Lumbar microdiscectomy complication rates: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECT Lumbar microdiscectomy and its various minimally invasive surgical techniques are seeing increasing popularity, but a systematic review of their associated complications has yet to be performed. The authors sought to identify all prospective clinical studies reporting complications associated with lumbar open microdiscectomy, microendoscopic discectomy (MED), and percutaneous microdiscectomy. METHODS The authors conducted MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase database searches for randomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies reporting complications associated with open, microendoscopic, or percutaneous lumbar microdiscectomy. Studies with fewer than 10 patients and published before 1990 were excluded. Overall and interstudy median complication rates were calculated for each surgical technique. The authors also performed a meta-analysis of the reported complications to assess statistical significance across the various surgical techniques. RESULTS Of 9504 articles retrieved from the databases, 42 met inclusion criteria. Most studies screened were retrospective case series, limiting the number of studies that could be included. A total of 9 complication types were identified in the included studies, and these were analyzed across each of the surgical techniques. The rates of any complication across the included studies were 12.5%, 13.3%, and 10.8% for open, MED, and percutaneous microdiscectomy, respectively. New or worsening neurological deficit arose in 1.3%, 3.0%, and 1.6% of patients, while direct nerve root injury occurred at rates of 2.6%, 0.9%, and 1.1%, respectively. Hematoma was reported at rates of 0.5%, 1.2%, and 0.6%, respectively. Wound complications (infection, dehiscence, orseroma) occurred at rates of 2.1%, 1.2%, and 0.5%, respectively. The rates of recurrent disc complications were 4.4%, 3.1%, and 3.9%, while reoperation was indicated in 7.1%, 3.7%, and 10.2% of operations, respectively. Meta-analysis calculations revealed a statistically significant higher rate of intraoperative nerve root injury following percutaneous procedures relative to MED. No other significant differences were found. CONCLUSIONS This review highlights complication rates among various microdiscectomy techniques, which likely reflect real-world practice and conceptualization of complications among physicians. This investigation sets the framework for further discussions regarding microdiscectomy options and their associated complications during the informed consent process.

Download Full-text

Anatomically Contoured Anterior Plating for Isolated Tibiotalar Arthrodesis: A Systematic Review

Foot & Ankle Specialist ◽

10.1177/1938640017700974 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 10 (4) ◽

pp. 352-358 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Nicholas Kusnezov ◽

John C. Dunn ◽

Logan R. Koehler ◽

Justin D. Orr

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Functional Outcomes ◽

Surgical Techniques ◽

Wound Complications ◽

Posttraumatic Arthritis ◽

Complication Rates ◽

Inclusion Criteria ◽

Tibiotalar Arthrodesis ◽

Anterior Plating

Introduction. We performed a systematic review of the published literature to characterize patient demographic, surgical techniques, and functional outcomes to elucidate the complication and revision rates following isolated tibiotalar arthrodesis with anatomically contoured anterior plating. Methods. A comprehensive literature search was performed. Inclusion criteria were peer-reviewed studies in English, after 1990, at least 10 patients, and reporting clinical outcomes following contoured anterior plating and with follow-up of at least 80% and 1 year. Primary outcomes were fusion rate, time to fusion, return to activities, satisfaction, and functional outcome scores. Complication rates, reoperation, and revision were also extracted. Results. Eight primary studies with 164 patients met the inclusion criteria. The average sample size was 21 ± 10.0 patients and average age was 49.2 years with 61.6% male. Posttraumatic arthritis (49.4%) was the most common operative indication, followed by primary osteoarthrosis (18.9%). The average follow-up was 21.1 months. At this time, 97.6% of patients went on to uneventful union at a weighted average time of 18.7 weeks postoperatively. AOFAS scores improved significantly ( P < .05). 25% complication rate was reported with wound complication (7.9%) and hardware irritation (6.7%) most common. Overall, 21.3% of patients underwent reoperation; 4 for revision arthrodesis following nonunion. Conclusion. Isolated tibiotalar arthrodesis utilizing anatomically contoured anterior plating demonstrates excellent clinical and functional outcomes at short-term follow-up. Overall, 97.6% of patients went on to fusion and functional outcomes consistently improved following surgery. Furthermore, while one-quarter of patients experienced complications, wound complications were relatively uncommon and less than one-quarter of these required surgical intervention. Levels of Evidence: Level IV: Systematic Review

