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

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.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lei Kong ◽  
Wei-Zhi Zhang ◽  
Hong-Guang Xu

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.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
LEI KONG ◽  
Hong Guang Xu

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.


Author(s):  
Prakash U. Chavan ◽  
Mahendra Gudhe ◽  
Ashok Munde ◽  
Balaji Jadhav

<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.


2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (21;1) ◽  
pp. E75-E84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhong-Liang Deng

Background: Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) has been growing in popularity for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation (LDH) due to its irreplaceable advantages over conventional open surgery. Compared with common lumbar disc herniations, discectomy of highly migrated LDH by PELD is known to be very difficult. Highly migrated lumbar disc herniation has long been a challenge for its specific characteristics. Three approaches for PELD have been applied to access a highly migrated LDH, including an interlaminar approach (IL), transforaminal approach (TF), and contralateral transforaminal approach (CTF). However, none of the existing research has systematically described the selection of the most appropriate procedure from the 3 approaches or the individualization of an operative procedure in different cases. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to present a detailed surgical approach selection and individualization of procedure in the treatment of highly migrated LDH with PELD. We also mean to compare the outcomes of patients with highly migrated LDH treated with PELD by the 3 approaches. Study Design: Single-center retrospective observational study. Setting: An interventional pain management practice, a medical center, major metropolitan city, China. Methods: In our retrospective analysis between March 2011 and March 2013, 73 patients with single level highly migrated LDH received PELD. Clinical outcomes were assessed with the visual analogue scale (VAS) score, the modified MacNab criteria, and the Oswestry disability index (ODI). Relevant data such as operation duration and fluoroscopy frequency of the 3 operative approaches were recorded. Results: The mean operating time of IL was 56 minutes, compared with 64 minutes for TF and 112 minutes for CTF. The mean intraoperative fluoroscopy times were 5.5 for IL, 9.7 for TF, and 14.6 for CTF. In each group, the mean VAS and ODI after surgery and 3 months after surgery improved dramatically compared with preoperative counterparts. However, the difference between postoperative results and the results 3 months after surgery was not significant (P > 0.05). The overall excellent rate was 90.4% according to the modified MacNab criteria; there was no significant statistical difference between the 3 operative routes. Operative complications occurred in 3 patients (2 after IL and one after CTF, 3 of 73, 4.1%). Limitations: This study is limited by its sample size. Conclusion: In our research, PELD with all 3 approaches was similarly effective to highly migrated disc herniation. The CTF approach required the longest operation duration and the most intraoperative times. On the contrary, the least operation time and radiographfrequency was required with the IL approach. In addition, we came to a conclusion of surgery approach selection when it comes to varied HM-LDH. Key words: Highly migrated, lumbar disc herniation, percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy, minimally invasive treatment Pain Physician 2017;


2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manyoung Kim ◽  
Sol Lee ◽  
Hyeun-Sung Kim ◽  
Sangyoon Park ◽  
Sang-Yeup Shim ◽  
...  

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