Is Endoscopic Discectomy the Next Gold Standard in the Management of Lumbar Disc Disease? Systematic Review and Superiority Analysis

Full-endoscopic lumbar spine discectomy: Are We Finally There? A Meta-Analysis of Its Effectiveness Against Non-microscopic Discectomy, Microdiscectomy and Tubular Discectomy

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Full-endoscopic lumbar discectomy (FELD) has gained increasing attention as a minimally invasive alternative to conventional microdiscectomy (MD), tubular discectomy (MED), and open non-microscopic discectomy (OD) Despite significant technological advancements in endoscopic techniques over the past decade, it is not yet clear whether FELD offers a definitive advantage over traditional methods.

PURPOSE

This study aims to perform a meta-analysis of available publications to assess whether the superiority of endoscopic treatment over traditional open and minimally invasive endoscopic surgical techniques can be more conclusively established. The central question driving this meta-analysis was: Are we finally there?

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Meta-analysis study included adult patients (≥18 years old) with symptomatic lumbar disc herniation (LDH) without concurrent lumbar spinal stenosis METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library for randomized or nonrandomized controlled trials published between 2013 and 2024. The quality of randomized controlled trials and cohort studies was assessed using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, respectively. Included studies reported on at least one of the following outcomes: (1) adverse effects, (2) operative parameters, (3) bed and hospital stay, and (4) clinical indices (postoperative values). Mean differences (MDs) or odds ratios (ORs) were used to compare treatment effects between FELD and MD, MED, or OD.

RESULTS

FELD demonstrated several advantages, particularly in short-term pain (within 6 months postoperatively) relief and faster patient (length of bed stay 1-2 days) mobilization, while maintaining comparable risks of recurrence, reoperation, and complications relative to traditional techniques. However, there is substantial heterogeneity in the data and a limited number of prospective trials.

CONCLUSIONS

More well-designed, prospective randomized trials are necessary, with a focus on radiological outcomes and comprehensive cost analyses including societal costs. Only through such robust data can we determine whether FELD truly represents a new gold standard for lumbar discectomy. Are we finally there? We are certainly closer, but much remains to be addressed.

Opioid Prescribing Trends Following Lumbar Discectomy

BACKGROUND

Lumbar diskectomy is a common procedure, following which a brief course of narcotics is often prescribed. Nonetheless, increasing attention has been given to such prescribing patterns to limit adverse effects and the potential for abuse. This study investigated prescribing patterns of opioid within 90 days following lumbar diskectomy.

METHODS

Patients undergoing single-level lumbar laminotomy/diskectomy from 2011 to 2021 were identified in the PearlDiver Mariner161 database. Exclusion criteria included the following: additional same-day spine procedures, age less than 18 years, same-day diagnosis of neoplasm, trauma, or infection, prior diagnosis of chronic pain, records active for less than 90 days following surgery, and filled opioid prescription between 7 and 30 days before the surgery. Predictors associated with receiving opioid prescriptions and excess prescribed morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) were assessed with multivariable regression analyses. Prescribing patterns over the years were then analyzed with simple linear regression and compared for 2011 and 2021.

RESULTS

A total of 271,631 patients met the inclusion criteria. Opioids were prescribed for 195,835 (72.1%) and were independently associated with lower age, female sex, higher Elixhauser Comorbidity Index, and geographic region (P < 0.0001 for each). Greater MMEs were independently prescribed to those who were younger, had higher Elixhauser Comorbidity Index, and lived in specific geographic regions (P < 0.0001 for each). The proportion of patients receiving opioid prescriptions slightly increased over time (69.0% in 2011 to 71.0% in 2021), whereas a decrease was observed in median MMEs prescribed (428.9 in 2011 to 225.0 in 2021, P < 0.0001) and mean number of prescriptions filled (3.3 in 2011 and 2.3 in 2021, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Following lumbar diskectomy, this study found clinical and nonclinical factors to be associated with prescribing opioids and prescribed MME. The decreased MME prescribed over the years was encouraging and the decreased number of prescriptions filled suggests that patients are not needing to return for more prescriptions than prior.

Full-Endoscopic Resection of a Lumbar Intradural Tumor (Schwannoma): Video Case Report and Description of the Surgical Technique

Endoscopic spinal surgery has gained increasing popularity over the past 10 years. Its muscle-preserving nature, reduction in postoperative pain, and lower complication rates have contributed to the growing number of surgeons adopting this technique year after year. This same progression has led to the application of the technique in oncological pathology, primarily for separation surgeries and biopsies of extradural lesions. However, reports in the literature on the use of this technique to treat intradural spinal tumors remain scarce. To present a case report of a patient with an intradural lesion, compatible with schwannoma, successfully removed using a fully endoscopic technique. A 46-year-old female patient presented with a long-standing history of low back pain and bilateral leg pain. The pain worsened over the past few months before her initial presentation. She also reported experiencing weakness in her feet and intermittent hypesthesia in her legs. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) showed a small intradural extramedullary tumor at the L1 level. Given the patient's young age, the tumor location at the thoracolumbar junction, and the rather small tumor size, a full-endoscopic approach was selected and performed. A step-by-step video of the surgical technique is provided with the manuscript. The current follow-up period is 2.5 years, with the patient remaining asymptomatic. The most recent follow-up MRI, conducted 16 months after the surgery, indicated no signs of recurrence. To our knowledge, this is the first video report providing a step-by-step description of this procedure. More high-quality evidence is needed to properly evaluate the safety and outcomes of this technique.

Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery for Lumbar Decompression or Disc Herniation

Many people experience low back pain caused by degenerative disease of the lumbar spine; this includes spinal stenosis, spondylolisthesis, disc degeneration, and disc herniation. Conservative management of degenerative disease, which includes physical therapy, lifestyle modifications, and medications, is the initial approach. If this approach fails, a surgical procedure may be the next step. Previously, open lumbar surgery would have been the planned procedure; today, minimally invasive spine surgery gives patients another choice. Perioperative nurses should understand how minimally invasive spine surgery differs from the open procedure, the steps involved during a minimally invasive procedure, the benefits of this type of procedure, and nursing considerations for patients undergoing minimally invasive spinal procedures.

Noninvasive intracranial pressure profile in 31 patients submitted to fullendoscopic spine surgery

PURPOSE

Full-endoscopic spine surgery (FESS) is associated with specific complications, possibly linked to increased intracranial pressure (ICP) resulting from continuous saline infusion into the epidural space. This study aimed to assess the impact of saline irrigation and its correlation with noninvasively obtained ICP waveform changes.

METHODS

Patients undergoing FESS between January 2019 and November 2020 were included. Noninvasive ICP (n-ICP) monitoring utilized an extracranial strain sensor generating ICP waveforms, from which parameters P2/P1 ratio and time to peak (TTP) values were derived and correlated to irrigation and vital parameters. Documentation occurred at specific surgical intervals (M0-preoperatively; M1 to M4-intraoperatively; M5-postoperatively). Mixed-model analysis of variance and multiple comparisons tests were applied, with M0 as the baseline.

