The Effect of Spinal Mobilization With Leg Movement in Patients With Lumbar Radiculopathy-A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of spinal mobilization with leg movement (SMWLM) on low back and leg pain intensity, disability, pain centralization, and patient satisfaction in participants with lumbar radiculopathy. DESIGN: A double-blind randomized controlled trial. SETTING: General hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Adults (N=60; mean age 44y) with subacute lumbar radiculopathy. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomly allocated to receive SMWLM, exercise and electrotherapy (n=30), or exercise and electrotherapy alone (n=30). All participants received 6 sessions over 2 weeks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes were leg pain intensity and Oswestry Disability Index score. Secondary variables were low back pain intensity, global rating of change (GROC), straight leg raise (SLR), and lumbar range of motion (ROM). Variables were evaluated blind at baseline, post-intervention, and at 3 and 6 months of follow-up. RESULTS: Significant and clinically meaningful improvement occurred in all outcome variables. At 2 weeks the SMWLM group had significantly greater improvement than the control group in leg pain (MD 2.0; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.4-2.6) and disability (MD 3.9; 95% CI, 5.5-2.2). Similarly, at 6 months, the SMWLM group had significantly greater improvement than the control group in leg pain (MD 2.6; 95% CI, 1.9-3.2) and disability (MD 4.7; 95% CI, 6.3-3.1). The SMWLM group also reported greater improvement in the GROC and in SLR ROM. CONCLUSION: In patients with lumbar radiculopathy, the addition of SMWLM provided significantly improved benefits in leg and back pain, disability, SLR ROM, and patient satisfaction in the short and long term.

Full endoscopic spine surgery.

Background: With a dramatic increase in elderly population worldwide, the prevalence of degenerative spine disease is steadily rising. Even though the entire spinal column is affected the problem is more commonly seen in the lumbar, cervical spine and to some extent the thoracic spine. The treatment of symptomatic lumbar disc or stenosis is primarily conservative with analgesics, epidural steroids and physiotherapy. Surgery is advised only if conservative treatment is ineffective. Conventional open microscopic procedures even though are still a gold standard, have the disadvantages of excessive muscle damage and bone resection, epidural scarring along with prolonged hospital stay and increased need of postoperative analgesics. Minimal access spine surgeries minimize surgical access related injury by minimizing soft tissue and muscle damage and also bony resection thus preventing iatrogenic instability and unnecessary fusions. This leads to good functional preservation of the spine and enhances early postoperative recovery and early return to work. Full endoscopic spine surgeries are one of the more sophisticated and advanced form of MIS surgeries. Purpose: Full endoscopy has definitive benefits over conventional microsurgical techniques. These include better and clear vision of the pathology due to presence of irrigation fluid channel, minimal soft tissue and bone trauma, better and relatively easy approach to deep seated pathologies like thoracic disc herniations and a possibility to avoid fusion surgeries. The purpose of this article is to describe these benefits, give an overview of the two main approaches - transforaminal and interlaminar, their indications, contraindications and their limitations. The article also describes about the challenges in overcoming the learning curve and its future prospectives. Conclusion: Full endoscopic spine surgery is one of the fastest growing technique in the field of modern spine surgery. Better intraoperative visualization of the pathology, lesser incidence of complications, faster recovery time, less postoperative pain, better relief of symptoms and early return to activity are the main reasons behind this rapid growth. With better patient outcomes and reduced medical costs, the procedure is going to be more accepted, relevant and popular procedure in future.

A 2-Year Outcomes and Complications of Various Techniques of Lumbar Discectomy: A Multicentric Prospective Study.

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective Study. OBJECTIVES: There are numerous techniques for performing lumbar discectomy, each with its own rationale and stated benefits. The authors set out to evaluate and compare the perioperative variables, results, and complications of each treatment in a group of patients provided by ten hospitals and operated on by experienced surgeons. METHODS: This prospective study comprised of 591 patients operated between February-2017 to February-2019. The procedures included open discectomy, microdiscectomy, tubular microdiscectomy, interlaminar endoscopic lumbar discectomy, transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy and Destandau techniques with a follow-up of minimum 2 years. VAS (Visual Analogue Score) for back and leg pain, ODI (Oswestry Disability Index), duration of surgery, hospital stay, length of scar, operative blood loss and peri-operative complications were recorded in each group. RESULTS: Post-operatively, there was a significant improvement in the VAS score for back pain as well as leg pain, and ODI scores spanning all groups, with no significant distinction amongst them. When compared to open procedures (open discectomy and microdiscectomy), minimally invasive surgeries (tubular discectomy, interlaminar endoscopic lumbar discectomy, transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy, and Destandau techniques) reported shorter operative time, duration of hospital stays, better cosmesis, and lower blood loss. Overall, the complication rate was reported to be 8.62%. Complication rates differed slightly across approaches. CONCLUSION: Minimally invasive surgeries have citable advantages over open approaches in terms of perioperative variables. However, all approaches are successful and provide comparable pain relief with similar functional outcomes at long term follow up.

