Cargando…
Microendoscopic discectomy for lumbar disc herniations
INTRODUCTION: Lumbar disc herniation is one of the main causes of discogenic low back pain and reported to affect 60%–80% of people during their lifetime. The two main surgical modalities for intervertebral disc surgery are standard open discectomy and minimally invasive discectomy which include per...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6187901/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30443133 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jcvjs.JCVJS_61_18 |
_version_ | 1783363111833567232 |
---|---|
author | Patil, Anil Chugh, Ashish Gotecha, Sarang Kotecha, Megha Punia, Prashant Ashok, Aditya Amle, Gaurav |
author_facet | Patil, Anil Chugh, Ashish Gotecha, Sarang Kotecha, Megha Punia, Prashant Ashok, Aditya Amle, Gaurav |
author_sort | Patil, Anil |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Lumbar disc herniation is one of the main causes of discogenic low back pain and reported to affect 60%–80% of people during their lifetime. The two main surgical modalities for intervertebral disc surgery are standard open discectomy and minimally invasive discectomy which include percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy and microendoscopic discectomy (MED). We report our experience with the same technique of MED to evaluate the efficacy of MED for lumbar disc pathology. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The aims and objectives were to study the efficacy, advantages, and associated limitations and complications of MED in lumbar disc herniations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was carried out on 300 patients who had single-level herniated disc. The procedure was done by Microscopic Endoscopic Tubular Retraction System. Preoperative assessment of Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and modified Suezawa and Schreiber (MSS) clinical scoring system was documented 1 day prior to surgery. Postoperative results were determined to be excellent, good, fair, or poor according to MacNab criteria and also evaluated by MSS clinical scoring system on postoperative day 7 and after 6 months. RESULTS: A total of 187 patients were males and 113 patients were females and a majority of patients were in the age group of 31–40 years. A total of 192 patients had disc herniations at L4–L5 level. The mean operative time was 82 min and the mean hospital stay was 5.3 days. Eighteen cases (6%) developed postoperative complications including discitis, dysesthesia, recurrent prolapsed intervertebral disc, residual disc, dural tear, and nerve root injury. Mean preoperative VAS score was 8.7 and the mean postoperative VAS scores at postoperative day 7 and at 6 months were 2.25 and 1.12, respectively. The mean preoperative MSS score was 3.27 and the MSS scores at postoperative day 7 and at 6 months were 7.42 and 8.2, respectively. The overall successful outcome of the endoscopic discectomy after 6-month follow-up on the basis of VAS improvement percentage was 87.6%, MSS scoring percentage was 91.6%, and MacNab scoring percentage was 92.67%. CONCLUSION: MED is a safe and effective technique. It offers decreased blood loss, shorter operative time, shorter in-hospital stay, decreased need for pain medication, decreased rate of infection, and a shorter return to work time. Limitations of this technique include a learning curve which is related to surgery time, complications, conversion to open procedures, and recurrent disc herniation. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6187901 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-61879012018-11-15 Microendoscopic discectomy for lumbar disc herniations Patil, Anil Chugh, Ashish Gotecha, Sarang Kotecha, Megha Punia, Prashant Ashok, Aditya Amle, Gaurav J Craniovertebr Junction Spine Original Article INTRODUCTION: Lumbar disc herniation is one of the main causes of discogenic low back pain and reported to affect 60%–80% of people during their lifetime. The two main surgical modalities for intervertebral disc surgery are standard open discectomy and minimally invasive discectomy which include percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy and microendoscopic discectomy (MED). We report our experience with the same technique of MED to evaluate the efficacy of MED for lumbar disc pathology. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The aims and objectives were to study the efficacy, advantages, and associated limitations and complications of MED in lumbar disc herniations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was carried out on 300 patients who had single-level herniated disc. The procedure was done by Microscopic Endoscopic Tubular Retraction System. Preoperative assessment of Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and modified Suezawa and Schreiber (MSS) clinical scoring system was documented 1 day prior to surgery. Postoperative results were determined to be excellent, good, fair, or poor according to MacNab criteria and also evaluated by MSS clinical scoring system on postoperative day 7 and after 6 months. RESULTS: A total of 187 patients were males and 113 patients were females and a majority of patients were in the age group of 31–40 years. A total of 192 patients had disc herniations at L4–L5 level. The mean operative time was 82 min and the mean hospital stay was 5.3 days. Eighteen cases (6%) developed postoperative complications including discitis, dysesthesia, recurrent prolapsed intervertebral disc, residual disc, dural tear, and nerve root injury. Mean preoperative VAS score was 8.7 and the mean postoperative VAS scores at postoperative day 7 and at 6 months were 2.25 and 1.12, respectively. The mean preoperative MSS score was 3.27 and the MSS scores at postoperative day 7 and at 6 months were 7.42 and 8.2, respectively. The overall successful outcome of the endoscopic discectomy after 6-month follow-up on the basis of VAS improvement percentage was 87.6%, MSS scoring percentage was 91.6%, and MacNab scoring percentage was 92.67%. CONCLUSION: MED is a safe and effective technique. It offers decreased blood loss, shorter operative time, shorter in-hospital stay, decreased need for pain medication, decreased rate of infection, and a shorter return to work time. Limitations of this technique include a learning curve which is related to surgery time, complications, conversion to open procedures, and recurrent disc herniation. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC6187901/ /pubmed/30443133 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jcvjs.JCVJS_61_18 Text en Copyright: © 2018 Journal of Craniovertebral Junction and Spine http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Patil, Anil Chugh, Ashish Gotecha, Sarang Kotecha, Megha Punia, Prashant Ashok, Aditya Amle, Gaurav Microendoscopic discectomy for lumbar disc herniations |
title | Microendoscopic discectomy for lumbar disc herniations |
title_full | Microendoscopic discectomy for lumbar disc herniations |
title_fullStr | Microendoscopic discectomy for lumbar disc herniations |
title_full_unstemmed | Microendoscopic discectomy for lumbar disc herniations |
title_short | Microendoscopic discectomy for lumbar disc herniations |
title_sort | microendoscopic discectomy for lumbar disc herniations |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6187901/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30443133 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jcvjs.JCVJS_61_18 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT patilanil microendoscopicdiscectomyforlumbardischerniations AT chughashish microendoscopicdiscectomyforlumbardischerniations AT gotechasarang microendoscopicdiscectomyforlumbardischerniations AT kotechamegha microendoscopicdiscectomyforlumbardischerniations AT puniaprashant microendoscopicdiscectomyforlumbardischerniations AT ashokaditya microendoscopicdiscectomyforlumbardischerniations AT amlegaurav microendoscopicdiscectomyforlumbardischerniations |