The Management of Symptomatic Lumbar Disc Herniation in Pregnancy: A Systematic Review

Lumbar disk herniation in pregnancy: its incidence, presentation and management: a systematic review

Background

Back pain in pregnancy is common, but pain from lumbar disk herniations in pregnancy is rare. This systematic review aims to comprehensively analyse literature on lumbar disk herniation in pregnancy, focusing on risk factors, incidence, clinical presentation, and management.

Methods

We conducted a literature review using PubMed and Web of Science databases, including studies from January 1, 1950, to August 1, 2023. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklist for cohort studies and the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for case-control studies were utilised to assess risk of bias. The review protocol was not previously published.

Results

A total of 41 studies were reviewed, with 6 addressing incidence and risk factors and 35 focusing on clinical presentation and management. Symptomatic lumbar disk herniation during pregnancy was found to be uncommon, with no significant predisposition noted during pregnancy as per magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings. However, patients with MRI-detected herniations were more likely to report back pain. Non-surgical management resulted in higher rates of complete symptom resolution (69% vs. 50%) and lower rates of cesarean section (57% vs. 70%) compared to surgical management. Among surgically treated patients, microdiscectomy showed higher symptom resolution (59%) compared to laminectomy (17%) or a combined approach (33%).

Conclusions

While pregnancy does not inherently increase the risk of herniated lumbar disks, the presence of a prolapsed disk can predispose to back pain during pregnancy. There is poor quality evidence that should be interpreted cautiously. Non-surgical management, in the absence of red-flag symptoms including bowel and bladder dysfunction may be trialled and yield comparatively better symptom resolution. Additionally, surgical management if necessitated has no clear link to pregnancy complications within the scope of this study.

Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal of Cauda Equina Syndrome Management During Pregnancy

Cauda equina during pregnancy represents a rare entity, with data regarding optimal treatment being very scarce in the pertinent literature. Given the scarcity of current evidence on the topic, this study conducts a systematic review and analysis of existing literature concerning cauda equina syndrome (CES) management in pregnant women. A comprehensive search was performed across multiple databases, yielding 26 level IV peer-reviewed articles that met the inclusion criteria. These studies collectively encompassed 30 pregnant patients with CES, with a mean age of 31.2 years and an average gestational age of 26 weeks. Disc herniation emerged as the primary cause in 73% of cases. Regarding surgical interventions, the prone position was utilised in 70% of cases, with 73% receiving general anaesthesia. Notably, third-trimester spinal surgeries exhibited a higher complete recovery rate compared to earlier trimesters. Minimally invasive spinal surgery demonstrated superior outcomes in terms of complete recovery and reduced risk of persistent post-operative symptoms when compared to open approaches. Moreover, patients undergoing caesarean section (CS) after spinal surgery reported higher rates of symptom resolution and lower symptom persistence compared to those with CS before spinal surgery or vaginal delivery post-spinal surgery. Despite these study's findings, the overall evidence base remains limited, precluding definitive conclusions. Consequently, the study underscores the importance of multidisciplinary team discussions to formulate optimal treatment strategies for pregnant individuals presenting with CES. This highlights a critical need for further research to expand the knowledge base and improve the guidance available for managing CES in pregnant populations.

Incidence of lumbar discectomy during pregnancy and within 12 months post-partum in Finland between 1999 and 2017: a retrospective register-based cohort study

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Both lumbar disc herniation in the general population and lower back pain in the pregnant population are known to be common conditions. The physiological and anatomical of the mother predispose to increased strain of the lumbar disc, whereas pregnancy may promote caution in physicians contemplating surgical care.

PURPOSE

We aimed to report the incidence of lumbar discectomy during pregnancy and 12 months postpartum in Finland between 1999 and 2017.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective register-based cohort study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Using nationwide data from the Finnish Care Register for Health Care and the Finnish Medical Birth Register, all women aged 15 to 49 years with a lumbar discectomy or pregnancy ending in delivery from 1st January, 1999 to 31st December, 2017 were included.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Incidence rates and their 95% confidence intervals were calculated for lumbar discectomy. Incidence rate ratios (IRR) were calculated between the study population and the control population. The effect of smoking on surgery risk was reported using odds ratios.

