Deuk Laser Disc Repair(®) is a safe and effective treatment for symptomatic cervical disc disease

Patient selection criteria for percutaneous anterior cervical laser versus endoscopic discectomy

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous anterior laser and anterior endoscopic cervical spine surgery are associated with less approach trauma than conventional open cervical spine surgery. The literature illustrating their appropriate use corroborated with objective outcome evidence is scarce. The authors were interested in comparing the clinical outcomes following percutaneous laser disc decompression (PLDD) versus percutaneous endoscopic disc decompression (PEDD). © 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty patients with soft contained symptomatic cervical disc herniations and an average age of 50.5 years (range 26 - 68 years; 16 males and 14 females) were prospectively enrolled in 2 groups of 15 patients to be either treated with PLDD or PEDD. All patients underwent PLDD or PEDD under local anesthesia and sedation. Clinical outcomes were assessed with the Macnab criteria VAS score for arm pain. Complications and reoperations were recorded.

RESULTS

There were significant reductions in the VAS score for arm pain from preoperative 8.4 ± 2.5 to 3.1 ± 1.2 in the PLDD group (P < 0.03), and from preoperative 8.6 ± 2.7 to 2.4 ± 1.1 (P < 0.01) in the PEDD group. In the PLDD group, Macnab outcomes were excellent in 21% of patients, good in 44%, fair in 21%, and poor in 14%. In the PEDD group, Macnab outcomes were excellent in 14% of patients, good in 32%, fair in 12%, and poor in the remaining 12%. There were no statistically significant differences in clinical outcomes between the PLDD and the PEDD group. There were no approach-related or surgical complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Tissue trauma is significantly reduced with laser and endoscopic surgery techniques. PLDD and PEDD are both suitable for the specific indication of soft, symptomatic contained cervical disc herniations. The authors' small prospective cohort study indicates that PLDD and PEDD are options for cervical decompression surgery when medical comorbidities or preferences by patients and surgeons dictate more minimally invasive strategies.

Comparison of outcomes following minimally invasive and open posterior cervical foraminotomy: description of minimally invasive technique and review of literature

Although minimally invasive posterior cervical foraminotomy (MIS-PCF) is frequently employed in the treatment of cervical radiculopathy, there are very few studies directly comparing outcomes between MIS-PCF and open posterior cervical foraminotomy and between MIS-PCF and percutaneous endoscopic (full-endoscopic) posterior cervical foraminotomy (FE-PCF). This study includes a description of technique and systematic review of literature and analysis of clinical studies comparing outcomes between MIS-PCF and open posterior cervical foraminotomy and between MIS-PCF and FE-PCF. Six comparative studies, including one randomized controlled trial were included in analysis. Average operative time ranged from 60.5 to 171 minutes in the open group and 77.65 to 115 minutes in the MIS group. Mean intraoperative blood loss ranged from 43.5 to 246 cc in the open group and 42 to 138 cc in the MIS group. Average postoperative length of stay ranged from 58.6 to 304.8 hours in the open group and 20 to 273.6 hours in the MIS group. Two studies reported significantly increased VAS-N (Neck) scores postoperatively in patients undergoing open cervical foraminotomies, however both studies reported that the differences lost statistical significance with longer follow-up. There were no significant differences in complications or reoperations between open and MIS groups. One retrospective cohort study was included in analysis that compared MIS-PCF and FE-PCF. Postoperatively at 24 months, mean NDI and VAS-N were significantly lower after FE-PCF than MIS-PCF. There was no significant change in VAS-A (Arm) between the two groups. Direct comparative studies between MIS-PCF and open cervical foraminotomy are limited in number. Although, there is a significant heterogeneity in studies comparing open and MIS-PCF there appears to be a trend of decreased hospital length of stay and postoperative analgesic usage in the minimally invasive cohort.

Cervical endoscopic spinal surgery: A review of the current literature

Cervical endoscopic spinal surgery (CESS) is now regularly performed in some centres in the Far East, yet rarely in Europe and the United States. This review describes the application of CESS through anterior and posterior approaches with analysis of the available evidence supporting current techniques. An electronic literature search identified 52 papers and proceedings' abstracts of which 25 (16 anterior approach and 9 posterior approach) provided comparable clinical outcomes. The results revealed a good or excellent outcome from CESS in 91% (range 74-100%) with a complication rate of 5%. In a local cohort study, patients had 72% less neck pain (visual analogue scale rating) and 81% less arm pain at 6 months when CESS was used as an isolated procedure, and 74% less neck pain and 83% less arm pain when coupled with disc replacement or fusion at an adjacent level.

Percutaneous cervical laser diskectomy, thermoannuloplasty, and thermonucleoplasty; comparable results without surgery

BACKGROUND

Utilizing the literature, the results of three different minimally invasive surgery (MIS) anterior cervical percutaneous operations for neck/mild radicular pain and magnetic resonance (MR)-documented "contained" (not extruded/sequestrated) discs were evaluated. Results were compared with patients treated nonsurgically for comparable/greater neurological compromise, and even more severe cervical disc disease.

