Painless Footdrop Secondary to Lumbar Disc Herniation

Neurosurgery ◽  
1981 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 484-486 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eddy Garrido ◽  
Robert H. Rosenwasser
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Disc Herniation ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Nerve Root ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
The Other ◽  
Herniated Disc

Abstract This is a report of two patients who developed a painless footdrop due to compression of the L-5 nerve root from a herniated disc at the L-4, L-5 interspace. The diagnosis was suspected clinically, supported by myelography, and confirmed at operation. One patient has regained the strength of his foot during the follow-up period; the other has remained unchanged.

scholarly journals Clinical Outcomes of Trans-Sacral Epiduroscopic Laser Decompression (SELD) in Patients with Lumbar Disc Herniation

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Seong Son ◽  
Sang Gu Lee ◽  
Yong Ahn ◽  
Woo Kyung Kim
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Lumbar Disc Herniation ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Herniated Disc ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Invasive Treatment ◽  
Disc Disease

Objective. Nowadays, trans-sacral epiduroscopic laser decompression (SELD) using slender epiduroscopy and laser is one of the preferred options for minimally invasive treatment in lumbar disc diseases. However, SELD is still in the initial stages of the global field of spine surgery, and the clinical outcomes in patients with lumbar disc herniation are not established yet. Therefore, the authors investigated patients undergoing SELD to report the clinical results. Methods. Between November 2015 and November 2018, a total of 82 patients who underwent single-level SELD for lumbar disc herniation with a minimum follow-up of 6.0 months were enrolled. A retrospective review of clinical data was conducted. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the visual analogue scale (VAS) for low back and leg pain and Odom’s criteria. Also, surgical outcomes, including complications and symptom recurrences, and radiological outcomes were analyzed. Results. Low back pain and leg pain as determined by the VAS improved from an average of 5.43 ± 1.73 and 6.10 ± 1.67 to 2.80 ± 1.43 and 3.58 ± 2.08 at the final follow-up (p<0.001). According to Odom’s criteria, the success rate defined as excellent or good results at the final follow-up was 58.5%. There were no surgery-related complications such as neurologic deficits, infection, or epidural hematomas, except for transient mild paralysis in 3 patients and procedure-related nuchal pain in 2 patients. The rate of additional procedures was 17.0% (6 patients received revision surgery and 8 patients received an additional nerve block) during the follow-up. Conclusion. Our findings showed that SELD for lumbar herniated disc disease achieved less favorable clinical outcomes compared with those of previous studies. Further study is needed to clarify the influencing factors on the clinical outcomes of SELD.

scholarly journals Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy as an Alternative to Open Lumbar Microdiscectomy for Large Lumbar Disc Herniation

2016 ◽  
Vol 19 (2;2) ◽  
pp. E291-E300 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jin-Sung Kim
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Lumbar Disc Herniation ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Disc Height ◽  
Herniated Disc ◽  
Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy

Background: Remarkable advancements in endoscopic spinal surgery have led to successful outcomes comparable to those of conventional open surgery. Large lumbar disc herniation (LLDH) is a serious condition, resulting in higher surgical failure when accessing the herniated disc. Objectives: This study compared the outcomes of LLDH treated with percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) and open lumbar microdiscectomy (OLM). Study Design: Retrospective assessment. Methods: This retrospective observational study was conducted from January 2011 to June 2012. Forty-four consecutive patients diagnosed with LLDH without cauda equina syndrome who were scheduled to undergo spinal surgery were included. LLDH was defined as herniated disc fragment occupying > 50% of the spinal canal. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using a visual analogue scale (VAS, 0 – 10), functional status was assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI, 0 – 100%) at 1, 6, and 24 months postoperatively and surgical satisfaction rate (0 – 100%) at final follow up. Radiological variables were assessed by plain radiography. Results: Forty-three patients were included; 20 and 23 patients underwent PELD and OLM, respectively. Both groups exhibited significant improvements in leg and back pain postoperatively (P < 0.001). Although there was no significant difference in leg pain improvement between the groups, improvement in back pain was significantly higher in the PELD group than in the OLM group (4.9 ± 1.5 vs. 2.5 ± 1.0, P < 0.001). The surgical satisfaction rate of the PELD group was significantly higher than that of the OLM group (91.3% ± 6.5 vs. 84.3% ± 5.2, P < 0.001). Mean operating time, hospital stay, and time until return to work were significantly shorter in the PELD group than in the OLM group (67.8 vs. 136.7 minutes, 1.5 vs. 7.2 days, and 4.2 vs. 8.6 weeks; P < 0.001). Disc height (%) decreased significantly from 23.7 ± 3.3 to 19.1 ± 3.7 after OLM (P < 0.001), but did not change significantly after PELD (23.6 ± 3.2 to 23.4 ± 4.2; P = 0.703). The segmental angle of the operated level increased from 10.3° to 15.4° in the PELD group, which was significantly higher than that in the OLM group (9.6° to 11.6°; P = 0.038). In the OLM group, there was one case of fusion due to instability. In the PELD group, one case required revision surgery and another case experienced recurrence. There were no perioperative complications in either group. Limitation: The study was retrospective with a small sample size and short follow-up period. Conclusion: PELD can be an effective treatment for LLDH, and it is associated with potential advantages, including a rapid recovery, improvements in back pain, and disc height preservation. Key words: Large lumbar disc herniation, percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy, microdiscectomy, back pain, disc height

