scholarly journals Recording of Surgical Processes: A Study Comparing Senior and Junior Neurosurgeons During Lumbar Disc Herniation Surgery

2010 ◽  
Vol 67 (suppl_2) ◽  
pp. ons325-ons332 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurent Riffaud ◽  
Thomas Neumuth ◽  
Xavier Morandi ◽  
Christos Trantakis ◽  
Jürgen Meixensberger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Operating Room ◽  
Lumbar Disc Herniation ◽  
Spine Surgery ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Operating Time ◽  
Objective Measurement ◽  
Surgical Experience ◽  
Surgical Practice

Abstract BACKGROUND: Evaluating surgical practice in the operating room is difficult, and its assessment is largely subjective. OBJECTIVE: Recording of standardized spine surgery processes was conducted to ascertain whether any significant differences in surgical practice could be observed between senior and junior neurosurgeons. METHODS: Twenty-four procedures of lumbar discectomies were consecutively recorded by a senior neurosurgeon. In 12 cases, surgery was entirely performed by a senior neurosurgeon with the aid of a resident, and in the 12 remaining cases, surgery was performed by a resident with the aid of a senior neurosurgeon. The data recorded were general parameters (operating time for the whole procedure and for each step), and general and specific parameters of the surgeon's activities (number of manual gestures, number and duration of actions performed, use of the instruments, and use of interventions on anatomic structures). The Mann-Whitney U test was used for comparison between the 2 groups of neurosurgeons. RESULTS: The operating time was statistically lower for the group of senior surgeons. The seniors statistically demonstrated greater economy in time and in gestures during the closure step, for sewing and for the use of scissors, needle holders, and forceps. The senior surgeons statistically worked for a shorter time on the skin and used fewer manual gestures on the thoracolumbalis fascia. The number of changes in microscope position was also statistically lower for this group. CONCLUSION: There is a relationship between surgical practice, as determined by a method of objective measurement using observation software, and surgical experience: gesture economy evolves with seniority.

scholarly journals Minimally invasive tubular microdiscectomy for recurrent lumbar disc herniation

2016 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 48-53 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ulrich Hubbe ◽  
Pamela Franco-Jimenez ◽  
Jan-Helge Klingler ◽  
Ioannis Vasilikos ◽  
Christoph Scholz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Lumbar Disc Herniation ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Operating Time ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
P Value ◽  
Vas Scores ◽  
Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation

OBJECT The aim of the study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of minimally invasive tubular microdiscectomy for the treatment of recurrent lumbar disc herniation (LDH). As opposed to endoscopic techniques, namely microendoscopic and endoscopic transforaminal discectomy, this microscopically assisted technique has never been used for the treatment of recurrent LDH. METHODS Thirty consecutive patients who underwent minimally invasive tubular microdiscectomy for recurrent LDH were included in the study. The preoperative and postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) scores for pain, the clinical outcome according to modified Macnab criteria, and complications were analyzed retrospectively. The minimum follow-up was 1.5 years. Student t-test with paired samples was used for the statistical comparison of pre- and postoperative VAS scores. A p value < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. RESULTS The mean operating time was 90 ± 35 minutes. The VAS score for leg pain was significantly reduced from 5.9 ± 2.1 preoperatively to 1.7 ± 1.3 postoperatively (p < 0.001). The overall success rate (excellent or good outcome according to Macnab criteria) was 90%. Incidental durotomy occurred in 5 patients (16.7%) without neurological consequences, CSF fistula, or negative influence to the clinical outcome. Instability occurred in 2 patients (6.7%). CONCLUSIONS The clinical outcome of minimally invasive tubular microdiscectomy is comparable to the reported success rates of other minimally invasive techniques. The dural tear rate is not associated to higher morbidity or worse outcome. The technique is an equally effective and safe treatment option for recurrent LDH.

scholarly journals Retrospective Analysis of Paraspinal Muscle-Splitting Microscopic-Assisted Discectomy Versus Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy on Patients in the Treatment of Far-Lateral Lumbar Disc Herniation

