Lateral transmuscular or combined interlaminar/paraisthmic approach to lateral lumbar disc herniation? A comparative clinical series of 48 patients

Long-term follow-up results of surgically treated patients with foraminal and far lateral disc herniations

PURPOSE

Foraminal and far lateral disc herniations are rarer cause of nerve root compression. There are reports regarding the outcome, however long-term follow-up results of surgically treated patients are few. The purpose of this retrospective study is to analyze the clinical characteristics and long-term surgical outcomes of the foraminal and far lateral disc herniations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The 114 patients who underwent an operation for foraminal and far lateral disc herniaitions were reviewed. Visual analogue scale of back and leg pain, the ocurrence of motor deficit and sensory dysesthesia before and after operations were used to compare the results of early and long-term outcome.

RESULTS

A total of 114 telephone interviews were conducted. The mean follow up was 134 months. Complete relief of symptoms were reported by 77 patients (67.1%). The average VAS of radicular leg pain was 7.5 Post-operatively the average VAS of radicular pain decreased to 2.2. Preoperatively, 9 patients (7.6%) had motor deficit and 17 (14.4%) patients had sensory dysesthesia. Post-operatively 9 (100%) of the patients showed motor, and 12 (70.6%) of the patients showed sensory improvement. In 17 patients with hypoesthesia the complaints continued during 2 weeks to 6 months. They were given gabapentin as medical treatment, however 5 of these patients still have sensory dysesthesia. The outcome was: 67.1% excellent (77 patients), 26.3% good (30 patients), 6.1% fair (7 patients).

CONCLUSION

The far lateral approach is a minimally invasive and safe procedure with low complication rates.

Ultrasound Lancet-aided Translaminar Posterior Lumbar Approach to the Recesso-Foraminal Area: Technical Note

Extrusion and sequestration of the nucleus pulposus involving the spinal canal or the foramina/recesses complicates up to 28% of the lumbar disc herniations. The transpars/translaminar anatomical approach is well described and its advantages when handling with a lateral, foraminal extruded disc herniation are appreciated and recognized. Nevertheless, this approach presents several pitfalls such as the risk of disconnecting the pars interarticularis, which may cause segmental instability. This particular eventuality is because of the particular anatomical conformation of the pars interarticularis. Although already part of the modern surgical armamentarium for general, orthopedic, cranial and spinal surgeons, the use of the ultrasonic scalpel technique for such approach has never been discussed to date, to the best of our knowledge. The purpose of the present paper is therefore to introduce and describe the stepwise technique along with an extensive discussion of the facilitating role of the ultrasonic scalpel in the translaminar/transpars approach in the management of extruded disc herniation of the lumbar spine.

Surgical treatment of intraforaminal/extraforaminal lumbar disc herniations: Many approaches for few surgical routes

BACKGROUND

Several disc disease nomenclatures and approaches for LDH exist. The traditional midline bone-destructive procedures together with approaches requiring extreme muscular retraction are being replaced by muscle sparing, targeted, stability-preserving surgical routes. The increasing speculation on LDHs and the innovative corridors described to treat them have lead to an extensive production of papers frequently treating the same topic but adopting different terminologies and reporting contradictory results.

METHODS

The review of such literature somehow confounding gave us the chance to regroup by surgical corridors the vast amount of approaches for LDH differently renamed over time. Likewise, LDHs were simplified in intra-foraminal (ILDH), extra-foraminal (ELDH), and intra-/extra-foraminal (IELDH) in relation to precise anatomical boundaries and extent of bulging disc.

RESULTS

Through the analysis of the papers, it was possible to identify ideal surgical corridors for ILDHs, ELDHs, and IELDHs, distinguishing for each approach the exposure provided and the technical advantages/disadvantages in terms of muscle trauma, biomechanical stability, and nerve root preservation. A significant disproportion was noted between studies discussing traditional midline approaches or variants of the posterolateral route and those investigating pros and cons of simple or combined alternative corridors. Although rarely discussed, these latter represent valuable strategies particularly for the challenging IELDHs, thanks to the optimal compromise between herniation exposure and bone-muscle preservation.

CONCLUSIONS

The integration of adequate mastery of traditional approaches together with a greater confidence through unfamiliar surgical corridors can improve the development of combined mini-invasive procedures, which seem promising for future targeted LDH excisions.