scholarly journals RESULTS OF TREATMENT OF ACUTE LUMBAR DISC HERNIATION WITH TRANSFORAMINAL NERVE ROOT BLOCK

2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 222-225
Author(s):  
EMILIANO NEVES VIALLE ◽  
WELLINGTON KEITY UEDA ◽  
LUIZ ROBERTO GOMES VIALLE
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Disc Herniation ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Nerve Root ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Lower Limbs ◽  
Nerve Root Block ◽  
Persistent Symptoms ◽  
Results Of Treatment ◽  
Positive Effect

ABSTRACT Objective: To determine the efficacy of anesthetic transforaminal nerve root block in patients with sciatica secondary to lumbar disc herniation through a prospective observational study. Methods: The study included 176 patients from a private clinic undergoing transforaminal injection performed by a single spinal surgeon. The patients were assessed after two weeks, three months and six months regarding to the improvement of the pain radiating to the lower limbs. In case of persistent symptoms, patients could choose to perform a new nerve root block and maintenance of physical therapy or be submitted to conventional microdiscectomy. Results: By the end of six-month follow-up of the 176 patients, 116 had a favorable outcome (95 after one block and 21 after two blocks), and only 43 required surgery. Conclusion: The results of our study suggest a positive effect of transforaminal block for the treatment of sciatica in patients with lumbar disc herniation.

scholarly journals Intraoperative chymopapain in lumbar laminotomy for disc disease: a less invasive technique

1998 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. E12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tord D. Alden ◽  
George J. Kaptain ◽  
John A. Jane ◽  
John A. Jane
Keyword(s):  
Nucleus Pulposus ◽  
Lumbar Disc Herniation ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Nerve Root ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Perioperative Period ◽  
Invasive Technique ◽  
Disc Disease ◽  
Lumbar Microdiscectomy

The use of chymopapain in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation has been widely studied since Smith first described its use in humans in 1963. The authors describe the use of chymopapain intraoperatively in open lumbar microdiscectomy in 63 patients. When combined with the results of a previous study performed at the same institution, the authors found that this technique significantly reduces the rate of recurrent disc herniation when compared with traditional laminotomy with discectomy. This procedure maximizes the benefits of each approach taken separately, allowing for decompression of the nerve root from a free fragment or sequestered disc and preventing recurrence through dissolution of the nucleus pulposus. Overall, outcome was good or excellent immediately postoperatively in 73% of the 63 patients and in 64% at last follow-up evaluation. Additionally, this procedure is safe with no complications noted in the immediate perioperative period or at follow-up evaluation.

scholarly journals Microscopic extra-laminar sequestrectomy (MELS) for the treatment of hidden zone lumbar disc herniation: report of the surgical technique, patient selection, and clinical outcomes

BMC Surgery ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chunxiao Wang ◽  
Yao Zhang ◽  
Xiaojie Tang ◽  
Haifei Cao ◽  
Qinyong Song ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Loss ◽  
Learning Curve ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Lumbar Disc Herniation ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Operation Duration ◽  
The Mean