Download Full-text

Use of implantable meshes for augmented rotator cuff repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-039552 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (12) ◽

pp. e039552

Author(s):

Mathew Baldwin ◽

N S Nagra ◽

Gemma Greenall ◽

Andrew J Carr ◽

David Beard ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Rotator Cuff ◽

Comparative Studies ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Case Series ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Complication Rates ◽

Eligibility Criteria ◽

Surgical Meshes

ObjectiveTo appraise studies reporting on clinical effectiveness and safety of surgical meshes used to augment rotator cuff repairs (RCRs).DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched between April 2006 and April 2020.Eligibility criteriaAll studies evaluating adults (≥18 years) undergoing RCR were considered. There were no language restrictions.Data extraction and synthesisScreening, data extraction and quality appraisal were conducted by two independent reviewers. Meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects models if ≥2 comparative studies reported the same outcome measure. Risk of bias assessment was undertaken for randomised (RoB2, Cochrane) and comparative studies (ROBINS-I, Cochrane).ResultsWe included 60 studies, consisting of 7 randomised controlled trials, 13 observational comparative studies and 40 observational case series. All comparative studies reported on shoulder-specific functional outcome scores, 18 on the radiographic occurrence of re-tear and 14 on pain score metrics. All studies contained some risk of bias.Compared with non-augmented repair, a small improvement in shoulder-specific function or pain scores was observed for synthetic patches with a mean improvement of 6.7 points on the University of California Los Angles (UCLA) shoulder score (95% CI 0.1 to 13.4) and 0.46 point reduction on the Visual Analogue Scale (95% CI −0.74 to −0.17), respectively. A reduced likelihood of radiologically observed re-tear was observed for synthetic (risk ratio (RR) 0.41, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.61) and allograft (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.65) patches. A total of 49 studies reported on the occurrence of complications. Slightly higher crude complication rates were observed following patch-augmented repair (2.1%) than standard repair (1.6%).ConclusionsWhile several studies suggest a decreased failure rate and small improvements in shoulder function and pain following augmented RCR, a paucity of rigorous clinical evaluation, for both effectiveness and safety, prevents firm recommendations.Prospero registration numberCRD42017057908.

Download Full-text

Does robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty have lower complication and revision rates than the conventional procedure? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-044778 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (8) ◽

pp. e044778

Author(s):

Yifeng Sun ◽

Wei Liu ◽

Jian Hou ◽

Xiuhua Hu ◽

Wenqiang Zhang

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Knee Arthroplasty ◽

Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Surgical Techniques ◽

Complication Rates ◽

Case Control Studies ◽

Eligibility Criteria ◽

Robotic Assisted ◽

Unicompartmental Knee

ObjectiveWe conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on patients who underwent unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) to compare the complication rates, revision rates and non-implant-specific complications between robotic-assisted and conventional UKA.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesThe PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane databases were searched up to 30 June 2020.Eligibility criteriaCase–control studies comparing robotic-assisted and conventional UKA.Data extraction and synthesisData from all eligible articles were independently extracted by two authors. We analysed the differences in outcomes between robotic-assisted and conventional UKA by calculating the corresponding 95% CIs and pooled relative risks (RRs). Heterogeneity was assessed using the χ2 and I2 tests. All analyses were performed using the ‘metafor’ package of R V.3.6.2 software.ResultsA total of 16 studies involving 50 024 patients were included in the final meta-analysis. We found that robotic-assisted UKA had fewer complications (RR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.96, p=0.036) and lower revision rates (RR: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.20 to 0.86, p=0.017) than conventional UKA. We observed no significant differences in non-implant-specific complications between the two surgical techniques (RR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.61 to 1.04, p=0.96). No publication bias was found in this meta-analysis.ConclusionsThis study provides evidence that robotic-assisted UKA has fewer complications and lower revision rates than conventional UKA; however, owing to important limitations, the results lack reliability, and more studies are required.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021246927.