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lei Kong ◽  
Wei-Zhi Zhang ◽  
Hong-Guang Xu
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Lumbar Disc Herniation ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Operating Time ◽  
Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Duration Of Hospitalization ◽  
Far Lateral ◽  
Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy

Abstract Background: Minimally invasive surgery includes percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy and the microscopic tubular technique. This study aimed to compare the two techniques and evaluate the outcomes of the procedures.Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients with far-lateral lumbar disc herniation (FLLDH) from June 2015 to October 2018. Twenty-six patients underwent paraspinal muscle-splitting microscopic-assisted discectomy (MD) and 30 patients underwent percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) surgery by the same surgical team. Data included the duration of the operation, duration of intraoperative radiation exposure, and average duration of hospitalization. Pre- and postoperative pain scores and neurological functions were recorded using a visual analog scale (VAS) score and Oswestry disability index (ODI).Results: 56 patients remained in the study over the 12–24 months period. The mean operating time was 65.83 ± 16.64 min in the PELD group, mean duration of radiation exposure was 2.87 ± 1.19 min, and average of hospitalization was 3.43 days. The mean operating time was 44.96 ± 16.87 min in the MD group, duration of radiation exposure was 0.78 ± 0.32 min, and duration of hospitalization was 4.12 days. There were two patients with postoperative transient dysesthesia and one underwent reoperation 7 months after surgery in the PELD group. One patient had postoperative transient dysesthesia in the MD group. Except low back pain at 3 months (p >0.05), all patients in both groups showed significant improvement in VAS and ODI scores compared with pre-operation and until final follow-up (p<0.05). Although the learning curve of MD is shorter compared with the PELD, beginners should practice on cadavers and receive teaching demonstrations from senior surgeons.Conclusion: Both techniques are minimally invasive, effective, and safe for treating far-lateral lumbar disc herniation in selected patients. Compared with the PELD technique, the MD procedure offers a wider field of vision during operation, shorter operation time, fewer postoperative complications, and shorter learning curve.

scholarly journals Criteria for failure and worsening after surgery for lumbar disc herniation: a multicenter observational study based on data from the Norwegian Registry for Spine Surgery

2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (10) ◽  
pp. 2650-2659 ◽  
Author(s):  
David A. T. Werner ◽  
Margreth Grotle ◽  
Sasha Gulati ◽  
Ivar M. Austevoll ◽  
Greger Lønne ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Observational Study ◽  
Lumbar Disc Herniation ◽  
Spine Surgery ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Multicenter Observational Study

scholarly journals Minimally Invasive versus Open Spine Surgery: What Does the Best Evidence Tell Us?

2017 ◽  
Vol 08 (02) ◽  
pp. 194-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shearwood McClelland ◽  
Jeffrey A. Goldstein
Keyword(s):  
Pain Relief ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Lumbar Disc Herniation ◽  
Spine Surgery ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Lumbar Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Cervical Disc ◽  
Readmission Rates

ABSTRACT Background: Spine surgery has been transformed significantly by the growth of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) procedures. Easily marketable to patients as less invasive with smaller incisions, MIS is often perceived as superior to traditional open spine surgery. The highest quality evidence comparing MIS with open spine surgery was examined. Methods: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving MIS versus open spine surgery was performed using the Entrez gateway of the PubMed database for articles published in English up to December 28, 2015. RCTs and systematic reviews of RCTs of MIS versus open spine surgery were evaluated for three particular entities: Cervical disc herniation, lumbar disc herniation, and posterior lumbar fusion. Results: A total of 17 RCTs were identified, along with six systematic reviews. For cervical disc herniation, MIS provided no difference in overall function, arm pain relief, or long-term neck pain. In lumbar disc herniation, MIS was inferior in providing leg/low back pain relief, rehospitalization rates, quality of life improvement, and exposed the surgeon to >10 times more radiation in return for shorter hospital stay and less surgical site infection. In posterior lumbar fusion, MIS transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) had significantly reduced 2-year societal cost, fewer medical complications, reduced time to return to work, and improved short-term Oswestry Disability Index scores at the cost of higher revision rates, higher readmission rates, and more than twice the amount of intraoperative fluoroscopy. Conclusion: The highest levels of evidence do not support MIS over open surgery for cervical or lumbar disc herniation. However, MIS TLIF demonstrates advantages along with higher revision/readmission rates. Regardless of patient indication, MIS exposes the surgeon to significantly more radiation; it is unclear how this impacts patients. These results should optimize informed decision-making regarding MIS versus open spine surgery, particularly in the current advertising climate greatly favoring MIS.