The surgery and early postoperative radicular pain in cases with multifocal lumbar disc herniation

Persistence of postoperative radicular pain after surgery for multifocal disc herniation (MFDH) is a clinical problem. This study aims to evaluate the effects of a combined treatment approach compared with unilateral stabilization on early postoperative radicular pain in patients with MFDH.Age, sex, level of operation, clinical findings, and radicular pain visual analogue scale (VAS) scores before surgery in the early postoperative period and at 3 months after surgery were retrospectively reviewed for 20 cases of multifocal lumbar disc herniation. The combined approach (translaminar and far lateral) was used for 13 cases. Seven cases underwent transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and unilateral transpedicular stabilization following total facetectomy.The mean age of the sample was 49.4 ± 10.1 years and the female-to-male ratio was 8:12. The mean VAS scores for radicular pain in cases treated with the combined approach were 8.2, 4.07, and 2.3 in the preoperative and early postoperative periods and 3 months after surgery, respectively. The mean score for radicular pain improved by 50.4% in the early postoperative period and by 72% in the late postoperative period. The mean VAS scores for radicular pain in cases who underwent TLIF and unilateral stabilization after facetectomy were 8.4, 2.1, and 1.4 in the preoperative and early postoperative periods and 3 months after surgery, respectively. The mean VAS score for radicular pain improved by 75% in the early postoperative period and by 83.3% in the late postoperative period.The combined approach is an effective alternative in cases with MFDH. TLIF and unilateral segmental stabilization provide substantial decompression and eliminate mechanical compression by conserving the height of the intervertebral foramen in the event that sufficient decompression is unable to obtain. We suggest that elimination of chemical mediators, particularly those causing pain in the dorsal ganglion, contributes to the absence of early radicular pain.

Postoperative Clinical Outcome and Risk Factors for Poor Outcome of Foraminal and Extraforaminal Lumbar Disc Herniation

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated postoperative outcomes in patients who have lumbar foraminal or extraforaminal disc herniation (FELDH) and suggested the risk factors for poor outcomes.

METHODS

A total of 234 patients were selected for this study. Pre- and post-operative Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Korean version Oswestry Disability Index (KODI) were evaluated and the changes of both score were calculated. Outcome was defined as excellent, good, fair, and poor based on Mcnab classification. The percentage of superior facetectomy was calculated by using the Maro-view 5.4 Picture Archiving Communication System (PACS).

RESULTS

Paramedian lumbar discectomy was performed in 180 patients and combined lumbar discectomy was performed in 54 patients. Paramedian lumbar discectomy group showed better outcome compared with combined discectomy group. p value of VAS change was 0.009 and KODI was 0.013. The average percentage of superior facetectomy was 33% (range, 0-79%) and it showed negative correlation with VAS and KODI changes (Pearson coefficient : -0.446 and -0.498, respectively). Excellent or good outcome cases (Group I) were 136 (58.1%) and fair or poor outcome cases (Group II) were 98 (41.9%). The percentage of superior facetectomy was 26.5% at Group I and 42.5% at Group II. There was significant difference in superior facetectomy percentage between Group I and II (p=0.000).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that paramedian lumbar discectomy with preservation of facet joints is an effective and good procedure for FELDH. At least 60% of facet should be preserved for excellent or good outcomes.

An evidence-based clinical guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of lumbar disc herniation with radiculopathy

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The objective of the North American Spine Society's (NASS) Evidence-Based Clinical Guideline for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Lumbar Disc Herniation with Radiculopathy is to provide evidence-based recommendations to address key clinical questions surrounding the diagnosis and treatment of lumbar disc herniation with radiculopathy. The guideline is intended to reflect contemporary treatment concepts for symptomatic lumbar disc herniation with radiculopathy as reflected in the highest quality clinical literature available on this subject as of July 2011. The goals of the guideline recommendations are to assist in delivering optimum efficacious treatment and functional recovery from this spinal disorder.

PURPOSE

To provide an evidence-based educational tool to assist spine specialists in the diagnosis and treatment of lumbar disc herniation with radiculopathy.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and evidence-based clinical guideline.