RESULTS

Among 31 enrolled patients, three experienced headaches unrelated to increased ICP at M5. The P2/P1 ratio and TTP decreased during surgery (p < 0.001 and p < 0.004, respectively). Compared to baseline, P2/P1 ratio and vital parameters remained significantly lower at M5. No significant differences were observed for fluid parameters throughout surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated a decline in the n-ICP parameters after anesthetic induction despite the anticipated increase in ICP due to constant epidural irrigation. The n-ICP parameters behaved independently of fluid parameters, suggesting a potential protective effect of anesthesia.

Endoscopic Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Disc Disease: A Narrative Review of Full-Endoscopic and Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery

BACKGROUND

Degenerative lumbar spine disease is the leading cause of disability and work absenteeism worldwide. Lumbar microdiscectomy became the standard treatment for herniated discs and stenotic disease. With the evolution of different techniques, endoscopic spinal surgery emerged to minimize the surgical footprint while providing at least non-inferior results. Currently, two different types of endoscopic spine procedures are dominating the surgical scenario: "Full-Endoscopic" (FE) and Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic" (UBE) Spine Surgery. The aim of this study is to describe and analyze their indications, their technical characteristicswithitsadvantagesanddisadvantagesofbothtechniquesandtheirfuture trends.

METHODS

We performed a narrative review of the most relevant articles published up to August 2023 through a Pub Med search. The search terms " FE Spine Surgery" and " UBE Spine Surgery" were used. The articles selected, were independently reviewed by 3 authors and 55 full text articles were reviewed.

RESULTS

The FE and UBE Spine Surgery techniques were described. The FE technique is performed with a monoportal access under constant saline irrigation. The FE comprises the transforaminal and the interlaminar approaches, and the indication depends from the pathology to treat, and still remains controversial. UBE can approach also the spine from a posterior, postero lateral,and para spinal route. It uses two different ports addressed to a target with continuous irrigation. The process of establishing these two portals is called triangulation.

CONCLUSIONS

FE and UBE spine surgery have demonstrated outcomes comparable to open surgery, minimizing complications and surgical footprint.

Technical Considerations and Avoiding Complications in Interlaminar Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy

The fully endoscopic technique has become the most effective and safest option for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation. Specifically, the interlaminar approach, which was first described at the beginning of the 21st century, is used for the treatment of L4–5 and L5–S1 intracanal disc herniation. Learning protocolized maneuvers facilitates reproducibility and increases the safety of the procedure. The description of the main maneuvers in this article aims to reduce complications and the learning curve with their widespread implementation.

Minimally Invasive Treatment for Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Matched Comparison Between Tubular Microdiscectomy and Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy

Background and objectives Discectomy for lumbar disc herniation is the most common spinal surgical procedure. Technological advances have led to the emergence of minimally invasive surgical approaches such as tubular microdiscectomy (TMD) and percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD). The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of PELD to those of TMD at one-year follow-up. Materials and methods This observational registry-based (Spine Tango) cohort study included patients with symptomatic lumbar disc herniation submitted to PELD or TMD. The inclusion criteria were patients who underwent minimally invasive lumbar discectomy (PELD or TMD), patients who attended a follow-up after a minimum of 12 months post surgery, and valid pre- and postoperative questionaries. The primary endpoint was defined as the difference between pre- and postoperative Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) for the back. The matching was based on a 1:1 nearest neighbor matching without replacement. Results A total of 109 patients were included in this study. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed achieving 86 patients in the matched sample. Regarding COMI improvement, we found no significant difference between the PELD and TMD groups (paired t-test: estimate, -0.23; standard error, 0.6; p=0.7), and we also did not find any significant difference between groups concerning Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and EuroQol 5 Dimension (EQ-5D). Medication usage and return to work were similar among the matched groups. Conclusions PELD is a technique that minimizes tissue damage achieving good clinical outcomes similar to TMD. This was observed one year after surgery from patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) that measured pain improvement, disability, and quality of life.

Lumbar percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy: a retrospective survey on the first 172 adult patients treated in Denmark

PURPOSE

To evaluate patient demographics, surgery characteristics, and patient-reported clinical outcomes related to the implementation of lumbar PTED in Denmark by surgeons novice to the PTED technique.

METHODS

All adult patients treated with a lumbar PTED from our first surgery in October 2020 to December 2021 were included. Data was generated by journal audit and telephone interview.

RESULTS

A total of 172 adult patients underwent lumbar PTED. Surgery duration was a median of 45.0 (35.0-60.0) minutes and patients were discharged a median of 0 (0-1.0) days after. Per operatively one procedure was converted to open microdiscectomy due to profuse bleeding. Post operatively one patient complained of persistent headache (suggestive of a dural tear), two patients developed new L5 paresthesia, and three patients had a newly developed dorsal flexion paresis (suggestive of a root lesion). Sixteen patients did not complete follow-up and 24 (14.0%) underwent reoperation of which 54.2% were due to residual disk material. Among the remaining 132 patients, lower back and leg pain decreased from 7.0 (5.0-8.5) to 2.5 (1.0-4.5) and from 8.0 (6.0-9.1) to 2.0 (0-3.6) at follow-up, respectively (p < 0.001). Additionally, 93.4% returned to work and 78.8% used less analgesics. Post hoc analysis comparing the early half of cases with the latter half did not find any significant change in surgery time, complication and reoperation rates, nor in pain relief, return to work, or analgesia use.

CONCLUSION

Clinical improvements after lumbar PTED performed by surgeons novel to the technique are satisfactory, although the reoperation rate is high, severe complications may occur, and the learning curve can be longer than expected.

Endoscopic Lumbar Disc Surgery Experience with the TESSYS Technique in 253 Case Series

Background: Herniated lumbar disc (HLD) is a widespread medical problem which can require surgery. Minimally invasive surgical management can represent an extremely valuable option for patients suffering from HLDs. Transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy is an alternative to classical microdiscectomy which was proposed more than two decades ago and has evolved technologically with time. Methods: The transforaminal endoscopic spine system (TESSYS) technique has been introduced in recent years and offers the advantage of performing a controlled foraminal augmentation with full nerve root protection. We started using this technique in 2016 and prospectively evaluated the results of endoscopic TESSYS-based operations performed in a three-year period until the end of 2019. Selection criteria were very strict, and we included only patients with unilateral radicular pain with no instability who failed conservative therapy. Out of the 253 patients operated on in that time span, 183 were available for follow-up evaluation. Results: After surgery, there was a clinically significant improvement of all symptoms which basically lasted in the long-term follow-up. Complications were limited and generally minor. Redo surgery with microdiscectomy was required only in four cases. Obesity did not play a clear negative role in patients' outcome. Conclusions: Endoscopic transforaminal discectomy with the TESSYS technique represents a valuable management option for patients harbouring unilateral herniated lumbar disc located laterally.