METHODS

There were three MIS percutaneous anterior cervical discectomy procedures. Anterior cervical laser discectomy ablated and vaporized disc tissue. The thermoannuloplasty used heat to contract collagen fibers to reduce disc volume. Thermonucleoplasty employed a low-temperature resister probe to promote disintegration and evacuation of small volumes of disc (e.g., some studies cited an average of just 0.09 mL of disc removed). These results were compared to those for the nonsurgical management of patients with comparable/greater neurological deficits, and more severe cervical disc herniations.

RESULTS

The three MIS anterior cervical operations resulted in 80-90%+ improvement using Macnab's criteria. However, although the literature demonstrated similar 80-90+% improvement without cervical surgery, the latter patients were more neurologically compromised.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with pain alone/mild radiculopathy and "contained" discs on MR, three MIS percutaneous anterior cervical disc operations resulted in 80-90%+ improvement. Notably, similar 80-90%+ improvement was observed for comparable/more neurologically impaired patients with even larger cervical disc herniations treated nonsurgically. With such findings, where is the "value added" for these three MIS cervical operations?

Clinical and radiographic changes after percutaneous endoscopic cervical discectomy: a long-term follow-up

OBJECTIVE

Results following anterior cervical discectomy (ACD) without fusion are not well reported because of skepticism that the disturbed cervical spine anatomy after ACD might compromise clinical outcome. The purpose of this study was to determine whether ACD without fusion prompts the degenerative process significantly, and whether it is necessary to preserve disc height and cervical alignment for the sake of better clinical outcome following cervical spine surgery.

BACKGROUND DATA

Out of 56 consecutive patients, 37 patients who replied and consequently underwent postoperative MRI from April to June 2009 were included in this study.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 37 consecutive patients diagnosed as having cervical monoradiculopathy and treated with percutaneous endoscopic cervical discectomy (PECD) were investigated. Angle of cervical lordosis, change in cervical range of motion, disc height change, and degree of degenerative changes at the corresponding level were evaluated. The visual analogue scale (VAS) score for neck and arm pain and the neck disability index (NDI) were compared preoperatively and at the final follow-up. The mean follow-up period was 45.5 months.

RESULTS

Despite prompted radiological deterioration such as loss of disc height (the posterior disc heights and central disc height ratio were significantly decreased from 3.6 to 2.6 mm, from 30.3% to 24.5%, respectively, p<0.05) or degenerative progression (from average grade of 2.8 to 4.1, p<0.05), the patients achieved significant improvement in clinical outcomes (VAS for neck and arm dropped from mean 6.3 and 7.5 to 2.7 and 2.6, respectively, and NDI score improved from 46.8% to 17.2%, p<0.05) after PECD.

CONCLUSIONS

Neither loss of disc height nor progression of degeneration at disc space compromised clinical outcome after PECD without fusion on long-term follow-up.

Microsurgery or open cervical foraminotomy for cervical radiculopathy? A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this article was to systematically review the clinical outcomes of microendoscopic foraminotomy compared with the traditional open cervical foraminotomy.

METHODS

A literature search of two databases was performed to identify investigations performed in the treatment of cervical foraminotomy with microsurgery or an open approach. Data including blood loss, surgical time, hospital stay, complications, clinical success rate, reduction of arm and neck pain, improvement of neurological function, and repeated surgery rate were summarized, calculated and compared. Results of clinical success were performed by calculattng effect indicators and standard errors based on a single rate to assess heterogeneity in the two groups.

RESULTS

The initial literature search resulted in 713 articles, of which, 26 were determined as relevant on abstract review. An open foraminotomy approach was performed in 16 and a microsurgery approach in ten studies. The open group demonstrated minimal to moderate heterogeneity, with I (2) value of 27 %; and microsurgery group demonstrated minimal heterogeneity, with I (2) value of 1 %. Aggregated data found that patients treated by microsurgery foraminotomy have lower blood loss by 100.1 ml (open: 149.5 ml, microsurgery: 49.4 ml, n = 1257), shorter surgical time by 24.9 minutes (open 88.7 minutes, microsurgery 63.8 minutes, n = 1423),and shorter hospital stay by 3.0 days (open 4.1 days, microsurgery 1.1 days, n = 1350), compared with patients treated by open cervical foraminotomy. The pooled clinical success rate was 89.7 % [confidence interval (CI) 87.7-91.6) in the open group versus 92.5 % (CI 89.9-95.1) in the microsurgery group, with no statistical difference (p = 0.095). Overall complication rates were not statistically significant between groups (p = 0.757). The incidence of dural tears was 1.07 %( 12/1121) in patients undergoing microsurgery versus 0.27 % (2/745) for open surgery (p = 0.091). The incidence of infection was 0.54 % (6/1121) in patients undergoing microsurgery versus 0.40 % (3/745) for open surgery (p = 0.949). The incidence of root injury was 0.80 % (9/1121) in patients undergoing microsurgery versus 1.48 % (11/745) for open surgery (p = 0.166). Revision surgery occurred in 2.32 % (27/1163) in the microsurgery group versus 3.35 % (28/835) for traditional surgery, with no statistical difference (p = 0.164). Pooled reduction in visual analogue scale for the arm (VASA) was 75.0 % (CI 66.0-84.0) in the open group and 87.1 % (CI:76.7, 97.5) in the microsurgery group, with no statistical difference (p = 0.065). Pooled reduction in VAS of the neck (VASN) was 66.2 % (CI:52.2, 80.2) in the open group and 68.1 % (CI:36.4, 99.8) in the microsurgery group, with no statistical difference(p = 0.894). Pooled improvement in neurological function was 55.3 % (CI:18.6, 91.9) in the open group and 64.9 % (CI:34.6, 95.2) in the microsurgery group, with no statistical difference (p = 0.576).

