Cargando…

Full endoscopic versus open discectomy for sciatica: randomised controlled non-inferiority trial

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) is non-inferior to conventional open microdiscectomy in reduction of leg pain caused by lumbar disc herniation. DESIGN: Multicentre randomised controlled trial with non-inferiority design. SETTING: Four hospitals i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gadjradj, Pravesh S, Rubinstein, Sidney M, Peul, Wilco C, Depauw, Paul R, Vleggeert-Lankamp, Carmen L, Seiger, Ankie, van Susante, Job LC, de Boer, Michiel R, van Tulder, Maurits W, Harhangi, Biswadjiet S
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8859734/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35190388
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2021-065846
_version_ 1784654528549748736
author Gadjradj, Pravesh S
Rubinstein, Sidney M
Peul, Wilco C
Depauw, Paul R
Vleggeert-Lankamp, Carmen L
Seiger, Ankie
van Susante, Job LC
de Boer, Michiel R
van Tulder, Maurits W
Harhangi, Biswadjiet S
author_facet Gadjradj, Pravesh S
Rubinstein, Sidney M
Peul, Wilco C
Depauw, Paul R
Vleggeert-Lankamp, Carmen L
Seiger, Ankie
van Susante, Job LC
de Boer, Michiel R
van Tulder, Maurits W
Harhangi, Biswadjiet S
author_sort Gadjradj, Pravesh S
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To assess whether percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) is non-inferior to conventional open microdiscectomy in reduction of leg pain caused by lumbar disc herniation. DESIGN: Multicentre randomised controlled trial with non-inferiority design. SETTING: Four hospitals in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: 613 patients aged 18-70 years with at least six weeks of radiating leg pain caused by lumbar disc herniation. The trial included a predetermined set of 125 patients receiving PTED who were the learning curve cases performed by surgeons who did not do PTED before the trial. INTERVENTIONS: PTED (n=179) compared with open microdiscectomy (n=309). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was self-reported leg pain measured by a 0-100 visual analogue scale at 12 months, assuming a non-inferiority margin of 5.0. Secondary outcomes included complications, reoperations, self-reported functional status as measured with the Oswestry Disability Index, visual analogue scale for back pain, health related quality of life, and self-perceived recovery. Outcomes were measured until one year after surgery and were longitudinally analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Patients belonging to the PTED learning curve were omitted from the primary analyses. RESULTS: At 12 months, patients who were randomised to PTED had a statistically significantly lower visual analogue scale score for leg pain (median 7.0, interquartile range 1.0-30.0) compared with patients randomised to open microdiscectomy (16.0, 2.0-53.5) (between group difference of 7.1, 95% confidence interval 2.8 to 11.3). Blood loss was less, length of hospital admission was shorter, and timing of postoperative mobilisation was earlier in the PTED group than in the open microdiscectomy group. Secondary patient reported outcomes such as the Oswestry Disability Index, visual analogue scale for back pain, health related quality of life, and self-perceived recovery, were similarly in favour of PTED. Within one year, nine (5%) in the PTED group compared with 14 (6%) in the open microdiscectomy group had repeated surgery. Per protocol analysis and sensitivity analyses including the patients of the learning curve resulted in similar outcomes to the primary analysis. CONCLUSIONS: PTED was non-inferior to open microdiscectomy in reduction of leg pain. PTED resulted in more favourable results for self-reported leg pain, back pain, functional status, quality of life, and recovery. These differences, however, were small and may not reach clinical relevance. PTED can be considered as an effective alternative to open microdiscectomy in treating sciatica. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02602093ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02602093.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8859734