Outcome of Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy in Relation to the Surgeon's Experience: Propensity Score Matching

Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) presents a challenging learning curve, and the correlation between surgeon experience and clinical outcomes remains contentious. This retrospective study aimed to compare the outcomes of PELD performed by a single surgeon at beginner and experienced stages. Propensity score matching selected 150 patients (75 per group) with a minimum 3-year follow-up. Clinical and radiological outcomes, perioperative complications, and adverse events were assessed. Baseline characteristics, pain improvement, patient satisfaction, and radiological outcomes did not differ between the groups. However, operation time was longer in the beginner group than in the experienced group (57.5 min [IQR, 50.0-70.0] versus 50.0 min [IQR, 45.0-55.0], p < 0.001). The beginner group had higher perioperative complication rates (eight patients [10.7%] versus one patient [1.3%], with a hazard ratio of 8.836 [95% CI, 1.077-72.514], p = 0.034) and lower 3-year survival without adverse events (19 patients [25.3%] in the beginner group and 10 patients [13.3%] in the experienced group, p = 0.045). Our findings indicate that the clinical outcomes were more favorable in patients operated on at the experienced stage compared to those treated at the beginner stage.

Patient-Reported Outcomes and Return to Work after CT-Guided Percutaneous Lumbar Discectomy: A Prospective Study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effectiveness of percutaneous lumbar discectomy (PLD) under computed tomography (CT) guidance on pain and functional capacities and to estimate the speed of recovery by assessing the time to return to work.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients treated with PLD were prospectively included between December 2019 and April 2021. Data regarding pain, duration of symptoms, analgesia intakes, time of absence from work, and the Oswestry disability index (ODI) were collected. Patients were followed-up during 6 months. Duration of hospitalization and time to return to work were reported. The Fisher test was used to compare nominal variables, the Kruskal-Wallis test to compare ordinal variables, and the Student t test to compare quantitative continuous variables.

RESULTS

A total of 87 patients were evaluated (median age, 56 years; interquartile range [IQR], 43-66 years). The median ODI decreased from 44 (IQR, 33-53) to 7 (IQR, 2-17) at 6 months (P < .001). The median visual analog scale score decreased from 8 (IQR, 8-9) to 2 (IQR, 0-3) within 6 months (P < .001). In total, 96.5% of patients were discharged on the day of the procedure, and 3.5% were discharged on the following day. No severe adverse events were reported according to the Society of Interventional Radiology (SIR) classification system. Of the 57 patients previously employed, 50 were able to return to work during the follow-up, with a median time of 8 days (IQR, 0-20 days).

CONCLUSIONS

Symptomatic lumbar disc herniation can be successfully treated using PLD, resulting in significant improvement in symptoms and functional capacities and a fast return to work.

Evaluation of Spin in Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Minimally Invasive Surgical Techniques and Standard Microdiscectomies for Treating Lumbar Disc Herniation

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

Spin in scientific literature is defined as bias that overstates efficacy and/or underestimates harms of procedures undergoing review. While lumbar microdiscectomies (MD) are considered the gold standard for treating lumbar disc herniations (LDH), outcomes of novel procedures are being weighed against open MD. This study identifies the quantity and type of spin in systematic reviews and meta-analyses of LDH interventions.

METHODS

A search was conducted on the PubMed, Scopus, and SPORTDiscus databases for systematic reviews and meta-analyses evaluating the outcomes of MD against other LDH interventions. Each included study's abstract was assessed for the presence of the 15 most common types of spin, with full texts reviewed during cases of disagreement or for clarification. Full texts were used in the assessment of study quality per AMSTAR 2.

RESULTS

All 34 included studies were observed to have at least 1 form of spin, in either the abstract or full text. The most common type of spin identified was type 5 ("The conclusion claims the beneficial effect of the experimental treatment despite a high risk of bias in primary studies"), which was observed in ten studies (10/34, 29.4%). There was a statistically significant association between studies not registered with PROSPERO and the failure to satisfy AMSTAR type 2 (P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

Misleading reporting is the most common category of spin in literature related to LDH. Spin overwhelmingly tends to go in the positive direction, with results inappropriately favoring the efficacy or safety of an experimental intervention.

Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery: Clinical Results for 163 Patients

BACKGROUND

Biportal endoscopy spine surgery is an endoscopic procedure that uses 2 portals, 1 for the endoscope and 1 for the instruments. It provides an excellent and very versatile field of view, with the advantage of another portal to approach the most common degenerative lumbar pathologies.

METHODS

We evaluated a retrospective series of patients who underwent biportal endoscopy with ≥1 year of follow-up. Relevant epidemiological and clinical data, such as the Oswestry disability index and visual analog scale for pain, were also considered. Complications and the effects of the learning curve are also discussed.

RESULTS

We included 163 patients treated within a 5-year period with ≥1 year of follow-up available. The main pathologies were disc herniation (53.4%), foraminal stenosis (19%), and central canal stenosis (16.6%). The outcomes regarding disability and pain scores after surgery were very good, with a redistribution of the patient sample to the mild categories of disability. Inferential analysis showed relative and absolute improvements for both disc herniation and canal stenosis in terms of the Oswestry disability index and visual analog scale for pain, especially for disc herniation. The incidence of complications was approximately 7%. The most common approach was interlaminar (89%), and the most common pathology was disc herniation (54.9%). The duration of surgery overall and for the different stages had improved at the end of the learning curve with a reduction of almost 58 minutes.

CONCLUSIONS

Biportal endoscopy is a minimally invasive procedure that is safe and effective, with a low rate of complications. It has a reproducible learning curve and provides very good outcomes regarding functionality and pain scores.

Intracranial Pressure Evaluation in Swine During Full-Endoscopic Lumbar Spine Surgery

BACKGROUND

Neurological complications during full-endoscopic spine surgery (FESS) might be attributed to intracranial pressure (ICP) increase due to continuous saline infusion (CSI). Understanding CSI and ICP correlation might modify irrigation pump usage. This study aimed to evaluate invasive ICP during interlaminar FESS; correlate ICP with irrigation pump parameters (IPPs); evaluate ICP during saline outflow occlusion, commonly used to control bleeding and improve the surgeon's view; and, after durotomy, simulate accidental dural tear.

METHODS

Five swine were monitored, submitted to total intravenous anesthesia, and positioned ventrally. A parenchymal catheter was installed through a skull burr for ICP monitoring. Lumbar interlaminar FESS was performed until exposure of neural structures. CSI was used within progressively higher IPPs (A [60 mm Hg, 350 mL/minute] to D [150 mm Hg, 700 mL/minute]), and ICP was documented. During each IPP, different situations were grouped: intact dura with open channels (A1-D1) or occlusion test (A2-D2); dural tear with open channels (Ax1-Dx1) or occlusion test (Ax2-Dx2). ICP <20 mm Hg was defined as safe.

