Document Detail

Lumbar Microdiscectomy Versus Sequesterectomy/Free Fragmentectomy: A Long-term (>2 y) Retrospective Study of the Clinical Outcome.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  20087226     Owner:  NLM     Status:  In-Data-Review    
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the long-term outcome of microdiscectomy versus sequestrectomy/free fragmentectomy for lumbar disc herniation.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Conventional lumbar microdiscectomy involves substantial excision of disc material from the intervertebral disc space to prevent reherniation. However, in selected patients removal of free-disc fragment sequestrectomy, without clearing the disc space can be as beneficial as conventional microdiscectomy.
METHODS: During the study period, we performed 196 lumbar microdiscectomies for disc herniation. Of these 101 patients met the inclusion criteria for this study. Seventy-seven of 101 patients underwent microdiscectomy and the remaining 24 patients received microscopic sequestrectomy. The following parameters were compared in these 2 groups: operating time, perioperative complications, the pre- and postoperative Visual Analog Scale (VAS), reherniation rate, and the use of analgesics at the time of follow-up. The patients were assessed at the final follow-up. Mean follow-up was 33.4 (24 to 47) months in the sequestrectomy group and 32.4 (24 to 45) months in the microdiscectomy group.
RESULTS: The operating time for the microdiscectomy patients was longer than that for the sequestrectomy patients, 32 (19 to 51) versus 24 (15 to 40) minutes. The reherniation rate was slightly lower in the sequestrectomy group than in the microdiscectomy group, 4.17% versus 5.56%. (P=1.00). The complication rate was higher in the microdiscectomy population, 6.4% versus 4.17%. Postoperative improvement in pain in the sequestrectomy group was slightly better than that in the microdiscectomy cohort, VAS 1.6 versus VAS 1.2. (P=0.06).
CONCLUSIONS: We argue that microscopic sequestrectomy is more successful with lesser operating time, fewer intraoperative complications, and lesser reherniation rate compared with conventional microdiscectomy in which patients are selected according to well-defined criteria, which is largely dependent on the competence of the annulus/posterior longitudinal ligament.
Bahram Fakouri; Vishal Patel; Edward Bayley; Shreya Srinivas
Related Documents :
16871306 - Percutaneous disc decompression for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis.
17077736 - Segmental motor paralysis after cervical laminoplasty: a prospective study.
7709276 - The straight leg raising test and the severity of symptoms in lumbar disc herniation. a...
16871296 - Intradiscal electrothermal therapy (idet) for treatment of chronic lumbar discogenic pa...
10149556 - Roentgenographic evaluation of a conical threaded acetabular cup.
9129926 - Clinical experience with 80 inflatable penile prostheses.
Publication Detail:
Type:  Journal Article    
Journal Detail:
Title:  Journal of spinal disorders & techniques     Volume:  24     ISSN:  1539-2465     ISO Abbreviation:  J Spinal Disord Tech     Publication Date:  2011 Feb 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2011-01-28     Completed Date:  -     Revised Date:  -    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  101140323     Medline TA:  J Spinal Disord Tech     Country:  United States    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  6-10     Citation Subset:  IM    
Centre for Spinal Studies and Surgery, Queen's Medical Centre, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Previous Document:  Comparative intermediate and long-term results of pedicle screw and hook instrumentation in posterio...
Next Document:  A Review of Medicolegal Malpractice Suits Involving Cervical Spine: What can we Learn or Change?