Minimally invasive lumbar discectomy and foraminotomy

The technological development of minimally invasive spine surgery

Minimally invasive spine surgery has its roots in the mid-twentieth century with a few surgeons and a few techniques, but it has now developed into a large field of progressive spinal surgery. A wide range of techniques are now called "minimally invasive," and case reports are submitted constantly with new "minimally invasive" approaches to spinal pathology. As minimally invasive spine surgery has become more mainstream over the past ten years, in this paper we discuss its history and development.

Clinical outcomes following sublaminar-trimming laminoplasty for extensive lumbar canal stenosis

PURPOSE

Current surgical approaches for treatment of lumbar canal stenosis are often associated with relatively high rates of reoperation and recurrent stenosis. We have developed a new approach for treatment of this condition: sublaminar-trimming laminoplasty. To describe the surgical approach of sublaminar-trimming laminoplasty and to assess associated outcomes.

METHODS

Patients with extensive lumbar canal stenosis who received sublaminar-trimming laminoplasty from 2006 to 2008 were considered for inclusion in the study. The surgery comprised aspects of laminotomy and laminectomy. The following were assessed before surgery and 3 years after surgery: leg and back pain by visual analog scale (VAS), extent of disability by Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), severity of back pain by Japanese Orthopedic Association Score for Back Pain (JOA), walking tolerance, and leg numbness. Complications were noted.

RESULTS

A total of 49 patients were included in the study (mean age 65.6 ± 10.6 years). VAS leg and back pain, ODI, and JOA scores significantly changed from before surgery to 3 years after surgery (P < 0.001). Mean changes (95 % confidence interval) were -6.2 (-6.7, -5.7), -4.3 (-4.8, -3.8), -21.4 (-23.4, -19.5), and 13.4 (12.1, 14.7) for leg pain, back pain, ODI, and JOA scores, respectively. Patients experienced significant improvements in walking tolerance and leg numbness (P < 0.001). There were no instances of recurrent stenosis or postoperative spinal instability. Complications included intraoperative dural tear (n = 2), postoperative urinary tract infection (n = 2), and inadequate decompression and junctional stenosis during follow-up (both n = 1).

CONCLUSION

Sublaminar-trimming laminoplasty shows promise as an effective treatment for extensive lumbar canal stenosis.

Complications of endoscopic microdiscectomy using the EASYGO! system: is there any difference with conventional discectomy during the learning-curve period?

BACKGROUND

Microendoscopic discectomy (MED) is emerging as a minimally invasive alternative to conventional microsurgical discectomy (MSD). EASYGO! is a new system for spinal endoscopy that claims smooth transition from MSD to MED, with a reduced learning curve period. The aims of this study were to describe the complications that appeared during the learning curve period of MED and to compare their incidence with the rate and type of complications that occurred during a simultaneous non-randomised series of standard MSDs.

METHODS

Between July 2009 and December 2010, 138 patients underwent scheduled first-time discectomy in our institution, 37 using an MED approach and 101 by a conventional MSD. A MED learning curve was obtained by plotting every case with its respective operative time. Complications, length of hospital stay, need of further surgery and outcome were prospectively recorded in both groups.

RESULTS

The mean operative time was 66 min for the MSD group and 100 min for the MED group, although for the last 14 cases of the latter group the time was reduced. Curve-fitting techniques showed that the inverse equation, ƒ(x) = 122.12/x + 73.05, had the best correlation between case number and operative time. The learning curve was overcome after the 30th case. Complications occurred in 9.8 % of the MSD group and 8.1 % of the MED group (P = 0.49). Average length of hospital stay was 2.36 days for the MED group and 3.36 days for the MSD group (P = 0.01). The procedure successfully relieved patient symptoms in 68.63 % of the MSD group and 89.92 % of the MED group. No revision surgery was required in the MED group, but it was necessary in ten patients of the MSD group.

CONCLUSIONS

Between 25 and 30 cases are needed to reach the learning curve's asymptote of MED. Even during this initial learning period MED is a safe procedure, with comparable results to those obtained with conventional MSD and with a similar complication rate. The key points for reducing intraoperative complications are an adequate expertise in MSD, a precise selection of initial cases, a proper surgical planning and a careful technique, which are mandatory to avoid unnecessary neurological injury in an otherwise secure surgical approach.