RESULTS

Basal average ICP was 8.1 mm Hg. Adjustment in total intravenous anesthesia or suspension of tests was necessary due to critical ICP or animal discomfort. It was safe to operate with all IPPs with opened drainage channels (A1-D1) even with dural tear (Ax1-Dx1). Several occlusion tests (A2-D2, Ax2-Dx2) caused ICP increase (e.g., 86.1 mm Hg) influenced by anesthetic state and hemodynamics.

CONCLUSIONS

During FESS, CSI might critically raise ICP. Keeping drainage channels open, with ideal anesthetic state, ICP remains safe even with high IPPs, despite dural tear. Drainage occlusions can quickly raise ICP, being even more severe with higher IPPs. Total intravenous anesthesia may protect from ICP increase and may allow longer drainage occlusion or higher IPPs.

Transiliac Endoscopic-Assisted L5S1 Intraforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Technical Considerations and Potential Complications

OBJECTIVE

We sought to determine the clinical outcomes, complications, and fusion rates in transiliac endoscopic-assisted L5S1 intraforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (iLIF).

METHODS

Between September 2020 and September 2021, patients with L5S1 degenerative disk disease were enrolled in a prospective study on transiliac L5S1 iLIF and followed for a minimum of 12 months. Conflict of the preoperative planned approach with the ilium was mandatory. The primary outcome measures were the Oswestry Disability Index, the visual analog scale (VAS) score for low back pain (VAS back) and leg pain (VAS leg), and the modified MacNab criteria. The secondary outcomes were complications and fusion rates.

RESULTS

Five consecutive patients were enrolled: 2 males and 3 females with a mean age of 50 ± 12.9. All had 12 months' follow-up. The mean improvement in the Oswestry Disability Index, VAS back, and VAS leg (44 ± 11.75, 6.6 ± 1.7, and 4.7 ± 4.2, respectively) was more than 3 times the minimum clinically important difference. The modified MacNab criteria were good or excellent in 80% of cases at all endpoints. Three patients had ipsilateral lower limb dysesthesia. One patient had revision surgery for foraminal bone fragment removal. All patients achieved fusion.

CONCLUSIONS

The transiliac iLIF is a feasible but demanding surgical technique that allows overcoming cases in which the ilium prevents endoscopic transforaminal access to L5S1. Our preliminary results had good clinical outcomes and high fusion rates. The main complication was late-onset dysesthesia of the ipsilateral lower limb, 10 to 14 days after surgery. Special care must be taken to prevent L5 dorsal root ganglion injury.

2nd and 3rd generation full endoscopic lumbar spine surgery: clinical safety and learning curve

AIM

2nd and 3rd generation endoscopic spine surgery techniques offer visualisation of familiar inter-laminar anatomy to spinal surgeons. We have prospectively evaluated the clinical outcome, complications and learning curve associated with these techniques in patients with lumbar spine radiculopathy.

METHODS

This is a prospective study of 50 consecutive patients with radicular pain from disc herniation and/or lateral recess stenosis. In 6 patients, endoscopy couldn't be done. Operating times, PROM's (VAS, ODI and EQ-5D scores) and complication rates of 44 patients were evaluated after mean FU of 52 months (range 39-65). MRI was used to divide these into protrusions (n = 19), extrusions (n = 17) and lateral recess stenosis (n = 8). Evidence about the learning curve was gathered by curvilinear regression analyses.

RESULTS

Using a composite clinical success criterion, 95% patients had a successful outcome, with no major complications. ODI, VAS and EQ-5D scores had a statistically significant improvement and achieved MCID. Revision discectomy rate was only 4.5% (n = 2). MRI based grouping, case sequence and degree of difficulty influenced the duration of surgery and a learning curve was found for protrusions and lateral recess decompressions, but not for extrusions. A learning curve effect was also observed with respect to the ODI.

CONCLUSIONS

Although anatomy visualised in 2nd and 3rd generation endoscopy is familiar to spinal surgeons, our learning curve experience suggests a careful and MRI pathology based take up of this technique in clinical practice, despite its clinical safety in our series.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 3, prospective cohort study.

Full-endoscopic bilateral over-the-top decompression in lumbar central stenosis: surgical technique and outcomes

Decompression of spinal stenosis represents one of the most commonly performed procedures in spine surgery. With constantly increasing patient age and changing demographics, reducing the invasiveness of surgical procedures has become increasingly important. Over the past decades, microsurgical decompression has been established as a gold standard technique for the surgical treatment of spinal stenosis. In comparison with open techniques or surgeries that were performed with loop lenses, which required larger skin incisions, and which consecutively raised the access-related collateral damage, the microscope served to significantly reduce the invasiveness of the decompression interventions. Advantages included smaller skin incisions, reduced collateral tissue damage, less blood loss, lower infection rates and wound healing problems, shorter hospital stay, and multiple others, as widely known across various MIS techniques. For the same reasons as outlined above, the introduction of full-endoscopic surgical techniques aims to further reduce the invasiveness of surgical interventions. The present manuscript provides a delineation of the surgical technique of LE-ULBD (Lumbar Endoscopic Unilateral Laminotomy for Bilateral Decompression), gives an overview on the current state of literature, and aims to put this surgery into context with other currently available decompression techniques.

Full-endoscopic foraminotomy in low-grade degenerative and isthmic spondylolisthesis: a patient-specific tailored approach

PURPOSE

To describe the surgical technique and methodology to successfully plan and execute an endoscopic foraminotomy in patients with isthmic or degenerative spondylolisthesis, according to each patient's unique characteristics.

METHODS

Thirty patients with degenerative or isthmic spondylolisthesis (SL) with radicular symptoms were included from March 2019 to September 2022. Treating physician registered patients' baseline and imaging characteristics, as well as preoperative back pain VAS, leg pain VAS and ODI. Subsequently, authors treated the included patients with an endoscopic foraminotomy according to a "patient-specific" tailored approach.

RESULTS

Nineteen patients (63.33%) had isthmic SL and 11 patients (36.67%) had degenerative SL. 75.86% of the cases had a Meyerding Grade 1 listhesis. One of the transforaminal foraminotomies with lateral recess decompression in degenerative SL had to be aborted because of intense osseous bleeding. Of the remaining 29 patients, one patient experienced recurrence of the sciatica pain that required subsequent reintervention and fusion. No other intraoperative or post-operative complications were observed. None of the patients developed post-operative dysesthesia. In 86.67% of the patients, the foraminotomy was implemented using a transforaminal approach. In the remaining 13.33% of the cases, an interlaminar contralateral approach was used. Lateral recess decompression was performed in half of the cases. Mean follow-up time was 12.69 months, reaching a maximum of 40 months in some patients. Outcome variables such as VAS for leg and back pain, as well as ODI, showed statistically significant reduction since the 3-month follow-up visit.

