar discectomy with micro-endoscopy, microscopy or open technique, but severe complications are more likely and costs higher with micro-endoscopy.
Lumbar disc herniation; Discectomy; Microdiscectomy; Micro-endoscopic discectomy
The authors report 2 cases of nerve root herniation after discectomy of a large lumbar disc herniation caused by an unrecognized dural tear. Patients complained of the abrupt onset of radiating pain after lumbar discectomy. Magnetic resonance imaging showed cerebrospinal fluid signal in the disc space and nerve root displacement into the disc space. Symptoms improved after the herniated nerve root was repositioned. Clinical symptoms and suggestive radiologic image findings are important for early diagnosis and treatment.
Nerve root herniation; Dural tear; Lumbar disc heniation; Discectomy; Lumbar spinal stenosis
The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcome of the hemilaminoplasty technique for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation (LDH). Forty-three cases of single-level LDH underwent a discectomy and hemilaminoplasty procedure. The preoperative JOA score and VAS of lower back and leg pain were 10.4±1.3, 7.8±2.1, and 8.6±1.7, respectively. The Cobb angle of lumbar sagittal alignment was 10.1±2.0. Twenty-five patients who agreed to lumbar discectomy through fenestration were enrolled as the control group. The postoperative JOA score and VAS of low back and leg pain of the hemilaminoplasty group were 19.4±1.3, 1.4±0.4, and 2.1±0.5, respectively. The Cobb angle was 29.2±1.9 degrees. There was no epidural scar observed in any of the patients. The Cobb angle of the hemilaminoplasty group was higher than that of the control group (p < 0.05), while the VAS was significantly lower (p < 0.05). Hemilaminoplasty is a useful method to improve clinical outcome, prevent epidural scar, and preserve the normal alignment of lumbar spine.
The herniated lumbar disc (HLD) in adolescent patients is characterized by typical discogenic pain that originates from a soft herniated disc. It is frequently related to back trauma, and sometimes it is also combined with a degenerative process and a bony spur such as posterior Schmorl's node. Chemonucleolysis is an excellent minimally invasive treatment having these criteria: leg pain rather than back pain, severe limitation on the straight leg raising test (SLRT), and soft disc protrusion on computed tomography (CT). Microsurgical discectomy is useful in the cases of extruded or sequestered HLD and lateral recess stenosis due to bony spur because the nerve root is not decompressed with chymopapain. Spinal fusion, like as PLIF, should be considered in the cases of severe disc degeneration, instability, and stenosis due to posterior central bony spur. In our study, 185 adolescent patients, whose follow-up period was more than 1 year (the range was 1 - 4 years), underwent spinal surgery due to HLD from March, 1998 to December, 2002 at our institute. Among these cases, we performed chemonucleolysis in 65 cases, microsurgical discectomy in 94 cases, and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) with cages in 33 cases including 7 reoperation cases. The clinical success rate was 91% for chemonucleolysis, 95% for microsurgical disectomy, and 89% for PLIF with cages, and there were no nonunion cases for the PLIF patients with cages. In adolescent HLD, chemonucleolysis was the 1st choice of treatment because the soft adolescent HLD was effectively treated with chemonucleolysis, especially when the patient satisfied the chemonucleolysis indications.
Adolescent disc herniation; lumbar chemonucleolysis; microsurgical discectomy; posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF)
Spinal epidural hematoma is a well known complication of spinal surgery. Clinically insignificant small epidural hematomas develop in most spinal surgeries following laminectomy. However, the incidence of clinically significant postoperative spinal epidural hematomas that result in neurological deficits is extremely rare. In this report, we present a 33-year-old female patient whose spinal surgery resulted in postoperative spinal epidural hematoma. She was diagnosed with lumbar disc disease and underwent hemipartial lumbar laminectomy and discectomy. After twelve hours postoperation, her neurologic status deteriorated and cauda equina syndrome with acute spinal epidural hematoma was identified. She was immediately treated with surgical decompression and evacuation of the hematoma. The incidence of epidural hematoma after spinal surgery is rare, but very serious complication. Spinal epidural hematomas can cause significant spinal cord and cauda equina compression, requiring surgical intervention. Once diagnosed, the patient should immediately undergo emergency surgical exploration and evacuation of the hematoma.
Magnetic resonance myelography (MRM) after lumbar discectomy is all too often an unrewarding challenge. A constellation of findings are inevitable, and determining their significance is often difficult. MRM is a noninvasive technique that can provide anatomical information about the subarachnoid space. Until now, there is no study reported in literature showing any clinico-radiological correlation of post operative MRM. The objective of this study was to prospectively evaluate the diagnostic effectiveness of MRM for the demonstration of decompression in operated discectomy patients and its correlation with subjective and objective outcome (pain and SLR) in immediate postoperative period.