scholarly journals Transforaminal percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy versus microdiscectomy: an Indian rural experience

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (6) ◽  
pp. 1141
Author(s):  
Prakash U. Chavan ◽  
Mahendra Gudhe ◽  
Ashok Munde ◽  
Balaji Jadhav
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Disc Herniation ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Operating Time ◽  
Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Single Level ◽  
Group I ◽  
Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> The objective of the study was to compare surgical outcome of micro-discectomy with transforaminal percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy for single level lumbar disc herniation in Indian rural population.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> Retrospective comparative study was designed during the period of October 2012 to June 2015, patients in the age group of 22-75 years with unremitting sciatica with/without back pain, and/or a neurological deficit that correlated with appropriate level and side of neural compression as revealed on MRI, with single level lumbar disc herniation who underwent either microdiscectomy or TPELD were included in the study. Patients were assessed on visual analogue scale (VAS) for back and leg pain, modified macnabs criteria, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI).<strong></strong></p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> Group I (MD) included 44 patients and Group II (TPELD) included 20 patients. Significant improvement was seen in claudication symptom post-operatively in both MD and TPELD. Mean operating time was significantly shorter in MD group (1.11 hrs vs. 1.32 hrs; p&lt;0.01). According to modified MacNab's criteria,<strong> </strong>outcome were excellent (81.8%), good (9.09%) and fair<strong> </strong>(9.09%) in MD. Similarly, in TPELD, 80%, 15% and 5% patients had excellent, good and fair outcome respectively. In both groups, no one had a poor outcome. Thus, overall success rate was 100% in the study.</p><strong>Conclusions:</strong> TPELD and MD have comparable post-operative outcome in most of the efficacy parameters in Indian rural patients undergoing treatment of single level lumbar disc herniation. Additionally, TPELD offers distinct advantages such as performed under local anaesthesia, preservation of structure, lesser post-operative pain and early mobilization and discharge from hospital.

scholarly journals A retrospective analysis of paraspinal muscle-splitting microscopic-assisted discectomy versus percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy on patients in the treatment of far-lateral lumbar disc herniation

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
LEI KONG ◽  
Hong Guang Xu
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Lumbar Disc Herniation ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Operating Time ◽  
Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Duration Of Hospitalization ◽  
Far Lateral ◽  
Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy

Abstract Background : Minimally invasive surgery includes percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy and the microscopic tubular technique. This study aimed to compare the two techniques and evaluate the outcomes of the procedures. Methods : We retrospectively analyzed patients with far-lateral lumbar disc herniation (FLLDH) from June 2015 to October 2018. Twenty-six patients underwent paraspinal muscle-splitting microscopic-assisted discectomy (MD) and 30 patients underwent percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) surgery by the same surgical team. Data included the duration of the operation, duration of intraoperative radiation exposure, and average duration of hospitalization. Pre- and postoperative pain scores and neurological functions were recorded using a visual analog scale (VAS) score and Oswestry disability index (ODI). Results: 56 patients remained in the study over the 12–24 months period. The mean operating time was 65.83 ± 16.64 min in the PELD group, mean duration of radiation exposure was 2.87 ± 1.19 min, and average of hospitalization was 3.43 days. The mean operating time was 44.96 ± 16.87 min in the MD group, duration of radiation exposure was 0.78 ± 0.32 min, and duration of hospitalization was 4.12 days. Except low back pain at 3 months (p >0.05), all patients in both groups showed significant improvement in VAS and ODI scores compared with pre-operation and until final follow-up (p<0.05). Conclusion: Both techniques are minimally invasive, effective, and safe for treating far-lateral lumbar disc herniation in selected patients. Compared with the PELD technique, the MD procedure offers a wider field of vision during operation, shorter operation time, fewer postoperative complications, and shorter learning curve.