METHODS

This guideline is a product of the Lumbar Disc Herniation with Radiculopathy Work Group of NASS' Evidence-Based Guideline Development Committee. The work group consisted of multidisciplinary spine care specialists trained in the principles of evidence-based analysis. A literature search addressing each question and using a specific search protocol was performed on English-language references found in Medline, Embase (Drugs and Pharmacology), and four additional evidence-based databases to identify articles. The relevant literature was then independently rated using the NASS-adopted standardized levels of evidence. An evidentiary table was created for each of the questions. Final recommendations to answer each clinical question were developed via work group discussion, and grades were assigned to the recommendations using standardized grades of recommendation. In the absence of Level I to IV evidence, work group consensus statements have been developed using a modified nominal group technique, and these statements are clearly identified as such in the guideline.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine clinical questions were formulated and addressed, and the answers are summarized in this article. The respective recommendations were graded by strength of the supporting literature, which was stratified by levels of evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical guideline has been created using the techniques of evidence-based medicine and best available evidence to aid practitioners in the care of patients with symptomatic lumbar disc herniation with radiculopathy. The entire guideline document, including the evidentiary tables, suggestions for future research, and all the references, is available electronically on the NASS Web site at http://www.spine.org/Pages/PracticePolicy/ClinicalCare/ClinicalGuidlines/Default.aspx and will remain updated on a timely schedule.

The efficacy of minimally invasive discectomy compared with open discectomy: a meta-analysis of prospective randomized controlled trials

OBJECT

Advocates of minimally invasive discectomy (MID) have promoted this operation as an alternative to open discectomy (OD), arguing that there may be less injury to the paraspinal muscles, decreased postoperative pain, and a faster recovery time. However, a recently published large randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing these approaches reported inferior relief of leg pain in patients undergoing MID. The authors conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate complications and improvement in leg pain in patients with radiculopathy enrolled in RCTs comparing OD to MID.

METHODS

The authors performed a literature search using Medline and EMBASE of studies indexed between January 1990 and January 2011. Predetermined RCT eligibility included the usage of tubular retractors during MID, a minimum follow-up duration of 1 year, and quantification of pain with the visual analog scale (VAS). Trials that only evaluated patients with recurrent disc herniation were excluded. Data on operative parameters, complications, and VAS scores of leg pain were extracted by 2 investigators. A meta-analysis was performed assuming random effects to determine the difference in mean change for continuous outcomes and the risk ratio for binary outcomes.

RESULTS

Six trials comprising 837 patients (of whom 388 were randomized to MID and 449 were randomized to OD) were included. The mean operative time was 49 minutes during MID and 44 minutes during OD; this difference was not statistically significant. Incidental durotomies occurred significantly more frequently during MID (5.67% compared with 2.90% for OD; RR 2.05, 95% CI 1.05-3.98). Intraoperative complications (incidental durotomies and nerve root injuries) were also significantly more common in patients undergoing MID (RR 2.01, 95% CI 1.07-3.77). The mean preoperative VAS score for leg pain was 6.9 in patients randomized to MID and 7.2 in those randomized to OD. With long-term follow-up (1-2 years postoperatively), the mean VAS score improved to 1.6 in both the MID and OD cohorts. There was no significant difference in relief of leg pain between the 2 approaches with either short-term follow-up (2-3 months postoperatively, 0.81 points on the VAS, 95% CI -4.71 to 6.32) or long-term follow-up (2.64 on the VAS, 95% CI -2.15 to 7.43). Reoperation for recurrent herniation was more common in patients randomized to the MID group (8.50% compared with 5.35% in patients randomized to the OD group), but this difference was not statistically significant (RR 1.56, 95% CI 0.92-2.66). Total complications did not differ significantly between the operations (RR 1.50, 95% CI 0.97-2.33).

CONCLUSIONS

The current evidence suggests that both OD and MID lead to a substantial and equivalent long-term improvement in leg pain. Adequate decompression, regardless of the operative approach used, may be the primary determinant of pain relief-the major complaint of many patients with radiculopathy. Incidental durotomies occurred significantly more frequently during MID, but total complications did not differ between the techniques.

Ultra-long-term outcome of surgically treated far-lateral, extraforaminal lumbar disc herniations: a single-center series

PURPOSE

Far-lateral extraforaminal lumbar disc herniation is an uncommon cause of nerve root entrapment, and studies addressing the long-term outcome of surgically treated patients are few. The purpose of this study was to analyze the ultra-long-term outcome of patients who were treated via a lateral approach.