CONCLUSION

In the presented case series, endoscopic foraminotomy achieved satisfactory outcomes without sacrificing segmental stability. The proposed patient-specific "tailored" approach allowed to successfully design and execute the surgical strategy to perform an endoscopic foraminotomy through transforaminal or interlaminar contralateral approaches.

Personalized Interventional Surgery of the Lumbar Spine: A Perspective on Minimally Invasive and Neuroendoscopic Decompression for Spinal Stenosis

Pain generator-based lumbar spinal decompression surgery is the backbone of modern spine care. In contrast to traditional image-based medical necessity criteria for spinal surgery, assessing the severity of neural element encroachment, instability, and deformity, staged management of common painful degenerative lumbar spine conditions is likely to be more durable and cost-effective. Targeting validated pain generators can be accomplished with simplified decompression procedures associated with lower perioperative complications and long-term revision rates. In this perspective article, the authors summarize the current concepts of successful management of spinal stenosis patients with modern transforaminal endoscopic and translaminar minimally invasive spinal surgery techniques. They represent the consensus statements of 14 international surgeon societies, who have worked in collaborative teams in an open peer-review model based on a systematic review of the existing literature and grading the strength of its clinical evidence. The authors found that personalized clinical care protocols for lumbar spinal stenosis rooted in validated pain generators can successfully treat most patients with sciatica-type back and leg pain including those who fail to meet traditional image-based medical necessity criteria for surgery since nearly half of the surgically treated pain generators are not shown on the preoperative MRI scan. Common pain generators in the lumbar spine include (a) an inflamed disc, (b) an inflamed nerve, (c) a hypervascular scar, (d) a hypertrophied superior articular process (SAP) and ligamentum flavum, (e) a tender capsule, (f) an impacting facet margin, (g) a superior foraminal facet osteophyte and cyst, (h) a superior foraminal ligament impingement, (i) a hidden shoulder osteophyte. The position of the key opinion authors of the perspective article is that further clinical research will continue to validate pain generator-based treatment protocols for lumbar spinal stenosis. The endoscopic technology platform enables spine surgeons to directly visualize pain generators, forming the basis for more simplified targeted surgical pain management therapies. Limitations of this care model are dictated by appropriate patient selection and mastering the learning curve of modern MIS procedures. Decompensated deformity and instability will likely continue to be treated with open corrective surgery. Vertically integrated outpatient spine care programs are the most suitable setting for executing such pain generator-focused programs.

Determination of Work Related to Endoscopic Decompression of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Background: Effective 1 January 2017, single-level endoscopic lumbar discectomy received a Category I Current Procedural Terminology (CPT®) code 62380. However, no work relative value units (wRVUs) are currently assigned to the procedure. A physician’s payment needs to be updated to commensurate with the work involved in the modern version of the lumbar endoscopic decompression procedure with and without the use of any implants to stabilize the spine. In the United States, the American Medical Association (AMA) and its Specialty Society Relative Value Scale Update Committee (RUC) proposes to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) what wRVUs to assign for any endoscopic lumbar surgery codes. Methods: The authors conducted an independent survey between May and June 2022 which reached 210 spine surgeons using the TypeForm survey platform. The survey link was sent to them via email and social media. Surgeons were asked to assess the endoscopic procedure’s technical and physical effort, risk, and overall intensity without focusing just on the time required to perform the surgery. Respondents were asked to compare the work involved in modern comprehensive endoscopic spine care with other commonly performed lumbar surgeries. For this purpose, respondents were provided with the verbatim descriptions of 12 other existing comparator CPT® codes and associated wRVUs of common spine surgeries, as well as a typical patient vignette describing an endoscopic lumbar decompression surgery scenario. Respondents were then asked to select the comparator CPT® code most reflective of the technical and physical effort, risk, intensity, and time spent on patient care during the pre-operative, peri- and intra-operative, and post-operative periods of a lumbar endoscopic surgery. Results: Of the 30 spine surgeons who completed the survey, 85.8%, 46.6%, and 14.3% valued the appropriate wRVU for the lumbar endoscopic decompression to be over 13, over 15, and over 20, respectively. Most surgeons (78.5%; <50th percentile) did not think they were adequately compensated. Regarding facility reimbursement, 77.3% of surgeons reported that their healthcare facility struggled to cover the cost with the received compensation. The majority (46.5%) said their facility received less than USD 2000, while another 10.7% reported less than USD 1500 and 17.9% reported less than USD 1000. The professional fee received by surgeons was <USD 1000 for 21.4%, <USD 2000 for 17.9%, and <USD 1500 for 10.7%, resulting in a fee less than USD 2000 for 50% of responding surgeons. Most responding surgeons (92.6%) recommended an endoscopic instrumentation carveout to pay for the added cost of the innovation. Discussion and Conclusions: The survey results indicate that most surgeons associate CPT® 62380 with the complexity and intensity of a laminectomy and interbody fusion preparation, considering the work in the epidural space using the contemporary outside-in and interlaminar technique and the work inside the interspace using the inside-out technique. Modern endoscopic spine surgery goes beyond the scope of a simple soft-tissue discectomy. The current iterations of the procedure must be considered to avoid undervaluing its complexity and intensity. Additional undervalued payment scenarios could be created if technological advances continue to replace traditional lumbar spinal fusion protocols with less burdensome, yet no less complex, endoscopic surgeries that necessitate a high surgeon effort in terms of time required to perform the operation and its intensity. These undervalued payment scenarios of physician practices, as well as the facility and malpractice expenses, should be further discussed to arrive at updated CPT® codes reflective of modern comprehensive endoscopic spine care.

Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Discectomy Versus Microendoscopic Discectomy for Lumbar Disk Herniation: Five-year Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective randomized controlled study.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and safety between percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) and microendoscopic discectomy (MED).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Two kinds of minimally invasive discectomy, PTED and MED, are now widely used for treating lumbar disk herniation (LDH). The long-term comparative results of these two techniques still remained uncertain.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this single-center, open-label, randomized controlled trial, patients were included if they had persistent signs and symptoms of radiculopathy with corresponding imaging-confirmed LDH and were randomly allocated to PTED or MED groups. The primary outcome was the score of Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the secondary outcomes included the score of Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey bodily pain (SF36-BP) and physical function (SF36-PF), European Quality of Life-Five Dimensions (EQ-5D), Visual Analog Scales for back pain (VAS-back) and leg pain (VAS-leg).