scholarly journals The effect of paraspinal muscle-splitting microscopic-assisted discectomy versus percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy on patients in the treatment of far-lateral lumbar disc herniation

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
LEI KONG ◽  
Hong Guang Xu
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Lumbar Disc Herniation ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Operating Time ◽  
Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Far Lateral ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy

Abstract Background Minimally invasive surgery includes percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy and the microscopic tubular technique. This study aimed to compare the two techniques and evaluate the outcome of the procedure. Methods We retrospectively analyzed patients with far-lateral lumbar disc herniation (FLLDH) from June 2015 to October 2018. Twenty-six patients underwent paraspinal muscle-splitting microscopic-assisted discectomy (MD), and 30 underwent percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) surgery. Data included the duration of the operation, duration of intraoperative radiation exposure and average hospitalization. Pre- and postoperative pain scores and neurological functions were recorded using visual analogue scale (VAS) score and Oswestry disability index (ODI). Results A total of 56 patients remained in the study over the 12–24 months. The mean operating time was 65.83 ± 16.64 min in the PELD group, the mean duration of radiation exposure was 2.87±1.19 min and average hospitalization was 3.43 days. The mean operating time was 44.96 ± 16.87 min in the MD group, the mean duration of radiation exposure was 0.78±0.32 min and average hospitalization was 4.12 days. All patients in both groups showed significant improvement of VAS and ODI scores after surgery and until final follow-up. Conclusion Both techniques are minimally invasive, effective, and safe for treating far-lateral lumbar disc herniation in selected patients. Compared with the PELD technique, the MD procedure affords a wider field of vision during operation, shorter operation time, fewer postoperative complications, and a shorter learning curve.

scholarly journals A prognostic model for failure and worsening after lumbar microdiscectomy: a multicenter study from the Norwegian Registry for Spine Surgery

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
David A. T. Werner ◽  
Margreth Grotle ◽  
Milada Cvancarova Småstuen ◽  
Sasha Gulati ◽  
Øystein P. Nygaard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Lumbar Disc Herniation ◽  
Spine Surgery ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Prognostic Model ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Multicenter Cohort Study ◽  
Lumbar Microdiscectomy ◽  
Validation Set

Abstract Objective To develop a prognostic model for failure and worsening 1 year after surgery for lumbar disc herniation. Methods This multicenter cohort study included 11,081 patients operated with lumbar microdiscectomy, registered at the Norwegian Registry for Spine Surgery. Follow-up was 1 year. Uni- and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to assess potential prognostic factors for previously defined cut-offs for failure and worsening on the Oswestry Disability Index scores 12 months after surgery. Since the cut-offs for failure and worsening are different for patients with low, moderate, and high baseline ODI scores, the multivariate analyses were run separately for these subgroups. Data were split into a training (70%) and a validation set (30%). The model was developed in the training set and tested in the validation set. A prediction (%) of an outcome was calculated for each patient in a risk matrix. Results The prognostic model produced six risk matrices based on three baseline ODI ranges (low, medium, and high) and two outcomes (failure and worsening), each containing 7 to 11 prognostic factors. Model discrimination and calibration were acceptable. The estimated preoperative probabilities ranged from 3 to 94% for failure and from 1 to 72% for worsening in our validation cohort. Conclusion We developed a prognostic model for failure and worsening 12 months after surgery for lumbar disc herniation. The model showed acceptable calibration and discrimination, and could be useful in assisting physicians and patients in clinical decision-making process prior to surgery.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document