Download Full-text

Vulnerability of the L5 nerve root during anterior lumbar interbody fusion at L5–S1: case series and review of the literature

Neurosurgical FOCUS ◽

10.3171/2020.6.focus20315 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 49 (3) ◽

pp. E7

Author(s):

Ehsan Dowlati ◽

Hepzibha Alexander ◽

Jean-Marc Voyadzis

Keyword(s):

Nerve Root ◽

Interbody Fusion ◽

Preoperative Planning ◽

Case Series ◽

Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽

Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽

Review Of The Literature ◽

Single Center ◽

Nerve Root Injury ◽

Root Injury

OBJECTIVENerve root injuries associated with anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) are uncommonly reported in the literature. This case series and review aims to describe the etiology of L5 nerve root injury following ALIF at L5–S1.METHODSThe authors performed a single-center retrospective review of prospectively collected data of patients who underwent surgery between 2017 and 2019 who had postoperative L5 nerve root injuries after stand-alone L5–S1 ALIF. They also reviewed the literature with regard to nerve root injuries after ALIF procedures.RESULTSThe authors report on 3 patients with postoperative L5 radiculopathy. All 3 patients had pain that improved. Two of the 3 patients had a neurological deficit, one of which improved.CONCLUSIONSStretch neuropraxia from overdistraction is an important cause of postoperative L5 radiculopathy after L5–S1 ALIF. Judicious use of implants and careful preoperative planning to determine optimal implant sizes are paramount.

Download Full-text

Surgical Versus Nonsurgical Treatment for Acute Achilles Tendon Rupture A Systematic Review/Meta-Analysis

QJM ◽

10.1093/qjmed/hcaa059 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 113 (Supplement_1) ◽

Author(s):

O A Elshazly ◽

A F Mohamed ◽

Y R A Mohamed

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Achilles Tendon ◽

Tendon Rupture ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Achilles Tendon Rupture ◽

Surgical Techniques ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Wound Complications ◽

Rupture Rate ◽

Operative Repair

Abstract Background and Introduction Tendon Achilles injury affects 31.17 per 100000 per year, it has major impact on quality of life of affected patients, mostly active young patients. Different management options exist ranging from conservative treatment, to operative repair either open or percutaneous repair.no consensus has been reached on which treatment modality is preferred for each patient .in this study we systematically reviewed the literature for available evidence regarding management of tendon Achilles rupture. Aim of the Study to compare the two methods for treating Acute Achilles tendon rupture in a systematic review with meta-analysis and evaluate the functional outcomes of each methods. The objective is to perform a systematic review of overlapping meta-analysis regarding surgical versus non-surgical management of Acute Achilles tendon rupture to assist the decision makers in selecting their decision and provide intervention recommendations by the best available evidence. Methods This systematic review consisted of 5 studies, including a systematic search of the literature (PubMed, SCOPUS, and The Cochrane Library), selection of studies, extraction of study characteristics, assessment of methodological quality and bias. and extraction of data on clinical outcomes and their comparisons between different surgical groups. Results a total of 9 studies were included, 822 patients were extracted from the included studies. Of the 822 patients, 415 (50.4%) had undergone surgical intervention and 407 (49.6%) had received non-surgical treatment. The minimum follow-up duration was 12 months. The left Achilles tendon was relatively more prone to rupture. The interval from injury to treatment was within 2 to 14 days. Five 5 different surgical techniques were used; end to end, modified Kessler, augmented repair, Krackow type and interrupted circumferential stitch. Operative repair was found to significantly decrease rupture rate (risk ratio of 0.36, 95% CI 0.21-0.64; P = 0.0005) with higher risk of wound complications. No statistically significant difference between the two groups in functional outcome scores and range of motion. Conclusion We conclude that surgical technique lowers the risk of re-rupture rate but associated with higher complication rate which can be reduced by using the minimally invasive techniques. Multicenter randomized clinical trials are needed to obtain a high-quality level of evidence for the comparison between the different modified surgical techniques and the gap effect on making different decision of managements.