The Role and Clinical Outcomes of Endoscopic Spine Surgery of Treating Spinal Metastases; Outcomes of 29 Cases From 8 Countries.

OBJECTIVE: We aim to report the outcomes and feasibility of endoscopic spine surgery used to treat symptomatic spinal metastases patients. This is the most extensive series of spinal metastases patients who underwent endoscopic spine surgery. METHODS: A worldwide collaborative network group of endoscopic spine surgeons, named 'ESSSORG,' was established. Patients diagnosed with spinal metastases who underwent endoscopic spine surgery from 2012 to 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. All related patient data and clinical outcomes were gathered and analyzed before the surgery and the followtime period of 2 weeks, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months. RESULTS: A total of 29 patients from South Korea, Thailand, Taiwan, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, Chile, and India, were included. The mean age was 59.59 years, and 11 of them were female. The total number of decompressed levels was 40. The technique was relatively equal (15 uniportal; 14 biportal). The average length of admission was 4.41 days. Of all patients with an American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale of D or lower before surgery, 62.06% reported having at least one recovery grade after the surgery. Almost all clinical outcomes parameters statistically significantly improved and maintained from 2 weeks to 6 months after the surgery. Few surgical-related complications (4 cases) were reported. CONCLUSION: Endoscopic spine surgery is a valid option for treating spinal metastases patients as it could yield comparable results to other minimally invasive spine surgery techniques. As the aim is to improve the quality of life, this procedure is valuable and holds value in palliative oncologic spine surgery.

Full-Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy Approach Selection: A Systematic Review and Proposed Algorithm.

STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review of the literature to develop an algorithm formulated by key opinion leaders. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to analyze currently available data and propose a decision-making algorithm for full-endoscopic lumbar discectomy for treating lumbar disc herniation (LDH) to help surgeons choose the most appropriate approach [transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy (TELD) or interlaminar endoscopic lumbar discectomy (IELD)] for patients. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Full-endoscopic discectomy has gained popularity in recent decades. To our knowledge, an algorithm for choosing the proper surgical approach has never been proposed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review of the literature using PubMed and MeSH terms was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Patient samples included patients with LDH treated with full-endoscopic discectomy. The inclusion criteria were interventional research (randomized and nonrandomized trials) and observation research (cohort, case-control, case series). Exclusion criteria were case series and technical reports. The criteria used for selecting patients were grouped and analyzed. Then, an algorithm was generated based on these findings with support and reconfirmation from key expert opinions. Data on overall complications were collected. Outcome measures included zone of herniation, level of herniation, and approach (TELD or IELD). RESULTS: In total, 474 articles met the initial screening criteria. The detailed analysis identified the 80 best-matching articles; after applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 53 articles remained for this review. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed algorithm suggests a TELD for LDH located in the foraminal or extraforaminal zones at upper and lower levels and for central and subarticular discs at the upper levels considering the anatomic foraminal features and the craniocaudal pathology location. An IELD is preferred for LDH in the central or subarticular zones at L4/L5 and L5/S1, especially if a high iliac crest or high-grade migration is found.

A 2-Year Outcomes and Complications of Various Techniques of Lumbar Discectomy: A Multicentric Retrospective Study.

OBJECTIVES: Various techniques of performing lumbar discectomy are prevalent, each having its rationale and claimed benefits. The authors ventured to assess the perioperative factors, outcomes, and complications of each procedure and compare among them with 946 patients contributed by 10 centers and operated by experienced surgeons. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of patients operated using open discectomy, microdiscectomy, microendoscopic discectomy, interlaminar endoscopic lumbar discectomy, transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy, and Destandau techniques with a follow-up of minimum 2 years. The inclusion criteria were age >18 years, failed conservative treatment for 4-6 weeks, and the involvement of a single lumbar level. RESULTS: There was a significant improvement in the visual analog scale score of back, leg, and Oswestry Disability Index scores postoperatively across the board, with no significant difference between them. Minimally invasive procedures (microendoscopic discectomy, interlaminar endoscopic lumbar discectomy, transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy, and Destandau techniques) had shorter operation time, hospital stay, better cosmesis, and decreased blood loss compared with open procedures (open discectomy and microdiscectomy). The overall complication rate was 10.1%. The most common complication was recurrence (6.86%), followed by reoperation (4.3%), cerebrospinal fluid leak (2.24%), wrong level surgery (0.74%), superficial infection (0.62%), and deep infection (0.37%). There were minor differences in incidence of complications between techniques. CONCLUSION: Although minimally invasive techniques have some advantages over the open techniques in the perioperative factors, all the techniques are effective and provide similar pain relief and functional outcomes at the end of 2 years. The various rates of individual complications provide a reference value for future studies.