Materials and Methods:
Fifty three patients of single level lumbar disc herniation (LDH) justifying the inclusion criteria were operated for discectomy. All patients underwent MRM on second/third postoperative day. The pain relief and straight leg raise sign improvement was correlated with the postoperative MRM images to group the patients into: A- Subjective Pain relief, SLR improved and MRM image showing myelo regression; B- Subjective Pain relief, SLR improved and MRM image showing no myelo regression; C- No Subjective Pain relief, no SLR improved and MRM image showing myelo regression and; D- No Subjective Pain relief, no SLR improved and MRM image showing no myelo regression.
The result showed that Group A had 46 while Group B, C and Group D had 4, 2 and one patients respectively. Clinico-radiological correlation (Clinically diagnosed patient and findings with MRM correlation) was present in 47 patients (88.68%) which includes both A and D groups. The MRM specificity and sensitivity were 92% and 33.33% respectively.
MRM is a non-invasive, efficient and reliable tool in confirming postoperative decompression in lumbar discectomy patients, especially when economic factors are to be considered and the required expertise to reliably read a complex confusing post-operative MRI is not available readily. Further, controlled double blinded multicentric study in operated and non operated LDH, with MRI comparison would give better evidence to justify its use in screening to detect persisting compression and to document decompression.
Discectomy; lumbar disc herniation; magnetic resonance myelography
It is not known whether or not muscle spasm of the back muscles presented in patients with sciatic scoliosis caused by lumbar disc herniation produces muscle pain and/or tenderness. Pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) of the lower back and low-back pain were examined in 52 patients (13 of 52 presenting sciatic scoliosis) with lumbar disc herniation who complained of radicular pain and in 15 normal subjects. PPTs were measured at five points bilaterally using an electronic pressure algometer. Low-back pain was evaluated using visual analogue scale (VAS) ratings. All patients complained of radicular leg pain and were divided into the following three groups according to the presence of and the region of low-back pain: no low-back pain group, low-back pain with no laterality group, and low-back pain dominantly on the herniation side group; the VAS rating on the side ipsilateral to the herniation side was higher than that on the contralateral side. In the normal subjects, there were no statistically significant differences between sides in mean PPTs at all sites examined. PPTs were not lower in the spasmodic side (concave side) than the convex side in patients with sciatic scoliosis. PPTs on the herniation side were significantly lower than those on the contralateral side in patients with low-back pain dominantly on the herniation side. Furthermore, the areas of low PPTs were beyond the innervation area of dorsal ramus of L5 and S1 nerve root. It was considered that not only the peripheral mechanisms but also the hyper excitability of the central nervous system might contribute in lowering PPTs of the lower back on the herniation side.
Pressure pain threshold; Muscle spasm; Low-back pain; Lumbar disc herniation; Sciatic scoliosis
Despite variations in technique, the results of primary and revision lumbar discectomy have been good. The aim of this study was to retrospectively review cases of primary and revision lumbar discectomy performed in our institute over a three-year period.
Materials and Methods:
The case records of 273 patients who underwent lumbar discectomy between January 2001-2004 and fulfilled our inclusion and exclusion criteria were reviewed. Of these, 259 were primary discectomies and 14 were revision surgeries. Recurrence was defined as ipsilateral disc herniation at the previously operated level. Demographic parameters, magnetic resonance imaging of the disc, patient satisfaction and rate of recurrence were analyzed.
The primary surgery group had 52 (20.08%) contained and 207 (79.92%) extruded or sequestered discs, while the numbers in the revision group were three (21.43%) and 11 (78.57%) respectively. “Satisfactory” outcome was noted in 96.5% of the primary surgeries, with a recurrence rate of 3.5%. In the revision group 78.6% had “satisfactory” outcome. In 9.4% of the primary group we encountered complications, while it was 21.43% in the revision group.
Lumbar discectomy is a safe, simple and effective procedure with satisfactory outcome in 96.5% of primary disc surgery and 78.6% of revision disc surgery.
Lumbar discectomy; herniated disc; revision discectomy
The purpose of this study was to compare clinical and radiological outcomes of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) and open lumbar microdiscectomy (OLM) for recurrent disc herniation.