Download Full-text

Unique Complications of Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy and Percutaneous Endoscopic Interlaminar Discectomy

January 2018 - Pain Physician ◽

10.36076/ppj.2018.2.e105 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 1 (21;1) ◽

pp. E105-E112 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Ma Xuexiao

Keyword(s):

Nerve Root ◽

Epidural Hematoma ◽

Surgical Techniques ◽

Lumbar Discectomy ◽

Nerve Root Injury ◽

Root Injury ◽

Endoscopic Discectomy ◽

Posterior Neck ◽

Nerve Root Pain ◽

Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy

Background: Percutaneous endoscopic discectomy (PED) includes 2 main procedures: percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) and percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy (PEID), both of which are minimally invasive surgical procedures that effectively deal with lumbar degenerative disorders. Because of the challenging learning curve for the surgeon and the individual characteristics of each patient, preventing and avoiding complications is difficult. The most common complications, such as nucleus pulposus omission, nerve root injury, dural tear, visceral injury, nerve root induced hyperalgesia or burning-like nerve root pain, postoperative dysesthesia, posterior neck pain, and surgical site infection, are difficult to avoid; however, more focus on these issues perioperatively may be in order. Additionally, unique and unexpected complications can also occur, such as retroperitoneal hematoma (RPH), intraoperative seizures, and thrombophlebitis, among others. Objective: We aim to delineate unique complications during PED and accumulate strategies to prevent significant morbidity and improve surgical techniques. Study Design: A retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing PEID or PELD from October 2014 to January 2016. Setting: Affiliated hospitals of Qingdao University. Methods: Patients with lumbar disc herniation (LDH) who underwent PEID and PELD were retrospectively analyzed. Complications were recorded and analyzed pre and postoperatively. We assessed clinical outcomes using the visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and classified the results into “excellent,” “good,” “fair,” or “poor” based on the modified MacNab criteria. All of the patients were followed for more than one year to evaluate their recovery from complications. Results: From October 2014 to January 2016, 426 patients with LDH underwent PEID (106 cases) or PELD (320 cases). Common complications and occurrence rates were as follows: the incomplete removal of herniated discs was 1.4% (6/426), recurrence 2.8% (12/426), nerve root injury 1.2% (5/426), dural tear 0.9% (4/426), and nerve root induced hyperalgesia or burning-like nerve root pain 2.3% (10/426); no posterior neck pain or surgical site infection occurred. Unique complications included: passage of the working channel through the spinal canal into the disc space (one case), super-elastic nerve hook caught by exiting nerve root (one case), epidural hematoma (one case), radicular artery injury and massive bleeding (one case) which was revised by micro-endoscopic discectomy, and intraoperative seizure (one case). No serious consequences occurred after active medical intervention, and most patients had good recovery by 3 months postoperatively with physical therapy. Limitations: The main limitations of this study are the retrospective study design, limited case number, and short follow-up period. Conclusions: PEDs are effective and minimally invasive methods for the surgical treatment of LDH, causing fewer complications due to the very minimal operational trauma for the muscle-ligament complex and stability of the spine. Nevertheless, because of the difficult learning curve for surgeons, lack of experience with the requisite surgical techniques, and enhanced clinical responsibility, a variety of problems may occur. Especially concerning are the unique complications mentioned here, which potentially lead to severe injury for the patient and require diligent preventive measures. Key words: Unique complications, epidural, hematoma, interlaminar, transforaminal, PEID, PELD

Download Full-text

One-stage bilateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty is a suitable option vs. the two-stage approach: a meta-analysis

EFORT Open Reviews ◽

10.1302/2058-5241.6.210047 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 6 (11) ◽

pp. 1063-1072

Author(s):

Pietro Feltri ◽

Camilla Mondini Trissino da Lodi ◽

Alberto Grassi ◽

Stefano Zaffagnini ◽

Christian Candrian ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Knee Arthroplasty ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Case Series ◽

Transfusion Rate ◽

Complication Rates ◽

Safe Procedure ◽

Two Stage ◽

One Stage

To compare one-stage vs. two-stage bilateral unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) in terms of complications, mortality, reinterventions, transfusion rate, days to discharge, and outcomes for the treatment of bilateral mono-compartmental knee osteoarthritis. A systematic review was performed in the PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases up to February 2021. Randomized controlled trials, case-control studies, and case series describing the use of bilateral UKA were retrieved. A meta-analysis was performed on complications, mortality, reinterventions, transfusion rate, and days to discharge comparing one-stage vs. two-stage replacement, and outcomes were also reported. Assessment of risk of bias and quality of evidence was performed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Fifteen articles were included on 1451 patients who underwent bilateral UKA (44.9% men, 55.1% women, mean age 66 years). The systematic review documented, for bilateral one-stage UKA: 2.6% major and 5.4% minor complication rates, 0.5% mortality, 1.9% reintervention, 4.1% transfusion rates, and 4.5 mean days to discharge. No studies reported functional differences. The meta-analysis did not find differences for major complications, minor complications, mortality, reintervention, transfusion rates, or days to discharge versus two-stage bilateral procedures. The operative time was 112.3 vs. 125.4 minutes for one-stage and two-stage surgeries, respectively. The overall quality of the retrieved studies was high. Bilateral single-stage UKA is a safe procedure, with a few complications, and overall positive clinical results. No differences were found in terms of complications, mortality, reinterventions, transfusion rate, and days to discharge in comparison with the two-stage approach. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:1063-1072. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.210047