AOSpine Consensus Paper on Nomenclature for Working-Channel Endoscopic Spinal Procedures.

STUDY DESIGN: International consensus paper on a unified nomenclature for full-endoscopic spine surgery. OBJECTIVES: Minimally invasive endoscopic spinal procedures have undergone rapid development during the past decade. Evolution of working-channel endoscopes and surgical instruments as well as innovation in surgical techniques have expanded the types of spinal pathology that can be addressed. However, there is in the literature a heterogeneous nomenclature defining approach corridors and procedures, and this lack of common language has hampered communication between endoscopic spine surgeons, patients, hospitals, and insurance providers. METHODS: The current report summarizes the nomenclature reported for working-channel endoscopic procedures that address cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spinal pathology. RESULTS: We propose a uniform system that defines the working-channel endoscope (full-endoscopic), approach corridor (anterior, posterior, interlaminar, transforaminal), spinal segment (cervical, thoracic, lumbar), and procedure performed (eg, discectomy, foraminotomy). We suggest the following nomenclature for the most common full-endoscopic procedures: posterior endoscopic cervical foraminotomy (PECF), transforaminal endoscopic thoracic discectomy (TETD), transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy (TELD), transforaminal lumbar foraminotomy (TELF), interlaminar endoscopic lumbar discectomy (IELD), interlaminar endoscopic lateral recess decompression (IE-LRD), and lumbar endoscopic unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (LE-ULBD). CONCLUSIONS: We believe that it is critical to delineate a consensus nomenclature to facilitate uniformity of working-channel endoscopic procedures within academic scholarship. This will hopefully facilitate development, standardization of procedures, teaching, and widespread acceptance of full-endoscopic spinal procedures.

Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy by transiliac approach: a case report.

STUDY DESIGN: Case report. OBJECTIVE: The authors report a new percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) technique for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation with a high iliac crest via a transiliac approach. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: When the iliac crest is high, the L4-L5 and L5-S1 disc spaces are located deep in the pelvis, so they are not easily accessible via a suprailiac route. METHODS: A 51-year-old man manifested left gluteal and leg pain due to an up-migrated soft disc herniation at the L4-L5 level. Transforaminal PELD via a transiliac approach was performed to remove the herniated fragment, achieving complete decompression of the nerve root. RESULTS: The symptom was relieved and the patient was discharged the next day. CONCLUSION: When a conventional transforaminal PELD is impossible due to the presence of a high iliac crest, PELD via a transiliac route could be a alternative option in selected cases.

Percutaneous endoscopic approach for highly migrated intracanal disc herniations by foraminoplastic technique using rigid working channel endoscope.

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective analysis of 59 patients operated for excision of soft highly migrated intracanal lumbar disc herniations by percutaneous endoscopic foraminoplasty. OBJECTIVE: To describe a safe and effective percutaneous endoscopic technique for removal of migrated herniations and report the results on the basis of modified MacNab criteria. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Migrated herniations pose a great challenge even for experienced endoscopic surgeons. These herniations are hidden from the endoscopic view by anatomic barriers like hypertrophied facet, inferior pedicle and foraminal ligaments rendering percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal lumbar discectomy (PELD) by conventional approach, difficult with high failure rate. Foraminoplasty, which means enlargement of foramen by undercutting ventral part of superior-facet, upper border of inferior pedicle along with ablation of foraminal ligament, can help us to address this issue. METHODS: Fifty-nine patients with soft highly migrated herniations who underwent PELD with foraminoplasty under local anesthesia from January 2002 to June 2006 were analyzed retrospectively. Patients were evaluated by postoperative Visual Analog Scale for leg pain and Oswestry Disability Index scores. Outcomes were graded according to modified MacNab criteria. RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 25.4 months. Mean visual analog scale score for radicular pain improved from 8.01 to 1.56, and mean Oswestry disability Index improved from 61.6 to 10.76. Based on modified MacNab criteria, 91.4% of patients experienced satisfactory outcome. Three patients had persistent leg pain after surgery. One patient underwent a repeat-PELD on next day and the other after 1 month. Both were relieved of symptoms. Third patient was subjected to open discectomy after 25 weeks from the first operation and showed improvement. Two patients had recurrent herniation at same level after 6 months; 1 patient underwent repeat PELD, and the other underwent open discectomy. Both patients had good results. CONCLUSION: Foraminoplastic-PELD is safe and effective procedure for surgical treatment of soft migrated herniations. The results are comparable to results of open discectomy.