RESULTS

A total of 241 patients were accepted to enroll in our randomized controlled trial, of which 119 were randomly assigned to the PTED group, and the rest 122 were assigned to the MED group. A total of 194 out of 241 patients (80.5%) completed the five-year follow-up. PTED group was associated with shorter postoperative in-bed time and length of hospital stay. Both primary and secondary outcomes did not differ significantly between the two treatment groups at each follow-up time point. During the five-year follow-up, seven recurrent cases occurred in PTED and MED groups, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Over the five-year follow-up period, PTED and MED were both efficacious in the treatment of LDH. The long-term clinical outcomes and recurrent rates were comparable between the treatment groups. PTED represents a more minimally invasive technique with the advantages of rapid recovery.

TRANSILIAC ENDOSCOPIC ASSISTED ILIF: A CADAVERIC STUDY

ABSTRACT Objective: Demonstrate the feasibility of endoscopic assisted L5S1 intraforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (iLIF) through a transiliac approach. Methods: Ten transiliac iLIF and ten supra iliac iLIF were performed bilaterally at L5S1 in five randomly selected fresh-frozen human cadavers. The following measurements were recorded: distances from the transiliac track to the iliac crest, posterior superior iliac spine, and superior gluteal neurovascular bundle; pelvic parameters; approach angles; cage’s lateral and AP center point ratio (CPR); percentage of the cage crossing the midline in the AP and lateral views. Endplate integrity was assessed through endoscopic visualization. In addition, the facet joint, sacroiliac joint, iliolumbar ligament, and exiting and traversing nerve roots were checked for integrity through anatomic dissection. Results: In the transiliac technique, the axial and coronal approach angles were significantly decreased by 13.5º (95% CI -15.5; -11.5; p value<0.001) and 13.2º (95% CI -15.3; -11.1; p value<0.001), respectively, the sagittal approach angle was significantly increased by 5.4º (95% CI 1.8,8.9; p-value = 0.008), and the AP CPR was significantly higher (MD 0.16; 95% CI 0.12,0.20; p value<0.001). The percentage of the cage crossing the AP view’s midline was increased by 31.6% (95% CI 19.8,43.4; p value<0.001). The integrity of endplates, facet joints, sacroiliac joints, iliolumbar ligament, and exiting and traversing nerve roots was maintained. Conclusion: L5S1 transiliac iLIF is a feasible surgical technique. It allows a more centrally placed interbody cage in the coronal plane without compromising the anterior position in the lateral plane. The integrity of the major anatomic structures at risk was preserved. Evidence Level III: A case-control study.

Full-endoscopic versus conventional microsurgical therapy of lumbar disc herniation: a prospective, controlled, single-center, comprehensive cohort trial (FEMT-LDH trial)

BACKGROUND

Lumbar disc herniation is one of the leading causes of chronic low back pain. Surgery remains the therapy of choice when conservative approaches fail. Full-endoscopic approaches represent a promising alternative to the well-established microsurgical technique. However, high-grade evidence comparing these techniques is still scarce.

METHODS

Patients presenting with lumbar disc herniation will be included. The intervention group will obtain full-endoscopic disc decompression, whereas the control group will be treated by microsurgical disc decompression. We will apply a comprehensive cohort study design involving a randomized and a prospective non-randomized study arm. Patients who do not consent to be randomized will be assigned to the non-randomized arm. The primary outcome will be the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Secondary outcomes involve the visual analog scale (VAS) of pain and the SF-36 health questionnaire. Furthermore, clinical characteristics including duration of hospital stay, operation time, and complications as well as laboratory markers, such as C-reactive protein, white blood cell counts, and interleukin 6 will be determined and compared.

DISCUSSION

This study will significantly contribute to the current evidence available in the literature by evaluating the outcome of the full-endoscopic technique against the gold standard for lumbar disc herniation in a clinically relevant study setup. Additionally, the study design allows us to include patients not willing to be randomized in a prospective parallel study arm and to evaluate the impact of randomization on outcomes and include. The results could help to improve the future therapy in patients suffering from lumbar disc herniation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was prospectively registered in The German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS), a German WHO primary registry, under the registration number: DRKS00025786. Registered on July 7, 2021.

Evaluation of Endoscopic Versus Open Lumbar Discectomy: A Multi-Center Retrospective Review Utilizing the American College of Surgeons’ National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) Database

Introduction: Endoscopic techniques in spine surgery continue to gain popularity due to their potential for decreased blood loss and post-operative pain. However, limited studies have evaluated these techniques within the United States. Additionally, given the limited number of practitioners with experience in endoscopy, most current studies are limited by a lack of heterogeneity.

Methods: The American College of Surgeons’ National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database was queried to evaluate the effect of endoscopic surgery on adverse events. Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes for open discectomy were compared with the relevant CPT codes for endoscopic lumbar discectomy. Baseline patient characteristics and adverse outcomes were then compared. 

Results: A total of 38,497 single-level lumbar discectomies were identified and included. Of these, 175 patients undergoing endoscopic discectomy were compared with 38,322 patients undergoing open discectomy. Endoscopic discectomy demonstrated a shorter operative time of 88.6 minutes than 92.1 minutes in the open group. However, this was not significant (p=0.08). Patients in the endoscopic group demonstrated a shorter total length of stay of 0.81 days vs 1.15 days (p=0.014). Total adverse events were lower in the endoscopic group at 0.6% vs 3.4% in the open group (p=0.03).

Conclusion: Endoscopic discectomy demonstrated a significantly lower rate of adverse events and shorter total length of stay than open discectomy. Further research is necessary over time to evaluate larger patient populations as this technology is more rapidly incorporated.

Risk Factors for Poor Outcomes Following Minimally Invasive Discectomy: A Post Hoc Subgroup Analysis of 2-Year Follow-up Prospective Data

Objective

A post hoc subgroup analysis of prospectively collected data from a randomized controlled trial was conducted to identify risk factors related to poor outcomes in patients who underwent minimally invasive discectomy.

Methods

Patients were divided into satisfied and dissatisfied subgroups based on Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analogue scale (VAS) back pain score (VAS-back) and leg pain score (VAS-leg) at short-term and midterm follow-up according to the patient acceptable symptom state threshold. Demographic characteristics, radiographic parameters, and clinical outcomes between the satisfied and dissatisfied subgroups were compared using univariate and multivariate analysis.

Results

A total of 222 patients (92.1%) completed 2-year follow-up, and the postoperative ODI, VAS-back, and VAS-leg were significantly improved after surgery as compared to preoperatively. Multivariate analysis indicated older age (p=0.026), lateral recess stenosis (p=0.046), and lower baseline ODI (p=0.027) were related to poor short-term functional improvement. Higher baseline VAS-back (p=0.048) was associated with poor short-term relief of back pain, while absence of decreased sensation (p=0.019) and far-lateral disc herniation (p=0.004) were associated with poorer short-term relief of leg pain. Lumbar facet joint osteoarthritis was identified as a risk factor for poor functional improvement (p=0.003) and relief of back pain (p=0.031). Disc protrusion (p=0.036) predicted poorer relief of back pain at midterm follow-up.