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88597342022-03-22 Full endoscopic versus open discectomy for sciatica: randomised controlled non-inferiority trial Gadjradj, Pravesh S Rubinstein, Sidney M Peul, Wilco C Depauw, Paul R Vleggeert-Lankamp, Carmen L Seiger, Ankie van Susante, Job LC de Boer, Michiel R van Tulder, Maurits W Harhangi, Biswadjiet S BMJ Research OBJECTIVE: To assess whether percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) is non-inferior to conventional open microdiscectomy in reduction of leg pain caused by lumbar disc herniation. DESIGN: Multicentre randomised controlled trial with non-inferiority design. SETTING: Four hospitals in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: 613 patients aged 18-70 years with at least six weeks of radiating leg pain caused by lumbar disc herniation. The trial included a predetermined set of 125 patients receiving PTED who were the learning curve cases performed by surgeons who did not do PTED before the trial. INTERVENTIONS: PTED (n=179) compared with open microdiscectomy (n=309). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was self-reported leg pain measured by a 0-100 visual analogue scale at 12 months, assuming a non-inferiority margin of 5.0. Secondary outcomes included complications, reoperations, self-reported functional status as measured with the Oswestry Disability Index, visual analogue scale for back pain, health related quality of life, and self-perceived recovery. Outcomes were measured until one year after surgery and were longitudinally analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Patients belonging to the PTED learning curve were omitted from the primary analyses. RESULTS: At 12 months, patients who were randomised to PTED had a statistically significantly lower visual analogue scale score for leg pain (median 7.0, interquartile range 1.0-30.0) compared with patients randomised to open microdiscectomy (16.0, 2.0-53.5) (between group difference of 7.1, 95% confidence interval 2.8 to 11.3). Blood loss was less, length of hospital admission was shorter, and timing of postoperative mobilisation was earlier in the PTED group than in the open microdiscectomy group. Secondary patient reported outcomes such as the Oswestry Disability Index, visual analogue scale for back pain, health related quality of life, and self-perceived recovery, were similarly in favour of PTED. Within one year, nine (5%) in the PTED group compared with 14 (6%) in the open microdiscectomy group had repeated surgery. Per protocol analysis and sensitivity analyses including the patients of the learning curve resulted in similar outcomes to the primary analysis. CONCLUSIONS: PTED was non-inferior to open microdiscectomy in reduction of leg pain. PTED resulted in more favourable results for self-reported leg pain, back pain, functional status, quality of life, and recovery. These differences, however, were small and may not reach clinical relevance. PTED can be considered as an effective alternative to open microdiscectomy in treating sciatica. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02602093ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02602093. BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. 2022-02-21 /pmc/articles/PMC8859734/ /pubmed/35190388 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2021-065846 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Research
Gadjradj, Pravesh S
Rubinstein, Sidney M
Peul, Wilco C
Depauw, Paul R
Vleggeert-Lankamp, Carmen L
Seiger, Ankie
van Susante, Job LC
de Boer, Michiel R
van Tulder, Maurits W
Harhangi, Biswadjiet S
Full endoscopic versus open discectomy for sciatica: randomised controlled non-inferiority trial
title Full endoscopic versus open discectomy for sciatica: randomised controlled non-inferiority trial
title_full Full endoscopic versus open discectomy for sciatica: randomised controlled non-inferiority trial
title_fullStr Full endoscopic versus open discectomy for sciatica: randomised controlled non-inferiority trial
title_full_unstemmed Full endoscopic versus open discectomy for sciatica: randomised controlled non-inferiority trial
title_short Full endoscopic versus open discectomy for sciatica: randomised controlled non-inferiority trial
title_sort full endoscopic versus open discectomy for sciatica: randomised controlled non-inferiority trial
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8859734/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35190388
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2021-065846
work_keys_str_mv AT gadjradjpraveshs fullendoscopicversusopendiscectomyforsciaticarandomisedcontrollednoninferioritytrial
AT rubinsteinsidneym fullendoscopicversusopendiscectomyforsciaticarandomisedcontrollednoninferioritytrial
AT peulwilcoc fullendoscopicversusopendiscectomyforsciaticarandomisedcontrollednoninferioritytrial
AT depauwpaulr fullendoscopicversusopendiscectomyforsciaticarandomisedcontrollednoninferioritytrial
AT vleggeertlankampcarmenl fullendoscopicversusopendiscectomyforsciaticarandomisedcontrollednoninferioritytrial
AT seigerankie fullendoscopicversusopendiscectomyforsciaticarandomisedcontrollednoninferioritytrial
AT vansusantejoblc fullendoscopicversusopendiscectomyforsciaticarandomisedcontrollednoninferioritytrial
AT deboermichielr fullendoscopicversusopendiscectomyforsciaticarandomisedcontrollednoninferioritytrial
AT vantuldermauritsw fullendoscopicversusopendiscectomyforsciaticarandomisedcontrollednoninferioritytrial
AT harhangibiswadjiets fullendoscopicversusopendiscectomyforsciaticarandomisedcontrollednoninferioritytrial