Abstract Background The area which located at the medial pedicle, posterior vertebral body and ventral hemilamina is defined as the hidden zone. Surgical management of hidden zone lumbar disc herniation (HZLDH) is technically challenging due to its difficult surgical exposure. The conventional interlaminar approach harbors the potential risk of post-surgical instability, while other approaches consist of complicated procedures with a steep learning curve and prolonged operation time. Objective To introduce microscopic extra-laminar sequestrectomy (MELS) technique for treatment of hidden zone lumbar disc herniation and present clinical outcomes. Methods Between Jan 2016 to Jan 2018, twenty one patients (13 males) with HZLDH were enrolled in this study. All patients underwent MELS (19 patients underwent sequestrectomy only, 2 patients underwent an additional inferior discectomy). The nerve root and fragment were visually exposed using MELS. The operation duration, blood loss, intra- and postoperative complications, and recurrences were recorded. The Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and the modified MacNab criteria were used to evaluate clinical outcomes. Postoperative stability was evaluated both radiologically and clinically. Results The mean follow-up period was 20.95 ± 2.09 (18–24) months. The mean operation time was 32.43 ± 7.19 min and the mean blood loss was 25.52 ± 5.37 ml. All patients showed complete neurological symptom relief after surgery. The VAS and ODI score were significantly improved at the final follow-up compared to those before operation (7.88 ± 0.70 vs 0.10 ± 0.30, 59.24 ± 10.83 vs 11.29 ± 3.59, respectively, p < 0.05). Seventeen patients (81%) obtained an “excellent” outcome and the remaining four (19%) patients obtained a “good” outcome based the MacNab criteria. One patient suffered reherniation at the same level one year after the initial surgery and underwent a transforaminal endoscopic discectomy. No major complications and postoperative instability were observed. Conclusions Our observation suggest that MELS is safe and effective in the management of HZLDH. Due to its relative simplicity, it comprises a flat surgical learning curve and shorter operation duration, and overall results in reduced disturbance to lumbar stability.

scholarly journals Follow-up study of lumbar disc herniation.

1989 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 94-97
Author(s):  
Toyoko Asami ◽  
Hideo Watanabe ◽  
Minoru Saika ◽  
Kazuyuki Moriyama ◽  
Akihiko Asami ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Disc Herniation ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Follow Up Study

118. Prosthetic Disc Nucleus (PDN) Replacement for Lumbar Disc Herniation Report with Four Year Follow-Up

2008 ◽  
Vol 8 (5) ◽  
pp. 60S ◽  
Author(s):  
Liang Zhao ◽  
Dongbin Qu ◽  
Dadi Jin ◽  
Hui Jiang
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Disc Herniation ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Lumbar Disc

scholarly journals A Comparison of Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy and Open Lumbar Microdiscectomy for Lumbar Disc Herniation in the Korean: A Meta-Analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manyoung Kim ◽  
Sol Lee ◽  
Hyeun-Sung Kim ◽  
Sangyoon Park ◽  
Sang-Yeup Shim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Disc Herniation ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Lumbar Microdiscectomy ◽  
Surgical Methods ◽  
Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy

Background. Among the surgical methods for lumbar disc herniation, open lumbar microdiscectomy is considered the gold standard. Recently, percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy is also commonly performed for lumbar disc herniation for its various strong points. Objectives. The present study aims to examine whether percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy and open lumbar microdiscectomy show better results as surgical treatments for lumbar disc herniation in the Korean population. Methods. In the present meta-analysis, papers on Korean patients who underwent open lumbar microdiscectomy and percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy were searched, both of which are surgical methods to treat lumbar disc herniation. The papers from 1973, when percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy was first introduced, to March 2018 were searched at the databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane Library. Results. Seven papers with 1254 patients were selected. A comparison study revealed that percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy had significantly better results than open lumbar microdiscectomy in the visual analogue pain scale at the final follow-up (leg: mean difference [MD]=-0.35; 95% confidence interval [CI]=-0.61, -0.09; p=0.009; back: MD=-0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI]=-1.42, -0.17; p=0.01), Oswestry Disability Index (MD=-2.12; 95% CI=-4.25, 0.01; p=0.05), operation time (MD=-23.06; 95% CI=-32.42, -13.70; p<0.00001), and hospital stay (MD=-4.64; 95% CI=-6.37, -2.90; p<0.00001). There were no statistical differences in the MacNab classification (odds ratio [OR]=1.02; 95% CI=0.71, 1.49; p=0.90), complication rate (OR=0.72; 95% CI=0.20, 2.62; p=0.62), recurrence rate (OR=0.83; 95% CI=0.50, 1.38; p=0.47), and reoperation rate (OR=1.45; 95% CI=0.89, 2.35; p=0.13). Limitations. All 7 papers used for the meta-analysis were non-RCTs. Some differences (type of surgery (primary or revisional), treatment options before the operation, follow-up period, etc.) existed depending on the selected paper, and the sample size was small as well. Conclusion. While percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy showed better results than open lumbar microdiscectomy in some items, open lumbar microdiscectomy still showed good clinical results, and it is therefore reckoned that a randomized controlled trial with a large sample size would be required in the future to compare these two surgical methods.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document