Download Full-text

1692 No Longer Unknown: A Systematic Review & Meta-Analysis of The Effectiveness of Trans-Oral Surgical Techniques in Identifying Head and Neck Primary Cancer in Carcinoma Unknown Primary

British Journal of Surgery ◽

10.1093/bjs/znab258.034 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 108 (Supplement_6) ◽

Author(s):

C Gao ◽

A Al-Lami ◽

N Al-Zuhir ◽

R Simo ◽

A Arora ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Case Reports ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Surgical Techniques ◽

Case Series ◽

Secondary Outcome ◽

Unknown Primary ◽

Primary Cancer ◽

Detection Rates ◽

Primary Identification

Abstract Aim The use of transoral robotic surgery (TORS), transoral laser microsurgery (TLM) and more recently reported transoral endoscopic electrocautery (TOEC) in the identification of the primary cancer in CUP patients has gained popularity. This systematic review aims to assess the effectiveness of TORS, TLM and TOEC. Method A systematic review and meta-analysis using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting methodology was carried out to assess the effectiveness of the three trans-oral surgical techniques. EMBASE, MEDLINE and CINAHL databases were searched from inception to September 2020. Primary outcome measure was detection rates of primary cancer of the different techniques. Secondary outcome measures were complications and length of hospital stay. Results 289 studies were identified of which 30 met the inclusion criteria (28 case series and 2 case reports). The overall combined primary identification rate was 72.3% (567 /777 patients). The primary identification rates were 49.7% and 34.2% in lingual (n = 273) and palatine tonsillectomy (n = 118) respectively. The primary cancer identification rates by surgical techniques are: TORS was 60% (CI 0.49, 0.70), TLM was 80% (CI 0.58, 1.01), TOEC was 41% (CI 0.05, 0.76). The commonest complication was haemorrhage (5.3%). Conclusions This is the largest systematic review in the subject and incorporates the more recently published surgical technique of TOEC. Lingual tonsillectomy is an effective procedure in CUP work up. Further larger, multi-centre, prospective studies of PET CT negative CUP patients is needed to draw conclusive results

Download Full-text

Rating Spinal Nerve Extremity Impairment Using the Sixth Edition

Guides Newsletter ◽

10.1001/amaguidesnewsletters.2009.julaug01 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 14 (4) ◽

pp. 1-6

Author(s):

Christopher R. Brigham

Keyword(s):

Nerve Root ◽

Spinal Nerve ◽

Upper Extremities ◽

Motor Deficits ◽

Nerve Injuries ◽

Sixth Edition ◽

Federal Employee ◽

Nerve Root Injury ◽

Root Injury ◽

Rating Process

Abstract The AMAGuides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), Sixth Edition, does not provide a separate mechanism for rating spinal nerve injuries as extremity impairment; radiculopathy was reflected in the spinal rating process in Chapter 17, The Spine and Pelvis. Certain jurisdictions, such as the Federal Employee Compensation Act (FECA), rate nerve root injury as impairment involving the extremities rather than as part of the spine. This article presents an approach to rate spinal nerve impairments consistent with the AMA Guides, Sixth Edition, methodology. This approach should be used only when a jurisdiction requires ratings for extremities and precludes rating for the spine. A table in this article compares sensory and motor deficits according to the AMA Guides, Sixth and Fifth Editions; evaluators should be aware of changes between editions in methodology used to assign the final impairment. The authors present two tables regarding spinal nerve impairment: one for the upper extremities and one for the lower extremities. Both tables were developed using the methodology defined in the sixth edition. Using these tables and the process defined in the AMA Guides, Sixth Edition, evaluators can rate spinal nerve impairments for jurisdictions that do not permit rating for the spine and require rating for radiculopathy as an extremity impairment.

Download Full-text