Comparison of Limited and Aggressive Open Lumbar Discectomy in Terms of Clinical Recurrence Complications, Discitis, Osteomyelitis and Postoperative Lumbar Pain
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61841/5mc5mm51Keywords:
Limited and Aggressive Open Lumbar Discectomy, Discitis, OsteomyelitisAbstract
Introduction: Low back pain is still one of the major public health problems. According to studies done today, back pain after a cold is the second cause of job absence. 70 to 80% of people in the world suffer from low back pain, which eventually leads to consultation with a physician and other health care providers for evaluation and treatment. Each year, governments spend heavily on diagnosing, treating, and coping with back pain disabilities. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare two methods, limited and aggressive open lumbar discectomy, in terms of clinical recurrence complications, discitis, osteomyelitis, and postoperative lumbar pain.
Materials and methods: In this study, sampling was done from patients referred to the neurosurgery ward of the hospital from 2016 to 2018. The study population included patients with lumbar disc herniation pain requiring surgical intervention and entered the study with inclusion criteria. Two surgical methods were used to perform the discectomy in patients. For the purpose of this study, the sample size with 80 power study and 95% significance level of the calculated volume is equal to 70 samples. Finally, the data were entered into SPSS software to make sample size and thus statistical analysis with the help of this software.
Results: The mean age of the first group was 35.57 years, and in the second group it was 9.34 years. The incidence of discitis with osteomyelitis was one case for the first group (2.5%) and two cases for the second group (5%). The rate of recurrence of the disc was evaluated: three cases for the first group (7.5%) and two cases for the second group (5%). The mean preoperative pain score was 7.95 for the first group, and 7.6 for the second group was obtained from 10. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the rate of disc recurrence during the six months after surgery (P-value = 0.18). Associated risk was also assessed for the incidence of discitis and osteomyelitis in the two groups, with no significant difference (P-value = 0.12). The mean pain reduction score one day after surgery was 5.1 for the first group and 4.625 for the second group, with no significant difference (P-value = 0.29).
Conclusion: According to the results of this study on the treatment of lumbar disc herniation with high evidence, it can be concluded that sequestrectomy surgery, due to shorter operation time, less manipulation of natural regional elements, and lack of obvious difference in incidence of disc recurrence, is preferable to the aggressive method. Of course, some searches showed an increased recurrence rate in these patients, butsive meta-analyses reject this finding.
Downloads
References
1. Zargar S, Nazemi Rafie A, Sosanabadi A, Kamali A. Addition of dexmedetomidine and neostigmine to 1.5 %
lidocaine and triamcinolone for epidural block to reduce the duration of analgesia in patients suffering from
chronic low back pain. J Med Life. 2019; 12(3): 260–265.
2. Gilbert FJ. Influence of early MR imaging or CT on treatment and outcome. Radiology. 2004; 231(2): 343-51.
3. Williams KD, Park AL. Lower back pain and disorders of intervertebral discs. In: Canale ST, editor. Campbell’s
Operative Orthopaedics. 10th ed. Philadelphia: Mosby. 2003; 12(34): 1955-2050.
4. Ohya J, Oshima Y, Chikuda H, Oichi T, Matsui H, Fushimi K, et al. Does the microendoscopic technique
reduce mortality and major complications in patients undergoing lumbar discectomy? Ansity score-matched analysis using a nationwide administrative database. Neurosurg Focus. 2016; 40(2): 114-9.
5. Hardy RW. Extradural cauda equina and nerve root compression from benign lesions of the lumbar spine. In:
Youmans, Jr., editor. In: Youmans JR, ed. Neurological Surgery. 4th ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders. 1996;
13(4): 2357-74.
6. Basu S, Ghosh J, Malik F, Tikoo A. Postoperative discitis following single-level lumbar discectomy: Our
experience of 17 cases. Indian J Orthop. 2012; 46(4): 427-33.
7. Guo JJ, Yang H, Tang T. Long-term outcomes of the revision open lumbar discectomy by fenestration: A
follow-up study of more than 10 years. Int Orthop. 2009; 33(5): 1341-5.
8. Fu TS, Lai PL, Tsai TT, Niu CC, Chen LH, Chen WJ. Long-term results of disc excision for recurrent lumbar
disc herniation with or without posterolateral fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005; 30(24): 2830-4.
9. Saruhashi Y, Mori K, Katsuura A, Takahashi S, Matsusue Y, Hukuda S. Evaluation of standard nucleotomy for
lumbar disc herniation using the Love method: results of follow-up studies after more than 10 years. Eur Spine
J. 2004; 13(7): 626-30.
10. Oosterhuis T, Costa L, Maher C, Vet H, van Tulder M, Ostelo R. Rehabilitation after lumbar disc surgery.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014; 12(4): 137-44.
11. Fakouri B, Shetty N, White T. Is sequestrectomy a viable alternative to microdiscectomy? A systematic review
of the literature. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015; 473(6): 1957-62.
12. Agarwal P, Pierce J, Welch W. Cost analysis of spinal versus general anesthesia for lumbar discectomy and
laminectomy spine surgery. World Neurosurg. 2016; 14(9): 1342-9.
13. Speed C. Low back pain. BMJ. 2004; 32(8): 1119-1121.
14. Panagis JS. Research on low back pain and common spinal disorders. NIH Guide. 1997; 26(16): 2.
15. Soliman J, Harvey A, Howes G, Seibly J, Dossey J, Nardone E. Limited microdiscectomy for lumbar disk
herniation: a retrospective long-term outcome analysis. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2014; 27(1): 8-13.
16. McGirt MJ, Ambrossi GL, Datoo G, Sciubba DM, Witham TF, Wolinsky JP, et al. Recurrent disc herniation
and long-term back pain after primary lumbar discectomy: review of outcomes reported for limited versus
aggressive disc removal. Neurosurgery. 2009; 64(2): 338-44.
17. Ledic D, Vukas D, Grahovac G, Barth M, Bouma G, Vilendecic M. Effect of annular closure on disk height
Maintenance and reoperated recurrent herniation following lumbar diskectomy: two-year data. J Neurol Surg A
Cent Eur Neurosurg. 2015; 76(3): 211-8.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 AUTHOR
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
