scholarly journals Disproportionate Vertebral Bodies and Their Impact on Lumbar Disc Herniation

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (14) ◽  
pp. 3174
Author(s):  
Ralph Läubli ◽  
Robin Brugger ◽  
Tatiana Pirvu ◽  
Sven Hoppe ◽  
Dominik Sieroń ◽  
...  

Background: The aim of this study was to determine whether the presence of disproportionate vertebral bodies is a risk factor for disc herniation (DH). Methods: Sixty-seven consecutive patients (m: 31 f: 36) who underwent lumbar discectomy for symptomatic DH at one level between L3 and S1 were retrospectively included. The last three motion segments (3 × 67 = 201) were assessed on sagittal MRI scans. A disproportionate motion segment was defined as the difference of more than 10% of the antero-posterior diameter of two adjacent endplates. Results: DH was present in 6/67 (9%), 26/67 (38.8%), and 35/67 (52.2%) patients at L3/4, L4/5, and L5/S1, respectively. A total of 14 of 67 patients demonstrated a disproportionate motion segment at the discectomy level (20.9%). A total of 23 of the 201 (11.4%) investigated motion segments met our criteria for a disproportionate motion segment. In our study population, when one of the 201 segments was disproportionate, the positive predictive value (PPV) for DH increased toward the lower segments: the PPV at the L5/S1 level was 83.0%. The odds ratio of disproportion for DH was the highest at the L5/S1 level, with 6.0 ± 0.82 (p = 0.017). Conclusions: The presence of a disproportionate motion segment in the lower spine may lead to a significant higher risk for DH in patients undergoing discectomy.

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (5) ◽  
pp. 14-19
Author(s):  
Tri Truong Van ◽  
Tri Tran Duc Duy ◽  
Khai Vo Le Quang

Introduction: Surgical wound infection in developing coutries is about 3%. Antibiotics prophylaxis may help to reduce the surgical site infection. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of antibiotics prophylaxis in patients with lumbar disc herniation who were treated with lumbar discectomy at Hue University hospital. Materials and Methods: A prospective study was conducted at Hue University hospital from March 2015 to May 2018 on 54 patients with lumbar disc herniation who were used antibiotics prophylaxis when undergoing discectomy. Results: The infection rate in our study was 0%. Antibiotics prophylaxis reduced the length of hospitalization as well as the medical cost. Conclusion: Antibiotics prophylaxis was effective in preventing surgical site infection despite the fact that the condition of operating rooms did not meet the standard rules. Key words: prophylaxis antibiotics, lumbar disc herniation


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