Conclusion

In this study, several factors were identified to be predictive of poor surgical outcomes following minimally invasive discectomy. (ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01997086).

Comparative study of the efficacy and safety of minimally invasive interlaminar full-endoscopic discectomy versus conventional microscopic discectomy in single-level lumbar herniated intervertebral disc (ENDO-F Trial): a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled trial protocol

Background

Advances in minimally invasive surgery have expanded the indications for interlaminar full-endoscopic discectomy. Although the clinical outcomes for this approach may be equivalent to those of conventional microscopic discectomy, the supporting evidence is still based on small, single-center, prospective, and retrospective studies. Therefore, a multicenter randomized controlled trial is warranted.

Methods

This will be a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial comparing the efficacy and safety of interlaminar full-endoscopic discectomy to those of conventional microscopic discectomy. The trial will enroll 100 participants with a lumbar disc herniation, 50 in each group. The primary outcome will be the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score at 12 months post-surgery. Secondary outcomes will be back and leg pain (visual analog scale); the ODI; the EuroQol-5-dimension score; patient satisfaction; and walking distance/time and time to return to daily activities post-surgery. Surgical outcomes will include postoperative drainage, operative time, duration of hospital stay, postoperative creatine kinase level as an indicator of muscle injury, and postoperative scarring. Postoperative magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography, and simple radiography will be performed to evaluate radiographic outcomes between the two surgical approaches. Surgery-related complications and adverse effects will be evaluated as safety outcomes. A single assessor at each participating hospital, blinded to group allocation, will assess the enrolled participants at baseline, at 2 weeks, and at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively.

Discussion

This trial is designed to determine whether interlaminar full-endoscopic discectomy is clinically comparable to microscopic discectomy to treat lumbar disc herniations. All efforts will be made to reduce bias, including adequate sample size, blinded analyses, and multicenter prospective registration. The outcomes will inform practice, providing the evidence needed for using interlaminar full-endoscopic over microscopic discectomy by confirming the potential of this technique to improve patient satisfaction and clinical outcomes.

Trial registration: Clinical Research Information Service; cris.nih.go.kr. (KCT0006277); protocol version (v1, June 8, 2021).

Dural Injury Treatment with a Full-Endoscopic Transforaminal Approach: A Case Report and Description of Surgical Technique

Introduction

The objective of this study was to describe a surgical technique that uses transforaminal full-endoscopic access, which is different from the existing protocol, and to demonstrate another method of dural tear repair during endoscopic spine surgery.

Background

Endoscopic spine surgery was initially described for lumbar disc pathologies. Technical advances and new materials have made it possible to treat cervical and thoracic spinal degenerative disorders. These advances have also made it possible to treat surgical complications, notably dural tears with CSF fistulas. The literature indicates that the incidence of these injuries ranges from 1% to 17%.

Materials and Methods

Descriptive technical note of innovative and improved endoscopic surgical procedure exemplified with illustrative clinical case and comparative literature review.

Results

There is only one report describing a full-endoscopic suture technique for dural sac repair. The gold standard for treatment of the most significant nonpunctate lesions continues to be a conversion to open surgery for lesion closure. Conversion can be problematic because most surgeries are performed under sedation and local anesthesia.

Conclusions

In this case report and the new endoscopic suture technique described here, we show that primary correction of dural tears through endoscopy is possible. In addition to representing a paradigm break in solving one of the main complications of these procedures, it can expand the possibilities of spine endoscopy.

Surgeons’ Perspective, Learning Curve, Motivation, and Obstacles of Full-Endoscopic Spine Surgery in Thailand: Results From A Nationwide Survey

Objective

To report a nationwide survey of the endoscopic spine surgeons across Thailand. Furthermore, the survey will be focused on the perspective of experience, learning curve, motivations, and obstacles at the beginning of their practices.

Materials and Methods

The online survey consisting of 16 items was distributed to spine surgeons who are performing endoscopic spine surgery in Thailand via the Google forms web-based questionnaire to investigate participants' demographics, backgrounds, experience in endoscopic spine surgery, motivations, obstacles, and future perspectives. The data was recorded from January 7, 2020 to January 21, 2022. Descriptive statistics were used for analysis.

Results

A total of 42 surveys were submitted by 6 neurosurgeons (14.3%) and 36 orthopedic surgeons (85.7%). From the surgeons' perspective, the average number of cases that should be performed until one feels confident, consistently good outcomes, and has minimal complications was 27.44 ± 32.46 cases. For surgeons who starting the endoscopic spine practice, at least 3 workshop participation is needed. Personal interest (39 selected responses) and trending marketing or business purpose (25 selected responses) were the primary motivators for endoscopic spine surgery implementation. Lack of support (18 selected responses) and afraid of complications (16 selected responses) were pertinent obstacles to endoscopic spine surgery implementation.

Conclusions

The trend of endoscopic spine surgery has continued to grow in Thailand, shown by the rate of implementation of endoscopic spine surgery reported by Thai spine surgeons. The number of appropriate cases until one feels confident was around 28 cases. The primary motivator and obstacles were personal interest and lack of support.

Full Endoscopic Thoracic Discectomy: Is the Interlaminar Approach an Alternative to the Transforaminal Approach? A Technical Note

BACKGROUND

Various approaches are used for decompressive surgeries in the thoracic spine depending on the location and consistency of the pathology, always avoiding manipulation of the thoracic spinal cord. Recently, there has been an effort to achieve adequate results and reduce morbidity with minimally invasive surgeries. Good outcomes and the advantages of full endoscopic spine surgery (FESS) have been proven for surgerical correction of herniated discs and stenoses in the lumbar and cervical spine. Similar evidence has recently been described for the thoracic spine, but it has not previously been reported in Brazil. Although the transforaminal approach is already established for the thoracic spine, the newly described interlaminar approach is equally efficient, and both techniques must be considered when treating thoracic spine diseases. The objective of the present article was to present the full endoscopic interlaminar and transforaminal techniques in patients with symptomatic disc herniation of the thoracic spine, discuss the rationality for implementing FESS in thoracic spine, and discuss the rationality in choosing between both approaches.

METHODS

Two patients were submitted to thoracic FESS. A transforaminal approach was chosen for a T10-T11 foraminal disc herniation; an interlaminar approach was selected for a paramedian T7-T8 disc extrusion. Data regarding operating time, intraoperative images, hospital stay, visual analog scales before and after FESS, course of recovery, and surgery satisfaction were evaluated.