METHODS

The medical reports of 138 consecutive patients were analyzed with regard to signs and symptoms, operative findings, complications, and short-term outcome (6 weeks). To assess long-term results, standardized telephone interviews were performed using a structured questionnaire. The patients were questioned about pain using the verbal rating scale and persisting symptoms, if any. Other queries were related to the Oswestry Disability Index. Subjective satisfaction with the result of surgery was classified as excellent (no pain), good (some pain), fair (moderate pain), and poor (unchanged or worse) based on MacNab classification.

RESULTS

At short-term follow-up, major and moderate leg pain had decreased from 99.3 to 5.1% and low back pain from 97.8 to 2.8%. Sensory and motor deficits, however, were still present in the majority of patients. A total of 87 telephone interviews were conducted, and the mean follow-up was 146 months. As many as 49 patients (56.3%) reported complete relief of symptoms, 14 patients (16.1%) had minor ailments under physical stress, and 24 patients (27.6%) had permanent residual symptoms. The most common complaint was remaining sensory disturbance. Despite residual symptoms, the vast majority of patients expressed satisfaction with the result of surgery. The outcome was subjectively rated as follows: 75.9% excellent (66 patients), 18.4% good (16 patients), 4.6% fair (4 patients), and 1.1% poor (1 patient).

CONCLUSIONS

The lateral approach is a minimally invasive and safe procedure with low complication rates. The profit from surgery is maintained beyond the usual postoperative observation periods. Thus, ultimate outcome at ultra-long-term follow-up is very gratifying in the vast majority of patients.

Avaliação da relação entre parâmetros antropométricos (peso e altura) e a topografia da raiz de L4 no espaço intertransversário L4-L5 através do acesso paramediano à coluna vertebral- Um estudo anatômico em vinte e um cadáveres

As hérnias discais extremolaterais correspondem a 10% das hérnias discais sintomáticas, mais comumente localizadas nos níveis L3-L4 e L4-L5. Por muitos anos, a abordagem cirúrgica das hérnias lombares foraminais e extraforaminais foi feita através de via de acesso posterior mediana com hemilaminectomia e facetectomia total ou parcial. A abordagem cirúrgica dessa patologia pela via paramediana, entre os músculos multífido e longuíssimo (via de Wiltse), tem a vantagem de poupar o paciente de perdas ósseas e permitir uma visão mais oblíqua do neuro-foramen. Essa abordagem permite, com mínima mobilização da raiz de L4, acesso ao disco L4-L5 e eventuais herniações extra-foraminais do mesmo. Nosso objetivo é avaliar se há relação entre características antropométricas de um indivíduo e a localização da raiz de L4 no espaço intertransversário, acessado pela via de Wiltse, para com isso poder antecipar alguns riscos cirúrgicos. Foram realizadas dissecções em 21 cadáveres (42 lados) e obtidas as respectivas medidas de peso e altura além da distância entre a base do processo transverso de L5 e o ponto onde a raiz de L4 o cruza. A análise dos dados nos permite concluir que não há relação estatisticamente significativa entre as variáveis envolvidas.

Mapeamento do trajeto extraforaminal da raiz L4 no espaço intertransversário L4-L5 através do acesso paramediano à coluna vertebral

As hérnias discais extremolaterais correspondem a 10% das hérnias discais sintomáticas, mais comumente localizadas nos níveis L3-L4 e L4-L5. Por muitos anos, a abordagem cirúrgica das hérnias lombares foraminais e extraforaminais foi feita através de via de acesso posterior mediana com hemilaminectomia e facetectomia total ou parcial. Inúmeras foram as variações propostas para essa técnica a fim de se evitar a facetectomia e suas repercussões biomecânicas, que ocasionavam com certa freqüência o surgimento de dor lombar baixa devido à instabilidade vertebral criada. A abordagem cirúrgica dessa patologia pela via paramediana, entre os músculos multífido e longuíssimo (via de Wiltse), tem a vantagem de poupar o paciente de perdas ósseas e permitir uma visão mais oblíqua do neuro-foramen. Essa abordagem permite, com mínima mobilização da raiz de L4, acesso ao disco L4-L5 e eventuais herniações extra-foraminais do mesmo. Nosso objetivo é apresentar um estudo do trajeto extra-foraminal da raiz de L4 no espaço intertransversário L4-L5. Para isso, foram realizadas dissecções em 10 cadáveres (20 lados) e obtidas as medidas baseadas em 6 parâmetros anatômicos. A análise dos dados nos permite concluir que as hérnias discais extremo-laterais no nível L4-L5 podem ser acessadas com relativa segurança através da via paramediana.