CONCLUSIONS

Although advantages of cervical microsurgery are less blood loss and shorter surgical time and hospital stay over the standard open technique, there is no significant difference in clinical success rate, complication rate, reduction of arm and neck pain and improvement of neurological function between microsurgery and open cervical foraminotomy.

Combined transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with posterolateral instrumented fusion for degenerative disc disease can be a safe and effective treatment for lower back pain

BACKGROUND

Lumbar fusion is a proven treatment for chronic lower back pain (LBP) in the setting of symptomatic spondylolisthesis and degenerative scoliosis; however, fusion is controversial when the primary diagnosis is degenerative disc disease (DDD). Our objective was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of lumbar fusion in the treatment of LBP due to DDD.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two-hundred and five consecutive patients with single or multi-level DDD underwent lumbar decompression and instrumented fusion for the treatment of chronic LBP between the years of 2008 and 2011. The primary outcome measures in this study were back and leg pain visual analogue scale (VAS), patient reported % resolution of preoperative back pain and leg pain, reoperation rate, perioperative complications, blood loss and hospital length of stay (LOS).

RESULTS

The average resolution of preoperative back pain per patient was 84% (n = 205) while the average resolution of preoperative leg pain was 90% (n = 190) while a mean follow-up period of 528 days (1.5 years). Average VAS for combined back and leg pain significantly improved from a preoperative value of 9.0 to a postoperative value of 1.1 (P ≤ 0.0001), a change of 7.9 points for the cohort. The average number of lumbar disc levels fused per patient was 2.3 (range 1-4). Median postoperative LOS in the hospital was 1.2 days. Average blood loss was 108 ml perfused level. Complications occurred in 5% of patients (n = 11) and the rate of reoperation for symptomatic adjacent segment disease was 2% (n = 4). Complications included reoperation at index level for symptomatic pseudoarthrosis with hardware failure (n = 3); surgical site infection (n = 7); repair of cerebrospinal fluid leak (n = 1), and one patient death at home 3 days after discharge.

CONCLUSION

Lumbar fusion for symptomatic DDD can be a safe and effective treatment for medically refractory LBP with or without leg pain.

Deuk Laser Disc Repair(®) is a safe and effective treatment for symptomatic cervical disc disease

BACKGROUND

Deuk Laser Disc Repair(®) is a new full-endoscopic surgical procedure to repair symptomatic cervical disc disease.

METHODS

A prospective cohort of 66 consecutive patients underwent cervical Deuk Laser Disc Repair(®) for one (n = 21) or two adjacent (n = 45) symptomatic levels of cervical disc disease and were evaluated postoperatively for resolution of headache, neck pain, arm pain, and radicular symptoms. All patients were candidates for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) or arthroplasty. The Mann-Whitney Wilcoxon test was used to calculate P values.

RESULTS

All patients (n = 66) had significant improvement in preoperative symptoms with an average symptom resolution of 94.6%. Fifty percent (n = 33) had 100% resolution of all preoperative cervicogenic symptoms. Only 4.5% (n = 3) had less than 80% resolution of preoperative symptoms. Visual analog scale (VAS) significantly improved from 8.7 preoperatively to 0.5 postoperatively (P < 0.001) for the cohort. Average operative and recovery times were 57 and 52 minutes, respectively. There were no perioperative complications. Recurrent disc herniation occurred in one patient (1.5%). Average postoperative follow-up was 94 days and no significant intergroup difference in outcomes was observed (P = 0.111) in patients with <90 days (n = 52) or >90 days (n = 14, mean 319 days) follow-up. No significant difference in outcomes was observed (P = 0.774) for patients undergoing one or two level Deuk Laser Disc Repair(®). Patients diagnosed with postoperative cervical facet syndrome did significantly worse (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Deuk Laser Disc Repair(®) is a safe and effective alternative to ACDF or arthroplasty for the treatment of one or two adjacent symptomatic cervical disc herniations with an overall success rate of 94.6%.