RESULTS

The patients had eventless surgeries, improved from preoperative pain without morbidity. Both were satisfied and recovered well. Hospital stay was less than 6 hours after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Transforaminal and interlaminar FESS for thoracic disc herniation are safe, efficient, and minimally invasive alternatives.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Despite being an innovative technique with evident advantages, it should be carefully considered along with conventional technique for the treatment of thoracic spine diseases, since its clinical relevance is yet to be determined.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4

Clinical outcomes, complications and fusion rates in endoscopic assisted intraforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (iLIF) versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF): systematic review and meta-analysis

This meta-analysis aims to determine the clinical outcomes, complications, and fusion rates in endoscopic assisted intra-foraminal lumbar interbody fusion (iLIF) and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) for lumbar degenerative diseases. The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched. The inclusion criteria were: five or more consecutive patients who underwent iLIF or MI-TLIF for lumbar degenerative diseases; description of the surgical technique; clinical outcome measures, complications and imaging assessment; minimum follow-up of 12 months. Surgical time, blood loss, and length of hospital stay were extracted. Mean outcome improvements were pooled and compared with minimal clinically important differences (MCID). Pooled and direct meta-analysis were evaluated. We identified 42 eligible studies. The iLIF group had significantly lower mean intra-operative blood loss, unstandardized mean difference (UMD) 110.61 mL (95%CI 70.43; 150.80; p value < 0.0001), and significantly decreased length of hospital stay (UMD 2.36; 95%CI 1.77; 2.94; p value < 0.0001). Visual analogue scale (VAS) back, VAS leg and Oswestry disability index (ODI) baseline to last follow-up mean improvements were statistically significant (p value < 0.0001), and clinically important for both groups (MCID VAS back > 1.16; MCID VAS leg > 1.36; MCID > 12.40). There was no significant difference in complication nor fusion rates between both cohorts. Interbody fusion using either iLIF or MI-TLIF leads to significant and clinically important improvements in clinical outcomes for lumbar degenerative diseases. Both procedures provide high rates of fusion at 12 months or later, without significant difference in complication rates. iLIF is associated with significantly less intraoperative blood loss and length of hospital stay.

Study registration: PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews: Registration No. CRD42020180980, accessible at https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ April 2020.

Postoperative pain treatment after lumbar discectomy. A protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing lumbar discectomy usually suffer from moderate to severe pain during the postoperative period. Multimodal, or balanced analgesia, is the leading treatment principle for managing postoperative pain. The rationale is to achieve optimal pain treatment through additive or synergistic effects of several non-opioid analgesics, and thereby, reducing the need for postoperative opioids, facilitating early mobilization and functional rehabilitation. For discectomy surgery, evidence of both the benefit and harm of different analgesic interventions is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review aims to investigate the benefits and harms of analgesic interventions in adult patients after lumbar discectomy.

METHODS

This protocol for a systematic review is written according to The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines. We will search The Cochrane Library's CENTRAL, PubMed, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrails.gov for published and ongoing trials. All randomized clinical trials assessing the postoperative analgesics effect of an intervention with a control or no-intervention group undergoing lumbar discectomy will be included. Two authors will independently screen trials for inclusion using Covidence, extract data and assess the risk of bias using Cochrane's risk-of-bias 2 tool. We will analyse the data using Review Manager and Trial Sequential Analysis. Meta-analysis will be performed according to the Cochrane guidelines. We will present our primary findings in a 'summary of findings' table and evaluate the overall certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.

DISCUSSION

This systematic review will assess the benefits and harms of analgesic interventions after lumbar discectomy and have the potential to improve best practices and advance research.

THE MICROSCOPIC AND ENDOSCOPIC TECHNIQUES IN LUMBAR DISCECTOMY: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

ABSTRACT Objectives: To compare microdiscectomy (MD) and endoscopic interlaminar discectomy (EID) as methods for the surgical treatment of lumbar disc herniation, describing their efficiency in reducing hospitalization time, pain, and neurological deficit, and comparing the findings and the quality of studies that used the microscopic and endoscopic techniques. Methods: A systematic literature review that used the PRISMA protocol as a methodology. The search was conducted in the PUBMED/MEDLINE and The Cochrane Library databases, using publications from the last 5 years in Portuguese and English. After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria and validating the qualified studies via STROBE and CONSORT, there were a total of 16 studies for data compilation. Results: A sample of 1004 patients who underwent lumbar discectomy was obtained, 62% of whom were male, and 493 of whom underwent EID (49%) and 511 MD (51%). The mean patient age was 38.7 years and the predominant vertebral level operated was L5-S1 (64.8%). The EID had shorter surgical time (66.38 min) and hospitalization time (3.3 days), in addition to greater variation in the VAS LLLL score (5.38), while the MD presented greater variation in the VAS LUMBAR score (3.14). Conclusion: EID demonstrated efficacy like that of MD, given the similarity in the results obtained, in addition to non-inferiority in the reduction of pain and neurological deficit, and superiority in surgical and hospitalization times. Level of Evidence I; Systematic review .

Percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy for different types of lumbar disc herniation: A retrospective study

Objective

To introduce the concept of ‘nerve root as the core’ and to investigate the surgical procedure and curative effect of percutaneous translaminar endoscopic discectomy (PTED) surgery in the treatment of different types of lumbar disc herniation (LDH).

Methods

This retrospective study analysed the clinical data from patients with LDH that underwent single-segment PTED surgery. They were divided into three groups based on LDH location: central canal zone group, lateral recess zone group and foraminal/far lateral zone group. Different working cannula placement methods were used for the different types of LDH. All patients were followed for at least 12 months. Clinical and follow-up data were compared between the three groups.

Results

A total of 130 patients were enrolled in the study: 44 (33.8%) in the central canal zone group, 72 (55.4%) in the lateral recess zone group and 14 (10.8%) in the foraminal/far lateral zone group. All three groups of patients achieved good postoperative results. The improvements in leg pain and disability were most marked in the first postoperative month in all three groups.

Conclusion

PTED achieved adequate decompression for different types of LDH. The concept of ‘nerve root as the core’ facilitated the accurate placement of the working cannula.

Fully endoscopic lumbar spinal surgery: Is it time to change?

Spinal surgery is becoming safer and progressively less invasive with advances in optical and instrument technology. The amount of decompression achievable with endoscopic approaches is now comparable to open approaches with the advantage of much less tissue trauma. This review aims at examining the status of endoscopic approaches in lumbar decompressive surgery.

Historical aspects of video endoscopic surgery of the lumbar spine

The literature review is devoted to the history of the development of endoscopic surgery of the lumbar spine: from open surgical interventions and puncture procedures – to percutaneous intracanal endoscopic operations, combining interventional and video endoscopic technologies and referred to in the English literature as “full-endoscopy”. The article also touches upon the historical aspects of fibroendoscopic and laparoscopic interventions on the lumbar spine. In conclusion, the principle of classification of endoscopic techniques is proposed.