Prospective, Randomised Blinded trial to compare outcome following lumbar discectomy and DYNESYS® dynamic distraction stabilisation for symptomatic isolated contained single level lumbar disc prolapse.

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
S Ghalayini
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Disc Prolapse ◽  
Single Level ◽  
Lumbar Disc Prolapse ◽  
Blinded Trial

scholarly journals Functional outcome of patients undergoing lumbar discectomy

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 514
Author(s):  
Harpreet Singh ◽  
Parth B. Bhavsar ◽  
Ankit Singh ◽  
Saurin Patel
Keyword(s):  
Functional Outcome ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Subjective Evaluation ◽  
Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Intervertebral Disc Herniation ◽  
Disc Prolapse ◽  
Duration Of Symptoms ◽  
Lumbar Disc Prolapse ◽  
Lumbar Intervertebral Disc Herniation

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> Sciatica resulting from a lumbar intervertebral disc herniation is the most common cause of radicular leg pain in adult working population. It can be treated with both conservative and operative methods. In our study, surgical treatment of lumbar disc prolapse has been done by open discectomy. We wish to assess the outcome of surgery in patients with lumbar disc prolapse undergoing lumbar discectomy.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> 40 patients were included in this study and were followed up for up to 1 year postoperatively. We assessed the outcome of each patient with ODI and VAS post-operatively and on follow-up at 3 weeks, 6 months and 1 year. Subjective evaluation of the patient’s satisfaction at the final follow-up was also done.<strong></strong></p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> We found that males had higher incidence of PIVD with an average duration of symptoms before surgery about 8.62 months. Left side was most involved and level l4-l5 was most involved level. The mean ODI and VAS score pre-operatively were 26.85±4.20 and 7.73±0.88 respectively, which changed to 4.48±5.15 and 1.70±1.57, respectively at 1 year post-operative follow-up. These were statistically highly significant. Most of the patients (34) gave a subjective evaluation as excellent at 1 year follow-up.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Conclusions:</strong> Our study established that open discectomy has a satisfactory functional outcome and leads to a significant improvement in the patients’ quality of life.</p>

scholarly journals Functional outcome of microscopic lumbar discectomy for the treatment of lumbar disc prolapse

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 389
Author(s):  
Ansari Ishtyaque Abdul Aziz ◽  
Ansari Muqtadeer Abdul Aziz
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Japanese Orthopaedic Association ◽  
Significant Proportion ◽  
Scientific Basis ◽  
Radicular Pain ◽  
Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Disc Prolapse ◽  
Lumbar Disc Prolapse

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> Back pain constitutes significant proportion of orthopaedic practitioner OPD. Lumbar disc prolapse constitutes important cause of back pain with radiculopathic leg pain. Different techniques have evolved to treat this disorder non-operatively and operatively. Operative techniques vary a lot in the field of spine surgery depending on the surgeon, institute, infrastructure and cost. We present simple, cost effective, cosmetic, operative technique with scientific basis which gives better visualization for decompression of nerve root in this paper called microscopic lumbar discectomy (MLD).</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> On the basis of inclusion and exclusion criteria 26 patients were operated by microscopic lumbar discectomy (MLD) technique. All the patients were followed up at the interval of 1 month, 3 months and 6 months and assessment was done of subjective and objective findings with Japanese orthopaedic association (JOA) score and rate of improvement (RI) was calculated. Out of 26 patients 18 were men and 8 were women. Age ranges from 28 years to 72 years. Mean age being 47.8 years.<strong></strong></p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> Out of 26 patients at the time of discharge, 20 patients (87.5%) could walk independently without any aid and without any radicular pain. In most of the patients 19 (73.07%) sciatica improved immediately. The pre-operative mean±SD (SE) JOA score was 8.346±0.85 (0.169) which improved to 11.807±0.694 (0.136) after 1 month and 13.19±0.895 (0.175) after 6 months.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Conclusions:</strong> Excellent to good results and improvement can be achieved surgically, economically and cosmetically by microscopic lumbar discectomy technique in the spine lumbar disc prolapse patients at many spine centre with cosmesis, good results and rehabilitation of the patient.</p><p class="abstract"> </p>

scholarly journals The Outcome of Minimally Invasive Discectomy in Single Level Lumbar Disc Prolapse

2016 ◽  
Vol 06 (07) ◽  
pp. 211-220
Author(s):  
Hamid A. Jaff ◽  
Bakhtyar Rasul M. Amin ◽  
Rebar M. Noori Fatah ◽  
Hosam H. Husein
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Disc Prolapse ◽  
Single Level ◽  
Lumbar Disc Prolapse

scholarly journals Automated Percutaneous Lumbar Discectomy for the Contained Herniated Lumbar Disc: A Systematic Assessment of Evidence

2009 ◽  
Vol 3;12 (3;5) ◽  
pp. 601-620 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua Hirsch
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Disc Prolapse ◽  
Level Ii ◽  
Lumbar Disc Prolapse ◽  
Alternative Techniques ◽  
One Year

Background: Lumbar disc prolapse, protrusion, and extrusion account for less than 5% of all low back problems, but are the most common causes of nerve root pain and surgical interventions. The typical rationale for traditional surgery is an effort to provide more rapid relief of pain and disability. It should be noted that the majority of patients will recover with conservative management. The primary rationale for any form of surgery for disc prolapse associated with radicular pain is to relieve nerve root irritation or compression due to herniated disc material. The primary modality of treatment continues to be either open or microdiscectomy, but several alternative techniques including automated percutaneous lumbar discectomy (APLD) have been described. However, there is a paucity of evidence for all decompression techniques, specifically alternative techniques including automated and laser discectomy. Study Design: A systematic review of the literature. Objective: To determine the effectiveness of APLD. Methods: A comprehensive evaluation of the literature relating to automated lumbar disc decompression was performed. The literature was evaluated according to Cochrane review criteria for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) criteria was utilized for observational studies. A literature search was conducted of English language literature through PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane library, systematic reviews, and cross references from reviews and systematic reviews. The level of evidence was classified as Level I, II, or III with 3 subcategories in Level II based on the quality of evidence developed by the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). Outcome Measures: Pain relief was the primary outcome measure. Other outcome measures were functional improvement, improvement of psychological status, opioid intake, and return to work. Short-term effectiveness was defined as one-year or less, whereas, long-term effectiveness was defined as greater than one-year. Results: Based on USPSTF criteria, the indicated evidence for APLD is Level II-2 for short- and long-term relief. Limitations: Paucity of RCTs in the literature. Conclusion: This systematic review indicated Level II-2 evidence for APLD. APLD may provide appropriate relief in properly selected patients with contained lumbar disc prolapse. Key words: Intervertebral disc disease, chronic low back pain, mechanical disc decompression, automated percutaneous lumbar discectomy, internal disc disruption, radiculitis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document