Fifty-four patients, who underwent surgery, either PELD (25 patients) or repeated OLM (29 patients), due to recurrent disc herniation at L4-5 level, were divided into two groups according to the surgical methods. Excluded were patients with sequestrated disc, calcified disc, severe neurological deficit, or instability. Clinical outcomes were assessed using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Radiological variables were assessed using plain radiography and/or magnetic resonance imaging.
Mean operating time and hospital stay were significantly shorter in PELD group (45.8 minutes and 0.9 day, respectively) than OLM group (73.8 minutes and 3.8 days, respectively) (p < 0.001). Complications occurred in 4% in PELD group and 10.3% in OLM group in the perioperative period. At a mean follow-up duration of 34.2 months, the mean improvements of back pain, leg pain, and functional improvement were 4.0, 5.5, and 40.9% for PELD group and 2.3, 5.1, and 45.0% for OLM group, respectively. Second recurrence occurred in 4% after PELD and 10.3% after OLM. Disc height did not change after PELD, but significantly decreased after OLM (p = 0.0001). Neither sagittal rotation angle nor volume of multifidus muscle changed significantly in both groups.
Both PELD and repeated OLM showed favorable outcomes for recurrent disc herniation, but PELD had advantages in terms of shorter operating time, hospital stay, and disc height preservation.
Reherniation; Discectomy; Lumbar spine
Background: Discogenic pain or herniation causing neural impingement of the thoracic vertebrae is less common than that in the cervical or lumbar regions. Treatment of thoracic discogenic pain usually involves conservative measures. If this fails, conventional fusion or discectomy can be considered, but these procedures carry significant risk.
Objectives: To assess the efficacy and safety of percutaneous laser disc decompression (PLDD) for the treatment of thoracic disc disease.
Methods: Ten patients with thoracic discogenic pain who were unresponsive to conservative intervention underwent the PLDD procedure. Thoracic pain was assessed using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores preoperatively and at 6-month intervals with a minimum of 18-months follow-up. Patients were diagnosed and chosen for enrollment based on abnormal MRI findings and positive provocative discograms. Patients with gross herniations were not included.
Results: Length of follow-up ranged from 18 to 31 months (mean: 24.2 mo). Median pretreatment thoracic VAS score was 8.5 (range: 5-10) and median VAS score at final follow-up was 3.8 (range: 0-9). Postoperative improvement was significant with a 99% confidence interval. Of interest, patients generally fell into two groups, those with significant pain reduction and those with little to no improvement. Although complications such as pneumothorax, discitis, or nerve damage were possible, no adverse events occurred during the procedures.
Limitations: The study is limited by its small size and lack of a sham group. Larger controlled studies are warranted.
Conclusions: With further clinical evidence, PLDD could be considered a viable option with a low risk of complication for the treatment of thoracic discogenic pain that does not resolve with conservative treatment.
back pain; minimally invasive surgery; laser; intervertebral disc; spine surgery
Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS) has become increasingly common and is characterized by multilevel disc herniation and lumbar spondylolisthesis, which are difficult to treat. The current study aimed to evaluate the short-term clinical outcomes and value of the combined use of microendoscopic discectomy (MED) and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) for the treatment of multilevel DLSS with spondylolisthesis, and to compare the combination with traditional posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). A total of 26 patients with multilevel DLSS and spondylolisthesis underwent combined MED and MI-TLIF surgery using a single cage and pedicle rod-screw system. These cases were compared with 27 patients who underwent traditional PLIF surgery during the same period. Data concerning incision length, surgery time, blood loss, time of bed rest and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score prior to and following surgery were analyzed statistically. Statistical significance was reached in terms of incision length, blood loss and the time of bed rest following surgery (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference between the surgery time and ODI scores of the two groups. The combined use of MED and MI-TLIF has the advantages of reduced blood loss, less damage to the paraspinal soft tissue, shorter length of incision, shorter bed rest time, improved outcomes and shorter recovery times and has similar short-term clinical outcomes to traditional PLIF.
microendoscopic discectomy; minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion; posterior lumbar interbody fusion; lumbar spinal stenosis; lumbar spondylolisthesis
Currently, there are over 300,000 lumbar discectomies performed in the US annually without an objective standard for patient selection. A prospective clinical outcome study of 200 cases with 5-year follow-up was used to develop and validate an MRI-based classification scheme to eliminate as much ambiguity as possible. 100 consecutive lumbar microdiscectomies were performed between 1992 and 1995 based on the criteria for “substantial” herniation on MRI. This series was used to develop the MSU Classification as an objective measure of lumbar disc herniation on MRI to define “substantial”. It simply classifies herniation size as 1-2-3 and location as A-B-C, with inter-examiner reliability of 98%. A second prospective series of 100 discectomies was performed between 2000 and 2002, based on the new criteria, to validate this classification scheme. All patients with size-1 lesions were electively excluded from surgical consideration in our study. The Oswestry Disability Index from both series was better than most published outcome norms for lumbar microdiscectomy. The two series reported 96 and 90% good to excellent outcomes, respectively, at 1 year, and 84 and 80% at 5 years. The most frequent types of herniation selected for surgery in each series were types 2-B and 2-AB, suggesting the combined importance of both size and location. The MSU Classification is a simple and reliable method to objectively measure herniated lumbar disc. When used in correlation with appropriate clinical findings, the MSU Classification can provide objective criteria for surgery that may lead to a higher percentage of good to excellent outcomes.
