Cargando…

Comparing the Incidence of Index Level Fusion Following Minimally Invasive Versus Open Lumbar Microdiscectomy

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES: To determine the incidence of index level fusion following open or minimally invasive lumbar microdiscectomy. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of 174 patients with a symptomatic single-level lumbar herniated nucleus pulposus who under...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: McAnany, Steven J., Overley, Samuel C., Anwar, Muhammad A., Cutler, Holt S., Guzman, Javier Z., Kim, Jun S., Merrill, Robert K., Cho, Samuel K., Hecht, Andrew C., Qureshi, Sheeraz A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5810896/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29456910
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568217718818
_version_ 1783299785686515712
author McAnany, Steven J.
Overley, Samuel C.
Anwar, Muhammad A.
Cutler, Holt S.
Guzman, Javier Z.
Kim, Jun S.
Merrill, Robert K.
Cho, Samuel K.
Hecht, Andrew C.
Qureshi, Sheeraz A.
author_facet McAnany, Steven J.
Overley, Samuel C.
Anwar, Muhammad A.
Cutler, Holt S.
Guzman, Javier Z.
Kim, Jun S.
Merrill, Robert K.
Cho, Samuel K.
Hecht, Andrew C.
Qureshi, Sheeraz A.
author_sort McAnany, Steven J.
collection PubMed
description STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES: To determine the incidence of index level fusion following open or minimally invasive lumbar microdiscectomy. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of 174 patients with a symptomatic single-level lumbar herniated nucleus pulposus who underwent microdiscectomy via a mini-open approach (MIS; 39) or through a minimally invasive dilator tube (135). Outcomes of interest included revision microdiscectomy and the ultimate need for index level fusion. Continuous variables were analyzed with independent sample t test, and χ(2) analysis was used for categorical data. A multivariate regression analysis was performed to identify predictive factors for patients that required index level fusion after lumbar microdiscectomy. RESULTS: There was no difference in patient demographics in the open and MIS groups aside from length of follow-up (60.4 vs 40.03 months, P < .0001) and body mass index (24.72 vs 27.21, P = .03). The rate of revision microdiscectomy was not statistically significant between open and MIS approaches (10.3% vs 10.4%, P = .90). The rate of patients who ultimately required index level fusion approached significance, but was not statistically different between open and MIS approaches (10.3% vs 4.4%, P = .17). Multivariate regression analysis indicated that the need for eventual index level fusion after lumbar microdiscectomy was statistically predicted in smokers and those patients who underwent revision microdiscectomy (P < .05) in both open and MIS groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest a low likelihood of patients ultimately requiring fusion following microdiscectomy with predictors including smoking status and a history of revision microdiscectomy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5810896
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58108962018-02-16 Comparing the Incidence of Index Level Fusion Following Minimally Invasive Versus Open Lumbar Microdiscectomy McAnany, Steven J. Overley, Samuel C. Anwar, Muhammad A. Cutler, Holt S. Guzman, Javier Z. Kim, Jun S. Merrill, Robert K. Cho, Samuel K. Hecht, Andrew C. Qureshi, Sheeraz A. Global Spine J Original Articles STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES: To determine the incidence of index level fusion following open or minimally invasive lumbar microdiscectomy. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of 174 patients with a symptomatic single-level lumbar herniated nucleus pulposus who underwent microdiscectomy via a mini-open approach (MIS; 39) or through a minimally invasive dilator tube (135). Outcomes of interest included revision microdiscectomy and the ultimate need for index level fusion. Continuous variables were analyzed with independent sample t test, and χ(2) analysis was used for categorical data. A multivariate regression analysis was performed to identify predictive factors for patients that required index level fusion after lumbar microdiscectomy. RESULTS: There was no difference in patient demographics in the open and MIS groups aside from length of follow-up (60.4 vs 40.03 months, P < .0001) and body mass index (24.72 vs 27.21, P = .03). The rate of revision microdiscectomy was not statistically significant between open and MIS approaches (10.3% vs 10.4%, P = .90). The rate of patients who ultimately required index level fusion approached significance, but was not statistically different between open and MIS approaches (10.3% vs 4.4%, P = .17). Multivariate regression analysis indicated that the need for eventual index level fusion after lumbar microdiscectomy was statistically predicted in smokers and those patients who underwent revision microdiscectomy (P < .05) in both open and MIS groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest a low likelihood of patients ultimately requiring fusion following microdiscectomy with predictors including smoking status and a history of revision microdiscectomy. SAGE Publications 2017-09-22 2018-02 /pmc/articles/PMC5810896/ /pubmed/29456910 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568217718818 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Original Articles
McAnany, Steven J.
Overley, Samuel C.
Anwar, Muhammad A.
Cutler, Holt S.
Guzman, Javier Z.
Kim, Jun S.
Merrill, Robert K.
Cho, Samuel K.
Hecht, Andrew C.
Qureshi, Sheeraz A.
Comparing the Incidence of Index Level Fusion Following Minimally Invasive Versus Open Lumbar Microdiscectomy
title Comparing the Incidence of Index Level Fusion Following Minimally Invasive Versus Open Lumbar Microdiscectomy
title_full Comparing the Incidence of Index Level Fusion Following Minimally Invasive Versus Open Lumbar Microdiscectomy
title_fullStr Comparing the Incidence of Index Level Fusion Following Minimally Invasive Versus Open Lumbar Microdiscectomy
title_full_unstemmed Comparing the Incidence of Index Level Fusion Following Minimally Invasive Versus Open Lumbar Microdiscectomy
title_short Comparing the Incidence of Index Level Fusion Following Minimally Invasive Versus Open Lumbar Microdiscectomy
title_sort comparing the incidence of index level fusion following minimally invasive versus open lumbar microdiscectomy
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5810896/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29456910
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568217718818
work_keys_str_mv AT mcananystevenj comparingtheincidenceofindexlevelfusionfollowingminimallyinvasiveversusopenlumbarmicrodiscectomy
AT overleysamuelc comparingtheincidenceofindexlevelfusionfollowingminimallyinvasiveversusopenlumbarmicrodiscectomy
AT anwarmuhammada comparingtheincidenceofindexlevelfusionfollowingminimallyinvasiveversusopenlumbarmicrodiscectomy
AT cutlerholts comparingtheincidenceofindexlevelfusionfollowingminimallyinvasiveversusopenlumbarmicrodiscectomy
AT guzmanjavierz comparingtheincidenceofindexlevelfusionfollowingminimallyinvasiveversusopenlumbarmicrodiscectomy
AT kimjuns comparingtheincidenceofindexlevelfusionfollowingminimallyinvasiveversusopenlumbarmicrodiscectomy
AT merrillrobertk comparingtheincidenceofindexlevelfusionfollowingminimallyinvasiveversusopenlumbarmicrodiscectomy
AT chosamuelk comparingtheincidenceofindexlevelfusionfollowingminimallyinvasiveversusopenlumbarmicrodiscectomy
AT hechtandrewc comparingtheincidenceofindexlevelfusionfollowingminimallyinvasiveversusopenlumbarmicrodiscectomy
AT qureshisheeraza comparingtheincidenceofindexlevelfusionfollowingminimallyinvasiveversusopenlumbarmicrodiscectomy