METHODS

A retrospective statistical analysis was performed to identify patients undergoing lumbar discectomy during pregnancy or the first 12 months after delivery. Incidence rates were compared with the age-adjusted values of the age-matched female general population. The effect of smoking on the risk of lumbar discectomy was analyzed using age-adjusted odds ratios.

RESULTS

In total, 91 discectomies were performed during pregnancy and 508 within 12 months postpartum. The total incidence of lumbar discectomy during pregnancy was 11 operations per 100,000 person-years with an IRR of 0.2 (95% CI 0.1-0.2) when compared with the age-adjusted female general population. Women with active smoking before pregnancy were at a higher risk for lumbar discectomy during pregnancy (OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.2-3.2). Caesarean section was more common after lumbar discectomy (22%). No perinatal mortality was observed. During the first-year postpartum the rate of lumbar discectomy increased to 47 per 100 000 person-years with an IRR of 0.7 (95% CI 0.6-0.8). 90-day reoperation rates were higher than in the general population with an IRR of 1.7 (95% CI 1.1- 2.7).

CONCLUSIONS

Lumbar discectomy during pregnancy is rare, but smoking increases the risk. Lumbar discectomy during pregnancy seems to be safe for the neonate. Postpartum incidences increased towards the end of the first year, but remained below the rates in the general population with a higher risk for short-term reoperation.

Clinical comparison of unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy with percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy for single l4/5-level lumbar disk herniation

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this research was to investigate the outcomes between unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy (UBE) and percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) for the single L4/5-level lumbar disk herniation (sLDH).

METHODS

From January 2018 to January 2021, a total of 40 patients with sLDH were retrospectively analyzed in this study. All the patients had received spinal surgeries in Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University and Affiliated Nantong Hospital 3 of Nantong University. Among them, 20 patients were treated with PELD (PELD group), and 20 patients were treated with UBE discectomy (UBE group). Postoperative length of hospital stay, estimated blood loss, operation time, and clinical complications of the patients were compared between the two groups. The visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were measured before surgeries and 3 days, 1, and 6 months after surgeries.

RESULTS

Compared with the UBE group, the PELD group had obviously less intraoperative blood loss, shorter operative time, and shorter hospital stay. The differences in the rate of complications were not statistically significant between the two groups. The VAS score and the ODI score of the two groups had a great reduction after operation. In addition, both the groups had satisfactory clinical outcome; the VAS score and ODI of the PELD group decreased more obviously.

CONCLUSION

The UBE for sLDH yielded similar clinical outcomes to PELD as minimally invasive surgeries; however, PELD is superior to UBE in terms of intraoperative blood loss, operative time, postoperative hospitalization, and short-term postoperative pain relief. The advantages and disadvantages of the two surgeries should be circumspectly balanced when evaluating a patient for a minimally invasive surgery for sLDH, selecting the most appropriate surgical method for patients.

Ultrasound-guided interventions during pregnancy for lumbosacral pain unresponsive to conservative treatment: A retrospective review

PURPOSE

Current conventional therapeutic strategies for lumbosacral pain during pregnancy are usually inadequate and data regarding interventional analgesic procedures feasible in pregnant women is scarce. We decided to retrospectively review our experience of ultrasound-guided pain management procedures in pregnant women with lumbosacral pain unresponsive to conservative treatment.

METHODS

Twenty women in the second trimester of pregnancy with lumbosacral pain developed during pregnancy unresponsive to conservative treatments who underwent the following ultrasound-guided pain interventions were included: sacroiliac joint, caudal epidural, interlaminar epidural, and trigger point injections. All patients were followed up until early postnatal period using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores.

RESULTS

All but one patient achieved satisfactory pain control throughout the pregnancy with a single injection. Significant declines in ODI and VAS scores was attained within the first 2 weeks and first week of intervention, respectively, which was maintained thereafter until early postnatal period.

CONCLUSIONS

Injections used for effective interventional pain management in nonpregnant populations seem to represent an effective and safe method also for pregnant women when performed under ultrasound guidance, with rapid onset and enduring duration of action until the time of delivery.