Cargando…

Effectiveness of percutaneous laser disc decompression versus conventional open discectomy in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation; design of a prospective randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: The usual surgical treatment of refractory sciatica caused by lumbar disc herniation, is open discectomy. Minimally invasive procedures, including percutaneous therapies under local anesthesia, are increasingly gaining attention. One of these treatments is Percutaneous Laser Disc Decompr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Brouwer, Patrick A, Peul, Wilco C, Brand, Ronald, Arts, Mark P, Koes, Bart W, Berg, Annette A van den, van Buchem, Mark A
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2009
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2697136/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19439098
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-10-49
_version_ 1782168289203453952
author Brouwer, Patrick A
Peul, Wilco C
Brand, Ronald
Arts, Mark P
Koes, Bart W
Berg, Annette A van den
van Buchem, Mark A
author_facet Brouwer, Patrick A
Peul, Wilco C
Brand, Ronald
Arts, Mark P
Koes, Bart W
Berg, Annette A van den
van Buchem, Mark A
author_sort Brouwer, Patrick A
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The usual surgical treatment of refractory sciatica caused by lumbar disc herniation, is open discectomy. Minimally invasive procedures, including percutaneous therapies under local anesthesia, are increasingly gaining attention. One of these treatments is Percutaneous Laser Disc Decompression (PLDD). This treatment can be carried out in an outpatient setting and swift recovery and return to daily routine are suggested. Thus far, no randomized trial into cost-effectiveness of PLDD versus standard surgical procedure has been performed. We present the design of a randomized controlled trial, studying the cost-effectiveness of PLDD versus conventional open discectomy in patients with sciatica from lumbar disc herniation. METHODS/DESIGN: The study is a randomized prospective multi-center trial, in which two treatment strategies are compared in a parallel group design. Patients (age 18–70 years) visiting the neurosurgery department of the participating hospitals, are considered for inclusion in the trial when sciatica due to lumbar disc herniation has lasted more than 8 weeks. Patients with disc herniation smaller than 1/3 of the spinal canal diameter, without concomitant lateral recess stenosis or sequestration, are eligible for participation, and are randomized into one of two treatment arms; either Percutaneous Laser Disc Decompression or conventional discectomy. The functional outcome of the patient, as assessed by the Roland Disability Questionnaire for Sciatica at 8 weeks and 1 year after treatment, is the primary outcome measure. The secondary outcome parameters are recovery as perceived by the patient, leg and back pain, incidence of re-intervention, complications, quality of life, medical consumption, absence of work and secondary costs. DISCUSSION: Open discectomy is still considered to be the golden standard in the surgical treatment of lumbar disc herniation. Whether Percutaneous Laser Disc Decompression has at least as much efficacy as the standard surgical procedure, and is more cost-effective, will be determined by this trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN25884790.
format Text
id pubmed-2697136
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2009
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-26971362009-06-16 Effectiveness of percutaneous laser disc decompression versus conventional open discectomy in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation; design of a prospective randomized controlled trial Brouwer, Patrick A Peul, Wilco C Brand, Ronald Arts, Mark P Koes, Bart W Berg, Annette A van den van Buchem, Mark A BMC Musculoskelet Disord Study Protocol BACKGROUND: The usual surgical treatment of refractory sciatica caused by lumbar disc herniation, is open discectomy. Minimally invasive procedures, including percutaneous therapies under local anesthesia, are increasingly gaining attention. One of these treatments is Percutaneous Laser Disc Decompression (PLDD). This treatment can be carried out in an outpatient setting and swift recovery and return to daily routine are suggested. Thus far, no randomized trial into cost-effectiveness of PLDD versus standard surgical procedure has been performed. We present the design of a randomized controlled trial, studying the cost-effectiveness of PLDD versus conventional open discectomy in patients with sciatica from lumbar disc herniation. METHODS/DESIGN: The study is a randomized prospective multi-center trial, in which two treatment strategies are compared in a parallel group design. Patients (age 18–70 years) visiting the neurosurgery department of the participating hospitals, are considered for inclusion in the trial when sciatica due to lumbar disc herniation has lasted more than 8 weeks. Patients with disc herniation smaller than 1/3 of the spinal canal diameter, without concomitant lateral recess stenosis or sequestration, are eligible for participation, and are randomized into one of two treatment arms; either Percutaneous Laser Disc Decompression or conventional discectomy. The functional outcome of the patient, as assessed by the Roland Disability Questionnaire for Sciatica at 8 weeks and 1 year after treatment, is the primary outcome measure. The secondary outcome parameters are recovery as perceived by the patient, leg and back pain, incidence of re-intervention, complications, quality of life, medical consumption, absence of work and secondary costs. DISCUSSION: Open discectomy is still considered to be the golden standard in the surgical treatment of lumbar disc herniation. Whether Percutaneous Laser Disc Decompression has at least as much efficacy as the standard surgical procedure, and is more cost-effective, will be determined by this trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN25884790. BioMed Central 2009-05-13 /pmc/articles/PMC2697136/ /pubmed/19439098 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-10-49 Text en Copyright © 2009 Brouwer et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Study Protocol
Brouwer, Patrick A
Peul, Wilco C
Brand, Ronald
Arts, Mark P
Koes, Bart W
Berg, Annette A van den
van Buchem, Mark A
Effectiveness of percutaneous laser disc decompression versus conventional open discectomy in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation; design of a prospective randomized controlled trial
title Effectiveness of percutaneous laser disc decompression versus conventional open discectomy in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation; design of a prospective randomized controlled trial
title_full Effectiveness of percutaneous laser disc decompression versus conventional open discectomy in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation; design of a prospective randomized controlled trial
title_fullStr Effectiveness of percutaneous laser disc decompression versus conventional open discectomy in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation; design of a prospective randomized controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Effectiveness of percutaneous laser disc decompression versus conventional open discectomy in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation; design of a prospective randomized controlled trial
title_short Effectiveness of percutaneous laser disc decompression versus conventional open discectomy in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation; design of a prospective randomized controlled trial
title_sort effectiveness of percutaneous laser disc decompression versus conventional open discectomy in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation; design of a prospective randomized controlled trial
topic Study Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2697136/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19439098
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-10-49
work_keys_str_mv AT brouwerpatricka effectivenessofpercutaneouslaserdiscdecompressionversusconventionalopendiscectomyinthetreatmentoflumbardischerniationdesignofaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT peulwilcoc effectivenessofpercutaneouslaserdiscdecompressionversusconventionalopendiscectomyinthetreatmentoflumbardischerniationdesignofaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT brandronald effectivenessofpercutaneouslaserdiscdecompressionversusconventionalopendiscectomyinthetreatmentoflumbardischerniationdesignofaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT artsmarkp effectivenessofpercutaneouslaserdiscdecompressionversusconventionalopendiscectomyinthetreatmentoflumbardischerniationdesignofaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT koesbartw effectivenessofpercutaneouslaserdiscdecompressionversusconventionalopendiscectomyinthetreatmentoflumbardischerniationdesignofaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT bergannetteavanden effectivenessofpercutaneouslaserdiscdecompressionversusconventionalopendiscectomyinthetreatmentoflumbardischerniationdesignofaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT vanbuchemmarka effectivenessofpercutaneouslaserdiscdecompressionversusconventionalopendiscectomyinthetreatmentoflumbardischerniationdesignofaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial