Guideline update for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 8: lumbar fusion for disc herniation and radiculopathy

Repeat Discectomy or Instrumented Surgery for Recurrent Lumbar Disk Herniation: An Overview of French Spine Surgeons' Practice

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective multicenter cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

Recurrent lumbar disc herniation (ReLDH) is a common condition requiring surgical intervention in a large proportion of cases. Evidence regarding the appropriate choice between repeat microdiscectomy (RD) and instrumented surgery (IS) is lacking. To understand the indications for either of the procedures and compare the results, we aimed to provide an overview of spine surgeon practice in France.

METHODS

This retrospective, multicenter analysis included adults who underwent surgery for ReLDHs between December 2020 and May 2021. Surgeons were asked which of the following factors determined their therapeutic choice: radio-clinical considerations, non-discal anatomical factors, patient preference, or surgeon background. Data on preoperative clinical status and radiologic findings were collected. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were assessed and compared using propensity scores preoperatively and at 3 and 12 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

The study included 150 patients (72 IS and 78 RD). Radioclinical elements, anatomical data, patient preferences, and surgeon background influenced the choice of RD in 57.7%, 1.3%, 25.6%, and 15.4% of the cases, respectively, and IS in 34.7%, 6.9%, 13.9%, and 44.5% of the cases, respectively. At 12 months, patient satisfaction, return to work, and changes in PROMs were not significantly different between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The decision-making process included both objective and subjective factors, resulting in patient satisfaction in 80.3% to 81.5% of cases, with significant clinical improvement in radicular symptoms in 75.8% to 91.8% of cases, and quality of life in 75.8% to 84.9% of cases, depending on the procedure performed.

Comparison of the clinical and radiographic outcomes of cortical bone trajectory and traditional trajectory pedicle screw fixation in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical outcomes and radiographic outcomes of cortical bone trajectory (CBT) and traditional trajectory (TT) pedicle screw fixation in patients treated with single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF).

METHODS

This trial included a total of 224 patients with lumbar spine disease who required single-level TLIF surgery. Patients were randomly assigned to the CBT and TT groups at a 1:1 ratio. Demographics and clinical and radiographic data were collected to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CBT and TT screw fixation in TLIF.

RESULTS

The baseline characteristic data were similar between the CBT and TT groups. Back and leg pain for both the CBT and TT groups improved significantly from baseline to 24 months postoperatively. The CBT group experienced less pain than the TT group at one week postoperatively. The postoperative radiographic results showed that the accuracy of screw placement was significantly increased in the CBT group compared with the TT group (P < 0.05). The CBT group had a significantly lower rate of FJV than the TT group (P < 0.05). In addition, the rate of fusion and the rate of screw loosening were similar between the CBT and TT groups according to screw loosening criteria.

CONCLUSION

This prospective, randomized controlled analysis suggests that clinical outcomes and radiographic characteristics, including fusion rates and caudal screw loosening rates, were comparable between CBT and TT screw fixation. Compared with the TT group, the CBT group showed advantages in the accuracy of screw placement and the FJV rate.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

This trial has been registered at the US National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials Registry: NCT03105167.

Return to flight duty (RTFD) after posterior lumbar spine surgery for symptomatic lumbar disc herniation (LDH) and lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis (LIS) in Chinese military pilots

BACKGROUND

Symptomatic lumbar disc herniation (LDH) and lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis (LIS) present significant challenges for military pilots, which may result in grounding if not effectively managed. Surgical treatment for LDH and LIS may offer a pathway to return to flight duty (RTFD), but recent data on this crucial topic is lacking. This study seeks to address this gap by investigating the RTFD outcomes among Chinese military pilots who have undergone lumbar spine surgery for symptomatic LDH and LIS.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted on active-duty military pilots who underwent isolated decompressive or fusion procedures at an authorized military medical center from March 1, 2007, to March 1, 2023. The analysis utilized descriptive statistics to examine demographic, occupational, surgical, and outcome data, with a particular focus on preoperative flight status, recommended clearance by spine surgeons, and actual RTFD outcomes and time.

RESULTS

Among the identified cases of active-duty military pilots with LDH or LIS treated by lumbar surgery (n = 24), 70.8% (17 of 24) consistently maintained RTFD status without encountering surgical complications or medical issues during the follow-up period. Of the seven pilots who did not RTFD, one retired within a year of surgery, two had anterior cruciate ligament injuries, three had residual radicular symptoms, and one had chronic low back pain. Excluding pilots who retired and did not RTFD for reasons unrelated to their lumbar conditions, the RTFD rate stood at 81.0% (17 of 21). The median time for recommended clearance by spine surgeons was 143.0 days (inter-quartile range, 116.5-196.0), while the median duration for actual RTFD attainment was 221.0 days (inter-quartile range, 182.0-300.0). The median follow-up post-lumbar surgery was 1.7 years (inter-quartile range, 0.4-2.9).

CONCLUSION

Most military pilots diagnosed with symptomatic LDH and LIS can continue their careers and regain active-duty flight status following lumbar spine surgery, as reflected by the high RTFD rate. Lumbar spine surgery can successfully alleviate the physical constraints associated with spinal conditions, facilitating the return of military pilots to their demanding profession.

Functionalization of Osteoplastic Material with Human Placental Growth Factor and Assessment of Biocompatibility of the Resulting Material In Vitro

This article provides the results of a study of the interaction of placental growth factor with adipose-derived stem cells (ASCs) of various origins, as well as the possibility of generating osteoplastic material based on xenogeneic matrix functionalization with human placental growth factor (PLGF). It is demonstrated that the greatest release of this factor from the functionalized material into the medium occurs during the first 3 h of contact with the model medium, but then the levels of the factor being released fall sharply, although release did continue throughout the 7 days of observation. The modified material was not cytotoxic, and its surface provided good cell adhesion. During 3 days of cultivation, the ASCs proliferated and migrated more actively on the surfaces of the modified material than on the surfaces of the control material. This study can serve as the basis for the development of original methods to functionalize such osteoplastic material by increasing PLGF immobilization by creating stronger bonds in order to regulate both factor dosage and the dynamics of the factor release into the environment. Further studies in experimental animals should facilitate assessment of the effectiveness of the functionalized materials. Such studies will be useful in the development of osteoplastic materials with new properties resulting from the inclusion of growth factors and in research on their biological activity.

The Impact of Physical Therapy After Lumbar Fusion Surgery

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective Cohort.

OBJECTIVE

To determine if outcomes varied between patients based on physical therapy (PT) attendance after lumbar fusion surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The literature has been mixed regarding the efficacy of postoperative PT to improve disability and back pain, as measured by patient-reported outcome measures. Given the prevalence of PT referrals and lack of high-quality evidence, there is a need for additional studies investigating the efficacy of PT after lumbar fusion surgery to aid in developing robust clinical guidelines.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified patients receiving lumbar fusion surgery by current procedural terminology codes and separated them into 2 groups based on whether PT was prescribed. Electronic medical records were reviewed for patient and surgical characteristics, PT utilization, and surgical outcomes. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were identified and compared preoperatively, at 90 days postoperatively and one year postoperatively.

RESULTS

The two groups had similar patient characteristics and comorbidities and demonstrated no significant differences between readmission, complication, and revision rates after surgery. Patients that attended PT had significantly more fused levels (1.41 ± 0.64 vs. 1.32 ± 0.54, P =0.027), longer operative durations (234 ± 96.4 vs. 215 ± 86.1 min, P =0.012), and longer postoperative hospital stays (3.35 ± 1.68 vs. 3.00 ± 1.49 days, P =0.004). All groups improved similarly by Oswestry Disability Index, short form-12 physical and mental health subsets, and back and leg pain by Visual Analog Scale at 90-day and 1-year follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that physical therapy does not significantly impact PROMs after lumbar fusion surgery. Given the lack of data suggesting clear benefit of PT after lumbar fusion, surgeons should consider more strict criteria when recommending physical therapy to their patients after lumbar fusion surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level-Ⅲ.

Spinal Fusion Versus Repeat Discectomy for Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Recurrent lumbar disc herniation (RLDH) is one of the major causes of failure for primary surgery. Repeat discectomy (RD) and spinal fusion (SF) are 2 surgical options for RLDH. The objective of our study is to compare the effectiveness of SF compared with RD in the treatment of RLDH.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Ovid Medline for studies (published between Jan 1, 1959 and July 8, 2022; no language restriction) comparing SF and RD for the RLDH. Odds ratio and weighted mean difference were calculated for binary outcomes and continuous outcomes. The quality of each outcome was graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations criteria.

RESULTS

We identified 5029 studies, of which 11 studies were included. There were 2 randomized controlled trials and the remaining were observational studies. Comparing SF and RD groups, no differences were found in visual analog scales for leg and back and Oswestry Disability Index. Furthermore, the Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores of SF were significantly higher than the RD group. In terms of complications, the incidence of neurological deficit, segmental instability, and re-recurrence is significantly lower with SF than with the RD group. Lastly, the SF group was associated with longer hospital stays and operation time, and more blood loss.

CONCLUSIONS

The pooled evidence suggests that fusion achieves better results than RD for RLDH. The results of this review should be further confirmed by future high-quality randomized controlled trials.

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.

Relationship between lumbar lordosis, pelvic parameters, PI-LL mismatch and outcome after short fusion surgery for lumbar degenerative disease. Literature review, rational and presentation of public study protocol: RELApSE study (registry for evaluation of lumbar artrodesis sagittal alignEment)

Background

Vertebral arthrodesis for degenerative pathology of the lumbar spine still remains burdened by clinical problems with significant negative results. The introduction of the sagittal balance assessment with the evaluation of the meaning of pelvic parameters and spinopelvic (PI-LL) mismatch offered new evaluation criteria for this widespread pathology, but there is a lack of consistent evidence on long-term outcome.

Methods

The authors performed an extensive systematic review of literature, with the aim to identify all potentially relevant studies about the role and usefulness of the restoration or the assessment of Sagittal balance in lumbar degenerative disease. They present the study protocol RELApSE (NCT05448092 ID) and discuss the rationale through a comprehensive literature review.

Results

From the 237 papers on this topic, a total of 176 articles were selected in this review. The analysis of these literature data shows sparse and variable evidence. There are no observations or guidelines about the value of lordosis restoration or PI-LL mismatch. Most of the works in the literature are retrospective, monocentric, based on small populations, and often address the topic evaluation partially.

Conclusions

The RELApSE study is based on the possibility of comparing a heterogeneous population by pathology and different surgical technical options on some homogeneous clinical and anatomic-radiological measures aiming to understanding the value that global lumbar and segmental lordosis, distribution of lordosis, pelvic tilt, and PI-LL mismatch may have on clinical outcome in lumbar degenerative pathology and on the occurrence of adjacent segment disease.

Clinicians' perceptions around discectomy surgery for lumbar disc herniation: a survey of orthopaedic and neuro-surgeons in Australia and New Zealand

INTRODUCTION

Understanding practice-based differences in treatment of lumbar disc herniations (LDHs) is vital for reducing unwarranted variation in the delivery of spine surgical health care. Identifying factors that influence surgeons' decision-making will offer useful insights for developing the most cost-effective and safest surgical strategy as well as developing surgeon education materials for common lumbar pathologies. This study was to capture any variation in techniques used by surgeons in Australia and New Zealand (ANZ) region, and perceived complications of different surgical procedures for primary and recurrent LDH (rLDH).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Web-based survey study was emailed to orthopaedic and neurosurgeons who routinely performed spinal surgery in ANZ from Decmber 20, 2018 to February 20, 2020. The response data were analyzed to assess for differences based on geography, practice setting, speciality, practice experience, practice length, and operative volume.

RESULTS

Invitations were sent to 150 surgeons; 96 (64%) responded. Most surgeons reported microdiscectomy as their surgical technique of choice for primary LDH (73%) and the first rLDH (72%). For the second rLDH, the preferred choice for most surgeons was fusion surgery (82%). A surgeon's practice setting (academic/private/hybrid) was a statistically significant factor in what surgical procedure was chosen for the first rLDH (P = 0.014). When stratifying based on surgeon experience, there were statisfically significant differences based on the annual volume of spine surgeries performed (perceived reherniation rates following primary discectomy, P = 0.013; perceived reherniation rates following revision surgeries, P = 0.017; perceived intraoperative complications rates following revision surgeries, P = 0.016) and based on the annual volume of lumbar discectomies performed (perceived reherniation rates following revision surgeries, P = 0.022; perceived intraoperative complications rates following revision surgeries, P = 0.036; perceived durotomy rates following primary discectomy, P = 0.023).

CONCLUSIONS

Surgeons' annual practice volume and practice setting have significant influences in the selection of surgical procedures and the perception of surgical complications when treating LDHs.

Fluoroscopy-Assisted Freehand Versus 3D-Navigated Imaging-Assisted Pedicle Screw Insertion: A Multicenter Study

INTRODUCTION

Pedicle screw placement is a widely accepted surgical procedure for spinal fixation. Despite increases in knowledge about and expertise in pedicle screw insertion techniques, overall reported screw misplacement rates are still high. Spinal neuronavigation and intraoperative computed tomography (CT) imaging improves the accuracy and safety of pedicle screw placement through the continuous monitoring of screw trajectory. The purpose of this study is to compare pedicle screw placement under an O-arm intraoperative imaging system assisted by the StealthStation navigation system with screw placement under conventional fluoroscopy (C-arm).

METHODS

For 222 patients, 1288 implanted pedicle screws in total were evaluated between 2018 and 2020. All patients underwent pedicle screw placement in the thoracic and lumbosacral regions through a posterior approach. Moreover, 107 patients (48.2%), 48 men and 59 women, underwent freehand screw placement under conventional fluoroscopy (C-arm group), whereas 115 patients (51.8%), 53 men and 62 women, underwent pedicle screw insertion under O-arm guidance with the help of the StealthStation neuronavigation system (Medtronic Navigation, Louisville, CO, USA) (O-arm group). Data were recorded and retrospectively analyzed. The accuracy of pedicle screw placement was postoperatively examined by using CT imaging and analyzed according to the Gertzbein-Robbins classification.

RESULTS

Of the 1288 pedicle screws, 665 (51.6%) were placed with C-arm image-guided assistance with a mean of 6.21 ± 2.1 screws per patient and 643 (48.4%) with O-arm image-guided assistance with a mean of 5.59 ± 1.6 screws. The average time for the screw placement procedure was 3:57 ± 1:07 h in the C-arm group and 4:21 ± 1:41 h in the O-arm group. A correct screw placement was detected in 92.78% of patients in the C-arm group and in 98.13% of patients in the O-arm group. Medial cortical breach was shown in 13 Grade B screws (1.95%), 19 Grade C (2.86%), 14 Grade D (2.11%), and two Grade E (0.3%) in the C-arm group, whereas this was shown in 11 Grade B screws (1.71%) and one Grade C (0.16%) in the O-arm group. Lateral breach occurred in eight screws in both groups. Anterior vertebral body breach was shown in eight screws in the C-arm group, whereas it was shown in four screws in the O-arm group. Reoperation for screw misplacement was mandatory in five patients in the C-arm group and two patients in the O-arm group.

CONCLUSION

Pedicle screw placement under an O-arm intraoperative imaging system assisted by spinal navigation showed greater accuracy compared with placement under conventional fluoroscopic control, thus avoiding the onset of major postoperative complications. Notably, a reduction in medial and anterior breaches has been demonstrated.

Development, validation, and visualization of a web-based nomogram to predict the effect of tubular microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation

Objective

The purpose of this study was to retrospectively collect the relevant clinical data of lumbar disc herniation (LDH) patients treated with the tubular microdiscectomy (TMD) technique, and to develop and validate a prediction model for predicting the treatment improvement rate of TMD in LDH patients at 1 year after surgery.

Methods

Relevant clinical data of LDH patients treated with the TMD technology were retrospectively collected. The follow-up period was 1 year after surgery. A total of 43 possible predictors were included, and the treatment improvement rate of the Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score of the lumbar spine at 1 year after TMD was used as an outcome measure. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) method was used to screen out the most important predictors affecting the outcome indicators. In addition, logistic regression was used to construct the model, and a nomogram of the prediction model was drawn.

Results

A total of 273 patients with LDH were included in this study. Age, occupational factors, osteoporosis, Pfirrmann classification of intervertebral disc degeneration, and preoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were screened out from the 43 possible predictors based on LASSO regression. A total of 5 predictors were included while drawing a nomogram of the model. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) value of the model was 0.795.

Conclusions

In this study, we successfully developed a good clinical prediction model that can predict the effect of TMD for LDH. A web calculator was designed on the basis of the model (https://fabinlin.shinyapps.io/DynNomapp/).

Application of Offset Dingo Instruments in Anterior to Psoas (ATP)/Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion (OLIF) Procedure: A Retrospective Study of 80 Patients

OBJECTIVE

Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) is a minimally invasive lumbar fusion procedure that has flourished in recent years. However, complications related to the anterior-to-psoas (ATP) approach have been reported. The purpose of this study was to assess the OLIF technique using offset design "Dingo" instruments for the treatment of degenerative lumbar disorders.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed to identify patients between March 2018 and November 2020 who underwent OLIF with conventional or modified instruments with a minimum follow-up of 12 months. Demographic data were recorded. Operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and length of hospital stay were compared between cohorts. Imaging parameters were measured and compared between cohorts before and after surgery. Clinical outcomes were assessed at each follow-up visit. All complications were reviewed.

RESULTS

A total of 80 consecutive patients were included. The mean follow-up times for the conventional group and modified group were 14.5 months and 16.3 months, respectively. The incidence of hip flexion weakness was 27.5% and 7.5% for the conventional cohort and modified cohort, respectively. The modified group was associated with a shorter operation time, shorter length of hospital stay, higher postoperative disk height and better cage position. The symptoms of all patients improved after surgery. At 1-week follow-up, the modified group showed significantly better clinical scores.

CONCLUSIONS

OLIF with modified instruments and techniques shows promising outcomes in reducing approach-related complications. Additionally, the modified technique is associated with a better cage position, shorter length of hospital stay and less postoperative pain in the early period.

Circumferential Fusion Employing Transforaminal vs. Direct Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion—A Potential Impact on Implants Stability

Background

Different fusion techniques were introduced in clinical practice in patients with lumbar degenerative disc disease, however, no evidence has been provided on the advantages of one technique over another.

The Objective of This Study

Is to assess the potential impact of circumferential fusion employing transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) vs. direct lateral interbody fusion (DLIF) on pedicle screw stability.

Materials and Methods

This is a single-center prospective evaluation of consecutive 138 patients with degenerative instability of lumbar spinal segments. Either conventional transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) with posterior fusion or direct lateral interbody fusion (DLIF) using cages of standard dimensions, were applied. The conventional open technique was used to supplement TLIF with pedicle screws while percutaneous screw placement was used in patients treated with DLIF. The duration of the follow-up accounted for 24 months. Signs of pedicle screws loosening (PSL) and bone union after fusion were assessed by the results of CT imaging. Fisher‘s exact test was used to assess the differences in the rate of CT loosening and revision surgery because of implant instability. Logistic regression was used to assess the association between potential factors and complication rate.

Results

The rate of PSL detected by CT and relevant revision surgery in groups treated with TLIF and DLIF accounted for 25 (32.9%) vs. 2 (3.2%), respectively, for the former and 9 (12.0%) vs. 0 (0%) for the latter (p &lt; 0.0001 and p = 0.0043) respectively. According to the results of logistic regression, a decrease in radiodensity values and a greater number of levels fused were associated with a rise in PSL rate. DLIF application in patients with radiodensity below 140 HU was associated with a considerable decrease in complication rate. Unipolar or bipolar pseudoarthrosis in patients operated on with TLIF was associated with a rise in PSL rate while patients treated with DLIF tolerate delayed interbody fusion formation. In patients treated with TLIF supplementary total or partial posterior fusion resulted in a decline in PSL rate.

Conclusion

Even though the supplementary posterior fusion may considerably reduce the rate of PSL in patients treated with TLIF, the application of DLIF provide greater stability resulting in a substantial decline in PSL rate and relevant revision surgery.

Comparison Between PE-TLIF and MIS-TLIF in the Treatment of Middle-Aged and Elderly Patients with Single-Level Lumbar Disc Herniation

Objective

To evaluate the early clinical effect of percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (PE-TLIF) and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) surgery in the treatment of middle-aged and elderly patients with single-level lumbar disc herniation accompanied by lumbar instability.

Methods

From January 2019 to June 2020, a total of 82 consecutive patients were categorised into PE-TLIF group and MIS-TLIF group based on different surgical methods. The visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, perioperative objective serological index, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, time to back to work or normal life, and Modified MacNab score were used as the evaluation indexes. The differences between the two groups were analyzed and the clinical effects were compared.

Results

The VAS back pain of PE-TLIF group was decreased compared to that of MIS-TLIF group in the postoperative 1 week and 1 month. The operative time in PE-TLIF group was obviously longer than that in MIS-TLIF group. The hospital stay was significantly shorter in PE-TLIF group than that in MIS-TLIF group. More intraoperative blood loss and postoperative drainage were recorded in MIS-TLIF group. Compared with MIS-TLIF, PE-TLIF surgery was associated with a shorter time to ambulation after surgery and a shorter time to back to work or normal life. Significant statistical differences were observed in IL-6, CRP, and CK on postoperative 3 days between the two groups.

Conclusion

For middle-aged and elderly patients, PE-TLIF and MIS-TLIF surgery both have obvious clinical efficacy and safety. However, with less intraoperative blood loss, shorter recovery time and less injury to the patients, people undergoing PE-TLIF surgery can return to work or normal life faster. It is speculated that PE-TLIF has a higher incidence of complications and recurrence rate than that MIS-TLIF. PE-TLIF may be a better choice for middle-aged and elderly patients with single-level lumbar disc herniation.

Emerging Issues Questioning the Current Treatment Strategies for Lumbar Disc Herniation

Lumbar disc herniation is among the common phenotypes of degenerative lumbar spine diseases, significantly affecting patients' quality of life. The practice pattern is diverse. Choosing conservative measures or surgical treatments is still controversial in some areas. For those who have failed conservative treatment, surgery with or without instrumentation is recommended, causing significant expenditures and frustrating complications, that should not be ignored. In the article, we performed a literature review and summarized the evidence by subheadings to unravel the cons of surgical intervention for lumbar disc herniation. There are tetrad critical issues about surgical treatment of lumbar disc herniation, i.e., favorable natural history, insufficient evidence in a recommendation of fusion surgery for patients, metallosis, and implant removal. Firstly, accumulating evidence reveals immune privilege and auto-immunity hallmarks of human lumbar discs within the closed niche. Progenitor cells within human discs further expand the capacity with the endogenous repair. Clinical watchful follow-up studies with repeated diagnostic imaging reveal spontaneous resolution for lumbar disc herniation, even calcified tissues. Secondly, emerging evidence indicates long-term complications of lumbar fusion, such as adjacent segment disease, pseudarthrosis, implant failure, and sagittal spinal imbalance, which get increasing attention. Thirdly, systemic and local reactions (metallosis) for metal instrumentation have been noted with long-term health concerns and toxicity. Fourthly, the indications and timing for spinal implant removal have not reached a consensus. Other challenging issues include postoperative lumbar stiffness. The review provided evidence from a negative perspective for surgeons and patients who attempt to choose surgical treatment. Collectively, the emerging underlying evidence questions the benefits of traditional surgery for patients with lumbar disc herniation. Therefore, the long-term effects of surgery should be closely observed. Surgical decisions should be made prudently for each patient.

Disparities in Rates of Fusions in Lumbar Disc Pathologies

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

To identify disparities in surgical decision making for lumbar disc pathologies based on patient demographics, hospital characteristics, and temporal characteristics of admission.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients admitted for surgical intervention of disc herniation or degeneration was performed to observe the effect of demographic, hospital, and admission-related factors on the decision to perform an isolated decompression or decompression with single level fusion using the National Inpatient Sample.

RESULTS

Of 84 953 patients with lumbar disc pathologies, 69 975 patients were treated electively, and 14 978 patients were treated nonelectively. Hispanic and Asian/Pacific Islander patients were less likely to receive a fusion for elective cases compared with White patients (odds ratio [OR] 0.88, P = .004; OR 0.70, P < .001, respectively). In elective cases, privately insured and self-paying patients were less likely to receive a fusion compared with Medicare patients (OR 0.83, P < .001; OR 0.66, P < .001, respectively), while this effect was limited to self-pay patients in nonelective cases (OR 0.44, P < .001). Urban teaching and nonteaching hospitals were less likely to perform fusions compared with rural hospitals in nonelective cases (OR 0.47, P < .001; OR 0.58, P < .001, respectively). Private for-profit hospitals were associated with higher rates of fusion in both elective and nonelective cases (OR 1.16, P = .003; OR 1.94, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

This study illustrates disparities in the modality of surgical intervention for lumbar disc pathologies in terms of demographics, hospital characteristics, and temporal characteristics of admission. The development of more evidence-based guidelines is warranted to reduce variability seen in treatment regimens for these conditions.

[Effect of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors on functional activity of the spinal cord and nerve roots in patients with degenerative lumbar spine diseases]

High neuroprotective activity of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors in patients with vascular diseases of the brain and spinal cord has been confirmed.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors on functional activity of the spinal cord and nerve roots in patients with degenerative lumbar spine diseases.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective observational cohort study was performed. We evaluated clinical and radiological parameters (gender, age of patients, type of antihypertensive drug, concomitant diseases, ODI (6) and SF-36 (7) scores of patient quality of life), functional recovery, increase of signal intensity and its area in T2WIs, localization and maximum spinal canal stenosis, as well as maximum spinal cord and nerve root compression.

RESULTS

The study included 117 medical records of respondents (88 men and 29 women aged 56.9±13.2 years) who underwent lumbar spine surgery for degenerative diseases. Arterial hypertension was verified in 68 (58.1%) patients, diabetes mellitus in 22 (18.8%) respondents. Age (p=0.002), diabetes mellitus (p=0.007), arterial hypertension (p=0.015) and antihypertensive therapy (p=0.023) were significantly associated with worse clinical and neurological status of patients. Binary logistic regression model demonstrated that only arterial hypertension was significantly associated with low preoperative quality of life (p=0.002).

CONCLUSION

Intake of AT II-1 receptor blockers and angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors for arterial hypertension is a significant predictor of decrease in signal intensity of the spinal cord and its roots according to T2WIs.

Age, body mass index, and osteoporosis are more predictive than imaging for adjacent-segment reoperation after lumbar fusion

Background:

Adjacent-segment disease (ASD) is a well-described long-term complication after lumbar fusion. There is a lack of consensus about the risk factors for development of ASD, but identifying them could improve surgical outcomes. Our goal was to analyze the effect of patient characteristics and radiographic parameters on the development of symptomatic ASD requiring revision surgery after posterior lumbar fusion.

Methods:

In this retrospective cohort study, we identified patients who underwent lumbar fusion surgery and revision surgery from May 2012 to November 2018 using an institutional lumbar fusion registry. Patients having both pre- and post-operative upright radiographs were included in the study. Revision surgeries for which the index operation was performed at an outside hospital were excluded from analysis. Univariate analysis was conducted on candidate variables, and variables with P< 0.2 were selected for multivariate logistic regression.

Results:

Of the 106 patients identified, 21 required reoperation (29 months average follow-up). Age >65 years (OR 4.14, 95% CI 1.46–11.76, P= 0.008), body mass index (BMI) >34 (OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.04–1.23, P = 0.004), and osteoporosis (OR 14, 95% CI 1.38–142.42, P = 0.03) were independent predictors of reoperation in the multivariate analysis. Increased facet diastasis at fusion levels (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.42–0.85, P = 0.004) was associated with reduced reoperation rates. Change in segmental LL at the index operation level, rostral and caudal facet diastasis, vacuum discs, and T2 hyperintensity in the facets were not predictors of reoperation.

Conclusion:

Age >65, BMI >34, and osteoporosis were independent predictors of adjacent-segment reoperation after lumbar spinal fusion.

Return to work in patients with lumbar disc herniation undergoing fusion

BACKGROUND

Lumbar disc herniation (LDH) is a common problem. When surgical treatment is required, the intervention is typically decompression without fusion. Successful return-to-work (RTW) is a standard expectation with these limited procedures. Occasionally, the size or location of the disc herniation suggests the need for fusion, but the inability to RTW is a significant concern in these cases. The purpose of this study is to determine if the addition of lumbar fusion, as compared to decompression alone, will substantially diminish RTW in patients with lumbar disc herniation.

METHODS

This is a longitudinal cohort study using prospectively collected data from the Quality and Outcomes Database (QOD). Patients with LDH, eligible to RTW (not retired, a student, or on disability) with complete 12-month follow-up data, were identified. Standard demographic and surgical variables, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and RTW status at 3 and 12 months were collected.

RESULTS

Of the 5062 patients identified, 4560 (90%) had decompression alone and 502 (10%) had a concurrent fusion. Age and gender were similar in the two groups. The fusion group had worse back pain (NRS 6.52 vs. 5.96) and less leg pain (6.31 vs. 7.01) at baseline compared to the no fusion group. Statistically significant improvement in all PROs was seen in both groups. RTW at 3 months post-op was seen in 85% of decompression cases and 66% of cases with supplemental fusion. At 12 months post-op, RTW increased to 93% and 82%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The need for fusion in LDH cases is unusual, seen in only 10% of cases in this series. The addition of fusion decreased the RTW rate from 85 to 66% at 3 months and from 93 to 82% at 12 months post-op. While the difference is significant, the ultimate deterioration in RTW may be less than anticipated. A reasonable RTW rate can still be expected in the rare patient who requires fusion as part of their treatment for LDH.

Low-back pain after lumbar discectomy for disc herniation: what can you tell your patient?

OBJECTIVE

Lumbar discectomy (LD) is frequently performed to alleviate radicular pain resulting from disc herniation. While this goal is achieved in most patients, improvement in low-back pain (LBP) has been reported inconsistently. The goal of this study was to characterize how LBP evolves following discectomy.

METHODS

The authors performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected patient data from the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN) registry. Patients who underwent surgery for lumbar disc herniation were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome was a clinically significant reduction in the back pain numerical rating scale (BPNRS) assessed at 12 months. Binary logistic regression was used to model the relationship between the primary outcome and potential predictors.

RESULTS

There were 557 patients included in the analysis. The chief complaint was radiculopathy in 85%; 55% of patients underwent a minimally invasive procedure. BPNRS improved at 3 months by 48% and this improvement was sustained at all follow-ups. LBP and leg pain improvement were correlated. Clinically significant improvement in BPNRS at 12 months was reported by 64% of patients. Six factors predicted a lack of LBP improvement: female sex, low education level, marriage, not working, low expectations with regard to LBP improvement, and a low BPNRS preoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinically significant improvement in LBP is observed in the majority of patients after LD. These data should be used to better counsel patients and provide accurate expectations about back pain improvement.

Charlson Comorbidity Index: An Inaccurate Predictor of Minimally Invasive Lumbar Spinal Fusion Outcomes

BACKGROUND

There is a scarcity of research on the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and its influence on minimum clinically important difference (MCID) achievement after minimally invasive (MIS) transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). The objective of this study is to detail the association between the CCI and attaining MCID after MIS TLIF.

METHODS

A prospective surgical registry was retrospectively reviewed for spine surgeries between May 2015 and February 2019. Inclusion criteria were primary or revision, 1- or 2-level MIS TLIF procedures. Patients were stratified based on CCI score: 0 points (no comorbidities), 1-2 points (mild CCI), ≥3 points (moderate CCI). Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative variables were assessed by subgroup using appropriate statistical analysis. Subgroups were analyzed with linear regression or χ² tests for continuous or categorical variables, respectively. Subgroup scores, improvement, and MCID achievement were assessed at postoperative timepoints (eg, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year) for back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), SF-12 Physical Composite Score (PCS), and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function (PROMIS PF).

RESULTS

A total of 171 patients were included (n = 51 [no comorbidities], n = 73 [mild CCI], and n = 47 [moderate CCI]). Higher CCI patients were older and more likely to be smokers, diabetic, arthritic, hypertensive, or have a malignancy history (P < 0.003). Preoperatively, ODI and PROMIS PF were the only patient-reported outcomes with a significant association by CCI group (P = 0.015 and 0.014). Back pain was the only measure that had a significant association with the CCI subgroup at 1 year for score (P = 0.002) or MCID (P = 0.028).

CONCLUSIONS

By 1 year, regardless of the number of comorbidities, a similar proportion of patients undergoing MIS TLIF were able to achieve MCID for visual analog scale leg, SF-12 PCS, and PROMIS PF. Patients with higher comorbidities are not likely to experience a significant difference in symptom improvement. Regardless of CCI score, MIS TLIF can have a significant benefit for patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Text.

Can Indirect Decompression Reduce Adjacent Segment Degeneration and the Associated Reoperation Rate After Lumbar Interbody Fusion? A Systemic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

We sought to assess and compare the rate of adjacent segment degeneration (ASDeg), adjacent segment disease, and related reoperations between patients who underwent lumbar interbody fusion surgery using indirect or direct decompression.

METHODS

On the basis of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to identify and analyze studies that compared the rate of ASDeg, adjacent segment disease, and related reoperations between indirect and direct decompression techniques. Indirect decompression included anterior lumbar interbody fusion, lateral lumbar interbody fusion, and oblique lateral interbody fusion, whereas direct decompression included posterior or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.

RESULTS

Seven studies including a total of 576 patients (indirect: 314; direct: 262) were identified. The pooled rates of ASDeg were 19.4% (45/232) and 34.9% (66/189) for indirect and direct decompression, respectively. A fixed-effects model showed 0.34 times lower odds of developing ASDeg in the indirect decompression group (odds ratio = 0.34, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.20, 0.57). The pooled incidence of reoperation was 2.5% (8/314) and 6.1% (16/262) for indirect and direct decompression, respectively. A fixed-effects model showed 0.40 times lower odds of reoperation from ASDeg in the indirect decompression group (odds ratio = 0.40, 95% CI = 0.18, 0.89). The pooled mean difference for the segmental lordosis angle was 1.80 degrees (95% CI = 0.74, 2.86) and 7.11 degrees (95% CI = 4.47, 9.74) for total lumbar lordosis angle, favoring indirect decompression.

CONCLUSIONS

Indirect decompression showed lower odds of developing ASDeg and undergoing reoperation for ASDeg after lumbar interbody fusion surgery in this meta-analysis. However, the limited number and quality of the included studies should be considered when interpreting the results.

The Results of Using a Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Cage at the Upper Lumbar Level

Aim

The aim of this study is to apply surgical treatments to upper lumbar disc hernias in order to provide lumbar stability and lumbar lordosis using a transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) cage and to preserve the success rate of surgical results by protecting neural structures without excessive subject tension.

Material and methods

Between 2012 and 2017, 32 patients who had undergone an operation for upper lumbar disc herniation and who had received a transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cage using a posterior technique were evaluated retrospectively.

Results

The radiological and clinical findings, surgical methods, and results of the patients were evaluated. In our study, 25 (78.1%) of the patients with upper lumbar disc hernias who were evaluated retrospectively were female and seven (21.9%) were male. Their average age was 55.43 years. The average follow-up was 21.75 months. The most common complaints were lower back pain, leg pain, and claudication. In the findings from neurological examinations, a positive result on the femoral stretching test occurred in 30 (93.7%) patients. In the degenerative spinal structure of patients at the L1-2 and L2-3 levels, a transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion was performed via a wide laminectomy with posterior stabilization due to a wide-bottomed disc hernia and stenosis. Only one of the patients with a neurological deficit still had a motor deficit after surgery.

Conclusion

While planning a surgery for upper lumbar disc hernias, the anatomical features of this region and the patients' radiological and neurological findings should be carefully evaluated. If TLIF is performed during upper lumbar region surgery, it may be preferable to perform it using a posterior technique.

Invasive Treatments for Low Back Disorders

OBJECTIVE

This abbreviated version of the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine's Low Back Disorders guideline reviews the evidence and recommendations developed for invasive treatments used to manage low back disorders.

METHODS

Comprehensive systematic literature reviews were accomplished with article abstraction, critiquing, grading, evidence table compilation, and guideline finalization by a multidisciplinary expert panel and extensive peer-review to develop evidence-based guidance. Consensus recommendations were formulated when evidence was lacking and often relied on analogy to other disorders for which evidence exists. A total of 47 high-quality and 321 moderate-quality trials were identified for invasive management of low back disorders.

RESULTS

Guidance has been developed for the invasive management of acute, subacute, and chronic low back disorders and rehabilitation. This includes 49 specific recommendations.

CONCLUSION

Quality evidence should guide invasive treatment for all phases of managing low back disorders.

Lumbar disc herniation surgery: Is it worth adding interspinous spacer or instrumented fusion with regard to disc excision alone?

BACKGROUND

Discectomy is sometimes associated with recurrence of disc herniation and pain after surgery. The evidence to use an interspinous dynamic stabilization system or instrumented fusion in association with disc excision to prevent pain and re-operation remains controversial. In this study, we analyzed if adding interspinous spacer or fusion, offers advantages in relation to microdiscetomy alone.

METHODS

Patients with lumbar disc herniation were divided in 3 groups; microdiscectomy alone (MD), microdiscectomy plus interspinous spacer (IS) and open discectomy plus posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). The clinical efficacy was measured using the Owestry Disability Index (ODI). Other outcome parameters including visual analogue scale for pain (VAS) back and legs, length of stay, direct in-hospital cost, 90-day complication rate, and 1-year re-operation rate were also evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 103 patients whose mean age was 39.1 (±8.5) years were included. A significant improvement of the ODI and VAS back and legs pain baseline score was detected in the 3 groups. After 1 year, no significant differences in ODI, VAS back and legs pain were found between the 3 groups. There was an increase of 169% of the total direct in- hospital cost in IS group and 287% in PLIF group, in relation to MD (p < 0.001). Length of stay was 86% higher in the IS group and 384% longer in the PLIF group compared to MD (p < 0.001). The 1 year re-operation rates were 5.6%, 10% and 16.2% (p = 0.33). Discectomy seems to be the main responsible for the clinical improvement, without the interspinous spacer or fusion adding any benefit. The addition of interspinous spacer or fusion increased direct in-hospital cost, length of stay, and did not protect against re-operation.

Revision Discectomy with or without Fusion for the Treatment of Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Nationwide Analysis of Risk Profiles and Short-Term Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

We compared the demographics, risk factors, and complications for adult patients with recurrent lumbar disc herniation (RLDH) undergoing revision discectomy with or without concurrent fusion.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was used to identify patients who had undergone revision discectomy with or without simultaneous fusion. The demographic variables and various peri- and postoperative complications were compared between these 2 patient groups.

RESULTS

A total of 6901 discectomy patients were included in the present study, of whom 2996 (43.4%) had undergone revision discectomy with fusion and 3905 (56.6%) had undergone revision discectomy alone. The revision discectomy with fusion group was significantly more likely to be older, female, and White or Black and to have a higher average body mass index than was the revision discectomy alone group. The discectomy with fusion group had longer hospital lengths of stay and was more likely to have a diagnosis of hypertension, insulin-dependent and non-insulin-dependent diabetes, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. In addition, the patients who had undergone discectomy with fusion were significantly more likely to develop pneumonia, require ventilation for >48 hours, require a blood transfusion, and to develop urinary tract infection, myocardial infarction, deep vein thrombosis, or pulmonary embolism compared with the patients who had undergone revision discectomy only.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings reveal that older patients with more comorbidities were more likely to undergo revision discectomy with fusion. Also, this surgical group experienced more adverse events after their procedure compared with the revision discectomy only group.

Clinical Outcomes of Decompression Alone Versus and Decompression and Fusion for First Episode Recurrent Disc Herniation

STUDY DESIGN

Longitudinal cohort.

OBJECTIVE

It is unclear if patients with a recurrent disc herniation benefit from a concurrent fusion compared with a repeat decompression alone. We compared outcomes of decompression alone (D0) versus decompression and fusion (DF) for recurrent disc herniation.

METHODS

Patients enrolled in the Quality and Outcomes Database from 3 sites with a first episode of recurrent disc herniation were identified. Demographic, surgical, and radiographic data including the presence of listhesis and extent of facet resection on computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging prior to the index surgery were collected. Patient-reported outcomes were collected preoperatively and at 3 and 12 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

Of 94 cases identified, 55 had D0 and 39 had DF. Patients were similar in age, sex distribution, smoking status, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade and surgical levels. Presence of listhesis (D0 = 7, DF = 5, P = .800) and extent of facet resection (D0 = 19%, DF = 16%, P = .309) prior to index surgery were similar between the 2 groups. Estimated blood loss (D0 = 26 cm³, DF = 329 cm³, P < .001), operating room time (D0 = 79 minutes, DF = 241 minutes, P < .001) and length of stay (D0 <1 day, DF = 4 days, P < .001) were significantly less in the D0 group. Preoperative and 1-year postoperative patient-reported outcomes were similar in both groups. Three patients in the D0 group and 2 patients in the DF group required revision. Regression analysis showed that presence of listhesis, extent of facet resection and fusion were not associated with the 12-month Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score.

CONCLUSION

For a first episode recurrent disc herniation, surgeons can expect similar outcomes whether patients are treated with decompression alone or decompression and fusion.

Full endoscopic interlaminar discectomy (FEID) for recurrent lumbar disc herniation: surgical technique, clinical outcome, and prognostic factors

Background

The objective of this study is to determine the effectiveness and prognostic factors of revisional full endoscopic interlaminar discectomy (FEID) for recurrent herniation after conventional open disc surgery. The major concerns of the repeated discectomy for recurrent lumbar disc herniation (RLDH) are the epidural scar and postoperative segmental instability. Compared to open discectomy, endoscopic method has advantages of less tissue traumatization, clearer visualization and better tissue identification. With the improvement of endoscopic technique and instrument, the problems related to adhesive scar tissues or postoperative instability could be overcome.

Methods

From June 2014 to December 2016, FEID was performed in consecutive 24 patients for RLDH. The age ranged from 25 to 60 years (mean 44.6 years). The level operated was L5-S1 in 16 cases and L4-5 in 8 cases. To avoid injury to the neural tissue, we started with the bony structure. A small part of facet or lamina might be resected in severe stenotic or adhesive condition. Aggressive separation of the scar from the neural tissue might lead to dural tear and should be avoided. The herniated disc material was removed after neural tissue had been clearly identified and protected.

Results

The follow-up period was at least 24 months. The visual analog scale (VAS) for leg pain and back pain, and Oswestry disability index (ODI) showed significant improvement after treatment. Excellent or good outcome by the modified Macnab's criteria was obtained in 22 of 24 patients at two years follow-up. Excellent outcome was noted in 100 percent patients younger than 50 years. Small durotomy occurred in 2 patients and no visible cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leakage was detected despite repair was not performed. Two additional surgery was performed including one repeated FEID for re-recurrence of disc herniation and one fusion surgery for postoperative back pain.

Conclusions

FEID is a safe and effective alternative for recurrent disc herniation. The successful rate was greater than 90 percent, especially in the younger patients with the advantages of early recovery and no need for fusion.

Outcomes of Discectomy in Young Adults With Large Central Lumbar Disc Herniations Presenting With Predominant Leg Pain

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES

Discectomy alone or discectomy with fusion have been 2 polarized options in the management of large lumbar disc herniations presenting with leg-dominant pain in young patients. The objective of the study was to evaluate the outcomes of discectomy in young patients with large central lumbar disc herniation (CLDH) presenting with predominant leg pain.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Young patients (<45 years) presenting with predominant leg pain and MRI confirmed diagnosis of CLDH between April 2007-January 2017 were included in the study. All patients underwent tubular microdiscectomy. Outcomes of surgery were evaluated using visual analogue score (VAS) for leg and back pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Macnab's criteria.

RESULTS

Ninety patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The mean age of patients was 34.9 years (range 19-45 years). Mean follow-up was 5.09 years (range 2-10 years). The incidence of CLDH in young adults was 30% and incidence among all "operated" lumbar disc herniations was 15.9%. The mean VAS for leg pain improved from 7.48 ± 0.9 to 2.22 ± 0.84 (P < .05) and the mean ODI changed from 60.53 ± 7.84 to 18.33 ± 6.20 (P < .05). Fifty-nine patients (65.6%) reported excellent, 25 patients (27.8%) reported good, 3 patients each (3.3%) as fair and poor outcomes respectively.

CONCLUSION

Discectomy alone for CLDH with predominant leg pain is associated with high success rate and low need for a secondary surgical procedure. Patient selection in terms of leg-dominant pain may be the main attribute for lower incidence of recurrence, postoperative back-pain, and instability needing a secondary procedure. Minimally invasive discectomy may provide an added advantage of preserving normal spinal anatomy, thus minimizing the need for primary spinal fusion in these patients.

Integrating Motivational Interviewing in Pain Neuroscience Education for People With Chronic Pain: A Practical Guide for Clinicians

Pain neuroscience education (PNE) and motivational interviewing (MI) have been widely implemented and tested in the field of chronic pain management, and both strategies have been shown to be effective in the short term (small effect sizes) for the management of chronic pain. PNE uses contemporary pain science to educate patients about the biopsychosocial nature of the chronicity of their pain experience. The goal of PNE is to optimize patients' pain beliefs/perceptions to facilitate the acquisition of adaptive pain-coping strategies. MI, on the other hand, is a patient-centered communication style for eliciting and enhancing motivation for behavior change by shifting the patient away from a state of indecision or uncertainty. Conceptually, PNE and MI appear to be complementary interventions, with complementary rather than overlapping effects; MI primarily improves cognitive and behavioral awareness and, potentially, adherence to treatment principles, whereas PNE potentially increases pain knowledge/beliefs, awareness, and willingness to explore psychological factors that are potentially associated with pain. Therefore, combining PNE with MI might lead to improved outcomes with larger and longer-lasting effect sizes. The combined use of PNE and MI in patients having chronic pain is introduced here, along with a description of how clinicians might be able to integrate PNE and MI in the treatment of patients experiencing chronic pain. Clinical trials are needed to examine whether combining PNE with MI is superior to PNE or MI alone for improving pain and quality of life in patients having chronic pain.

Acupuncture for lumbar disc herniation: Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

As development of society and change of modern life style, the prevalence of lumbar disc herniation (LDH) has been increasing. Being a major cause of low back pain, sciatica and radicular leg pain, LDH imposes a heavy burden on both individual and society. Because of high surgically intervene rate, non-invasive (non-surgical) treatments are recommended for most cases. Acupuncture has the advantages of low risk, good effect and low cost which has been proven that could alleviate pain while physical therapy plays a major role in the treatment of LDH in the vast majority of countries. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture for LDH.

METHODS

RCTs on ACU treating LDH will be searched from the following databases: PubMed, Web of science, EmBase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang data, from their inception to May 2020. The primary outcomes are verbal rating scale and functional disability. Two reviewers will independently exclude substandard articles and extract eligible data. The risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane Handbook 5.1.0 for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Egger test will be used to assess the reporting bias. Heterogeneity will be evaluated by the I statistic and Q test. We will conduct the meta-analysis using Stata V12.0 to evaluate the effectiveness of ACU for LDH. In case of high heterogeneity, sensitivity analysis of different items and subgroup analysis will be performed. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation System will be used to assess the quality of evidence.

RESULTS

The results of this review will be submitted to a journal for publication.

CONCLUSION

This proposed systematic review will evaluate the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture for LDH.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (registration number CRD42019148272).

Lifestyle and Chronic Pain across the Lifespan: An Inconvenient Truth?

Chronic pain has a tremendous personal and socioeconomic impact and remains difficult to treat. Therefore, it is important to provide an update on the current understanding regarding lifestyle factors in people with chronic pain across the lifespan. Lifestyle factors such as physical (in)activity, sedentary behavior, stress, poor sleep, unhealthy diet, and smoking are associated with chronic pain severity and sustainment. This applies to all age categories, that is, chronic pain across the lifespan. Yet current treatment options often do not or only partly address the many lifestyle factors associated with chronic pain or attempt to address them in a standard format rather than providing an individually tailored multimodal lifestyle intervention. The evidence regarding lifestyle factors is available in adults, but limited in children and older adults having chronic pain, providing important avenues for future research. In conclusion, it is proposed that treatment approaches for people with chronic pain should address all relevant lifestyle factors concomitantly in an individually-tailored multimodal intervention. Ultimately, this should lead to improved outcomes and decrease the psychological and socioeconomic burden of chronic pain. Level of Evidence: IV.

Surgical Outcomes for Upper Lumbar Disc Herniation: Decompression Alone versus Fusion Surgery

Upper lumbar herniated intervertebral disc (HIVD), defined as L1-2 and L2-3 levels, presents with a lower incidence and more unfavorable surgical outcomes than lower lumbar levels. There are very few reports onthe appropriate surgical interventions for treating upper lumbar HIVD. This study aimed to evaluate the surgical outcome of decompression alone, when compared with spinal fusion surgery. A retrospective study involving a total of 7592 patients who underwent surgery due to HIVD in our institution was conducted. A total of 49 patients were included in this study: 33 patients who underwent decompression-only surgery and 16 patients who underwent fusion surgery. Demographic data, perioperative information, and functional outcomes were recorded. The visual analog scale (VAS) scores showed improvement in both groups postoperatively. The three-month postoperative Oswestry Disability Index score was significantly better in the fusion group. Additionally, 10 patients (76.9%) in the decompression group and 5 patients (83.3%) in the fusion group reported improvement in preoperative motor weakness. The final “satisfactory” rate was 66.7% in the decompression group and 93.8% in the fusion group (p = 0.034). The overall surgical outcomes of patients with upper lumbar HIVD were satisfactory in this study without any major complications. More reliable satisfactory rates and better functional scores at the three-month postoperative follow-up were reported in the fusion group.

An evaluation of biomaterials and osteobiologics for arthrodesis achievement in spine surgery

An increasing variety of orthobiologic materials, including autologous and allogeneic bone graft, bone marrow aspirate, demineralized bone matrix, ceramics, and growth factors are available to the spine surgeon. Although autologous bone graft remains the gold standard material, concerns for failure in achieving fusion have prompted evaluation of current and new biologic materials. As such, this review attempts to summarize the available biologic materials with their pertinent characteristics, advantages, disadvantages, and primary uses.

Impact of tramadol abuse on clinical outcome of lumbar discectomy patients'

BACKGROUND DATA

Little data exists regarding the effect of chronic preoperative tramadol abuse on the clinical outcomes after surgery. Lumbar discectomy is a very common procedure that has a predictably high success rate for relief of radicular pain. In addition, the patient population presenting for this procedure has a high propensity for preoperative narcotic use.

PURPOSE

The study aims to identify an association between preoperative tramadol abuse and clinical outcome after lumbar discectomy.

STUDY DESIGN

A descriptive controlled, non-randomized, clinical study.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Sixty patients underwent surgery for lumbar disc herniation. They were divided into two groups; control group and tramadol abuse group. Each group included 30 patients. They were operated between 2015 and 2016. Participants were evaluated pre-operatively and post-operatively every three months. Strict history taking regarding preoperative and postoperative pain medication utilization, operative time, hospital stay and complications were assessed. Pain was scored by a VAS for both lower limbs and back pain. The clinical outcomes were compared using the Prolo economic and functional rating scale.

RESULTS

In Tramadol abuse group, 12 (40%) continued to use tramadol after surgery. Tramadol abuse group showed worse clinical outcome parameters including worse VAS for low back pain and lower limb pain, worse Prolo economic, functional rating scale. In addition, tramadol abuse group showed significantly higher complications rate in the early post-operative and during the follow up period.

CONCLUSION

Tramadol abuse before lumbar discectomy was found to be associated with continued tramadol abuse after surgery and worse functional outcomes following surgery. Surgeons may want to counsel their patients about the potential for inferior clinical outcomes if narcotics were used before surgery.

Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Review

STUDY DESIGN

Narrative review.

OBJECTIVES

To identify the risk factors and surgical management for recurrent lumbar disc herniation using a systematic review of available evidence.

METHODS

We conducted a review of PubMed, MEDLINE, OVID, and Cochrane Library databases using search terms identifying recurrent lumbar disc herniation and risk factors or surgical management. Abstracts of all identified articles were reviewed. Detailed information from articles with levels I to IV evidence was extracted and synthesized.

RESULTS

There is intermediate levels III to IV evidence detailing perioperative risk factors and the optimal surgical technique for recurrent lumbar disc herniations.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple risk factors including smoking, diabetes mellitus, obesity, intraoperative technique, and biomechanical factors may contribute to the development of recurrent disc disease. There is widespread variation regarding optimal surgical management for recurrent herniation, which often include revision discectomies with or without fusion via open and minimally invasive techniques.

Lumbar disc herniation: long-term outcomes after mini-open discectomy

PURPOSE

The outcomes of mini open discectomy in lumbar disc herniation are usually satisfying. Our study aims at finding if its results are still good at long-term follow-up.

METHODS

We reviewed 552 patients operated between 1993 and 2013 by mini open discectomy procedure. Our main evaluation criterion is a modified Stauffer and Coventry classification applied during follow-up visits at three months, one year, five years, and every five years. The secondary criterion was the Oswestry Disability Index.

RESULTS

The outcomes are considered good to very good in 87.3% of the cases at one year follow-up. These results deteriorate after an average follow-up of 14.7 years but remain satisfactory with 63.7%. The global decrease is 23.6%. The Oswestry Score decreases by 35 points at the same follow-up. In addition, 6.52% of patients required fusion at first revision and 1.08% at second revision. We also noticed 51 (9.2%) post-operative recurrences at the same level. In 23 (4.16%) of them, we proceeded to a new discectomy in an average interval of 41.4 months. At an adjacent level, 29 patients (5.2%) presented a new symptomatic disc herniation; among them, eight cases (1.44%) needed discectomy. The re-operative rate (including recurrent disc herniation and fusion for degenerative indications) is 10.68% at the last follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Nearly 2/3 of our patient series keep satisfactory outcomes after about 15-year follow-up. The mini open discectomy remains a reliable surgical technique provided we respect the indications and surgical requirements. This procedure also avoids excessive instrumentation and its possible iatrogenic complications. Powerful randomized and controlled trials are needed to strengthen these deductions.

Abandoned techniques in spine surgery

In spine surgery, certain surgical techniques and devices are currently in marked decline or have been completely abandoned. Although used in thousands of patients, such treatments failed to demonstrate durable and sound effectiveness, and sometimes associate inacceptable morbidity. Chemopapain injections, percutaneous discectomy, laser discectomy or antiadhesion gels are examples of abandoned therapies. Some other techniques are in frank decline like implantation of interspinous devices or lumbar disc prosthesis. In general, a technique is abandoned due to inefficacy, excessive associated morbidity, substituted by another more efficacious and less aggressive technique, end of commercialization, or usage prohibition. In the last decades, a great commercial pressure plus an increasing social demand have managed to convince many spine surgeons to indicate treatments not sufficiently supported by scientific evidence nor consolidated over time, many of which are eventually abandoned.

Comparison of implant survivability in primary 1- to 2-level lumbar fusion amongst opioid abusers and non-opioid abusers

Background

Primary lumbar fusion (LF) is a treatment option for degenerative disc disease. The literature is limited regarding postoperative complications in opioid abusers undergoing LF. The purpose of this study was to compare 2-year short term implant-related complications, infection rates, 90-day readmission rates, in-hospital length of stay, and cost of care amongst opioid abusers (OAS) and non-opioid abusers (NAS) undergoing primary 1- to 2-level primary lumbar fusion (1-2LF).

Methods

A retrospective review was performed using the Medicare Standard Analytical Files from an administrative database. Patients undergoing LF were queried using the International Classification of Disease, ninth revision (ICD-9) procedure codes 81.04-81.08. Patients who underwent 1-2LF were filtered using ICD-9 procedure code 81.62. Inclusion criteria for the study group consisted of patients undergoing primary 1-2LF with a diagnosis of opioid abuse and dependency 90-day prior to the procedure. NAS undergoing 1-2LF served as controls. Patients in the study group were matched to controls according to age, gender, and Charlson-Comorbidity Index (CCI). Two mutually exclusive cohorts were formed and outcome measures analyzed and compared were implant complications, infection rates, 90-day readmission rates, LOS, and cost of care.

Results

After the matching process 13,342 patients were identified with equal cohort distribution. OAS had higher odds implant related complications (OR: 2.78, P<0.001) such as prosthetic joint dislocation (OR: 3.83, P<0.001), requiring revision (OR: 2.89, P<0.001), pseudarthrosis (OR: 2.50, P<0.001), and spine related infections (OR: 1.58, P<0.001) compared to NAS. OAS had higher 90-day readmission rates, (OR: 1.29, P<0.001), higher hospital costs ($143,057.38 vs. $121,450.45, P<0.001), and greater in-hospital LOS (P<0.001).

Conclusions

OAS are susceptible to complications following primary 1-2LF. Appropriate patient counseling regarding the effects of opioids on lumbar fusion should be given priority to maximize patient outcomes. Future studies should investigate the impact of pre-operative opioid abuse versus post-operative opioid use.

Return to work following surgery for lumbar radiculopathy: a systematic review

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Informing patients about postoperative return to work (RTW) expectations is of utmost importance because of the influence of realistic expectations on RTW outcomes.

PURPOSE

We aimed to give an overview of the duration of sick leave and RTW rates after surgery for lumbar radiculopathy and to list predictors of and factors related to RTW.

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic review was carried out.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and SCOPUS. Full-text articles on RTW following surgery for lumbar radiculopathy were included through double-blind screening. Risk of bias was assessed using a modified version of the Downs and Black checklist.

RESULTS

Sixty-three full-text articles (total sample size: 7,100 patients) were included. Risk of bias was scored low to high. Mean duration of sick leave ranged from 0.8 to 20 weeks. Within 0.1-240 months post surgery, 3%-100% of patients resumed work. Most important predictors for work resumption were preoperative work status, presence of comorbidities, age, sex and duration of preoperative symptoms. Duration of sick leave can be predicted by the preoperative level of pain or disability and presence of symptoms of depression, occupational mental stress, and lateral disc prolapse. Furthermore, less invasive surgical techniques were found to result in better RTW outcomes compared with more invasive techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

Diverse results were found for RTW rates and duration of sick leave. Preoperative work status, presence of comorbidities, and several demographic factors were retrieved as predictors of RTW and duration of sick leave.

Endoscopic lumbar discectomy and minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion: a contrastive review

Both percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) have been demonstrated as two common and effective choices for lumbar disc herniation (LDH) minimally invasive surgery. In order to get a better understanding of these two procedures, we made this contrastive review. By looking up recent literature and combining it with our clinical practice, the indications/contraindications, advantages/disadvantages as well as complications/recurrences of PELD and MIS-TLIF were summarized in this review. It was concluded that PELD and MIS-TLIF are safe and effective minimally invasive operative techniques for symptomatic LDH treatment. A better understanding of these two procedures will help to improve clinical outcomes by selecting proper indications, and also benefit the further development of minimally invasive spine surgery.

Recurrent lumbar disc herniation recurrence after percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy: A case report

RATIONALE

Lumbar disc herniation (LDH) is a degenerative disease and affects human health. Although percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) can redeem the living quality of patient with LDH rapidly, it appears weak to limit the recurrence rate of LDH.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A 52-year-old male suffered lower back pain and lower limb paralysis for 20 years. However, conservative treatment could not relieve above-mentioned symptoms after doing heavy labor.

DIAGNOSES

Computed tomography (CT) revealed a disc fragment had migrated to the inferior edge of the L5 pedicle. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) demonstrated a type 2 Modic change (MC) at L5 and spinal canal stenosis at L4-L5. Based on these findings, the patient was diagnosed with L4-L5 disc herniation and secondary lumbar stenosis.

INTERVENTIONS

The patient underwent surgery twice for PELD at L4-L5 in 1 month. Symptoms were not improved effectively until the conventional posterior discectomy with fusion was performed.

OUTCOMES

No signs of recurrence have been detected in 6 months of follow-up, except for mild lower back pain meeting the temperature change.

LESSONS

Rapid decompression and instant therapeutic effect do not mean extending the indications of PELD. It is unreasonable to revise the recurrent LDH or treat the primary LDH with PELD under inadequate preoperative assessment.

Length of stay, costs, and complications in lumbar disc herniation surgery by standard PLIF versus a new dynamic interspinous stabilization technique

BACKGROUND

The number of lumbar spine surgeries has been increasing during the last 20 years, which also leads to an increase in hospital costs and complications related to surgery. Therefore, there is a greater concern about the costs and safety of the techniques and implants used.

METHODS

Patients (aged from 18 to 50 years) presenting with lumbago /sciatica (ICD-10-CM M54.3, M54.4) due to lumbar disc herniation lasting more than 12 weeks, were included. Patients with disc herniation larger than size-2 or size-3 according to the MSU Classification were eligible for participation. Intervention was divided in two groups. In Group 1, patients underwent microdiscectomy and Interspinous Dynamic Stabilization System (IDSS). Meanwhile, in Group 2, patients received discectomy and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). The primary outcome measure was the length of stay and costs during hospital admission. We also evaluated several other outcome parameters, including 90- day readmission rate, 90-day complication rate, and re-operations rate. The study was an observational prospective cohort study carried out from January 2015 to August 2016 in which two surgical techniques were compared. Our hypothesis was that a less aggressive procedure, such as discectomy and DSS, will decrease the length of stay and costs, and that it will also reduce the rate of complications with respect to PLIF.

RESULTS

A total of 67 patients (mean age 39.8 ± 8.4 years) were included. Patients in the PLIF group had a length of stay increase of 109% (4.52 ± 1.76 days vs 2.16 ± 1.18 days p < 0.001) and an in-hospital cost increase of 71% (1821.97 ± 460.41€ vs. 1066.20 ± 284.34€ p < 0.001). The reduction of one day of stay is equivalent to a reduction of total in-hospital costs of 12.5%. Patients in the IDSS cohort had no significant differences regarding PLIF cohort in the 90-day readmission rate (12.9% vs 11.1% € p > 0.999, respectively), 90-day re-operation rate (12.9% vs 11.1% € p > 0.999) and 90-day complication rates (35.5% vs 52.8% € p > 0.156). Dural tear and urinary tract infection rates were higher in the PLIF cohort (13.9% vs 3.2%. p = 0.205 and 11.1% vs 0% p = 0.118, respectively). Implant related complications were the most frequent in both IDSS and PLIF groups (32.3% vs 38.9% p = 0.572).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who underwent IDSS had a significant decrease of the length of stay and costs in relation to PLIF group. No significant differences were found in 90-day readmission and reintervention rates for both groups. Although differences were not significant, dural tear and urinary tract infection rates were lower in the interspinous group. IDSS or PLIF after discectomy, did not protect against subsequent 90-day re-operation or readmission compared to discectomy alone.

Treatment for Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Recurrent lumbar disc herniation (RLDH) is the most common indication for reoperation after a lumbar discectomy. The purpose of this manuscript is to review the incidence, risk factors, and treatment for RLDH.

RECENT FINDINGS

Patients who require revision surgery for RLDH improved significantly compared to baseline; however, the magnitude of improvement is less than in primary discectomy patients. Treatment with either repeat discectomy or instrumented fusion has comparable clinical outcomes. Repeat discectomy patients, however, have shorter operative times and length of stay. Hospital charges are dramatically lower for repeat discectomy compared to instrumented fusion. The incidence of RLDH is somewhere between 5 and 18%. Risk factors include younger age, lack of a sensory or motor deficit, and a higher baseline Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score. Available evidence suggests that some patients may respond to nonoperative interventions and avoid the need for reoperation. For those that fail a trial of conservative management or present with neurologic deficit, both repeat lumbar discectomy and instrumented fusion appear to effectively treat patients with similar complication rates and clinical outcomes.

Predictors of haematocrit in lumbar fusion for lumbar disc herniation: a surgical assessment

BACKGROUND

Low haematocrit (Hct) is associated with a higher rate of post-operative complications, increased mortality, and additional medical costs following cardiac surgery. Predictors of post-operative Hct in lumbar fusion are unclear and may be beneficial in avoiding adverse surgical outcomes.

METHODS

A total of 704 lumbar disc herniation patients (385 males, 319 females) who underwent primary lumbar fusion surgery were reviewed in this retrospective study.

RESULTS

In the 687 patients who met the selection criteria, the pre-operative Hct was 41.23 ± 4.57%, the post-operative Hct was 32.61 ± 4.52%, the peri-operative Hct decline was 8.62 ± 4.07%, the estimated intra-operative blood loss was 586.76 ± 346.62 mL, and the post-operative drainage was 489.33 ± 274.32 mL. Pre-operative Hct, estimated blood volume, estimated intra-operative blood loss, post-operative drainage, allogeneic blood transfusion, and age showed significant correlations with post-operative Hct, and all factors were involved in the final multiple regression model. Patients who received intensive care had lower post-operative Hct values, and the length of post-operative hospital stay was negatively correlated with post-operative Hct.

CONCLUSIONS

Dangerously low post-operative Hct is related to the length of ICU stay and post-operative hospital stay. Age, pre-operative Hct, intra-operative blood loss, post-operative drainage, and units of allogeneic blood transfusion are significant predictors of post-operative Hct and Hct decline. Hct variations during the operation make the calculation of total blood loss difficult.