MRI; Discectomy; Classification; Substantial herniated disc; Low back pain
Endoscopic discectomy method is a novel technique that is increasingly used in spine surgery. Previous studies have reported that some common complications like dural adhesions are lower in this technique compared with the other techniques. Furthermore, treatment outcomes are reportedly higher because of minimal invasion. Thepresent study aims to determine the outcome of percutaneous endoscopic discectomy.
A total of 130 patients underwent the lumbar disc prolapse operations during 2008 to 2012 in all of them the entire procedure was performed endoscopically. All procedures were carried out from a posterior approach using a 4-mm Hopkins 0 degrees-telescope placed in the working insert equipped with channels for suction tube, operative instruments and nerve root retractor (ENDOSPINE instrumentation (Karl STORZ GmbH and Co. KG). The pre- and post-operation pain was assessed using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Furthermore, the treatment outcome was assessed using modified MacNab criteria before operation, 24 hours, one month, 2 months, 6 months, one year, and two years after operation .
Good to excellent outcome was achieved in 89% of patients, which is comparable with the results of classic microdiscectomy. The mean age of patients was 35.6 years old and the mean length of follow-up was 3.4 years. There was significant reduction in the severity of back pain and lower limb symptoms at 6 months and 2 years post-operation. There was significant improvement in all aspects of the Quality of Life scores at 6 months and 2 years post-operation. In 3 patients the dural sac was lacerated but none of the tears was exceed a few mm in length with not association with neural injury.
Findings of this study showed that percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy is associated with improvement in back pain and lower limb symptoms. It has the advantage that it can be performed on a day case basis with short length of hospitalization and early return to work thus improving quality of life earlier.
Endoscopic discectomy, Spine surgery, Lumbar disc prolapse operation, Outcome
Cervical disc herniation often results in neck and arm pain in patients as a result of direct impingement of nerve roots and associated inflammatory processes. The clinical presentation usually corresponds with the side of herniation and ipsilateral symptoms predominate the clinical picture.
A 35-year-old Caucasian man presented to our facility with neck pain and left-sided upper and lower extremity pain. A magnetic resonance imaging scan revealed a right paramedian herniated disc at the C5 to C6 level. All other cervical levels were normal without central canal stenosis or neural foraminal stenosis. Results from magnetic reasonance imaging scans of the brain and lumbar spine were negative. An anterior cervical discectomy was performed at the C5 to C6 level, and an inter-body graft and plate were placed. Our patient had complete resolution of his neck and left arm pain.
Anterior discectomy and fusion of the cervical spine resulted in complete resolution of our patient’s neck and left arm symptoms and improvement of his contralateral left leg pain. Cervical disc herniation may present with contralateral symptoms that are different from the current perception of this disease.
Cervical; Contralateral symptoms; Disc herniation; Radiculopathy
Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) can be performed under local anesthesia with intravenous analgesics. To define the incidence of piriformis syndrome (PS) after PELD via the posterolateral approach under local anesthesia compared to that of general patients presenting with low back pain with/without lower leg pain. The incidence and time of occurrence of positive FAIR test after PELD within a 3-month follow-up period were evaluated retrospectively, and compared with the prevalence of general patients who visited the pain clinic for LBP with/without lower leg pain. Factors that may increase the incidence of PS after PELD were also evaluated. There was no patient with positive FAIR test immediately after PELD in the operation room and before walking. The prevalence of PS in general patients was 317/2,320 (13.7%); however, the incidence of PS after PELD within a 3-month follow-up period was 61/151 (40.4%), peaking at 32 days. High anxiety scale scores during operation led to increased incidence of PS after PELD. PELD under local anesthesia with high level of anxiety may increase the incidence of PS after walking, peaking around the first month, compared with the results for general patients with low back pain with/without lower leg pain.
Diskectomy; Endoscopy; Lumbar vertebrae; Percutaneous; Piriformis syndrome