The safety of perioperative antiplatelet continuation without selection biases in microsurgical decompression surgery for single level lumbar spinal stenosis and lumbar disc herniotomy.

PURPOSE: Each institution or physician has to decide on an individual basis whether to continue or discontinue antiplatelet (AP) therapy before spinal surgery. The purpose of this study was to determine if perioperative AP continuation is safe during single-level microsurgical decompression (MSD) for treating lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) and lumbar disc hernia (LDH) without selection bias. METHODS: Patients who underwent single-level MSD for LSS and LDH between April 2018 to December 2022 at our institute were included in this retrospective study. We collected data regarding baseline characteristics, medical history/comorbidities, epidural hematoma (EDH) volume, reoperation for EDH, differences between preoperative and one-day postoperative blood cell counts (ΔRBC), hemoglobin (ΔHGB), and hematocrits (ΔHCT), and perioperative thromboembolic complications. Patients were divided into two groups: the AP continuation group received AP treatment before surgery and the control group did not receive antiplatelet medication before surgery. Propensity scores for receiving AP agents were calculated, with one-to-one matching of estimated propensity scores to adjust for patient baseline characteristics and past histories. Reoperation for EDH, EDH volume, ΔRBC, ΔHGB, ΔHCT, and perioperative thromboembolic complications were compared between the groups. RESULTS: The 303 enrolled patients included 41 patients in the AP continuation group. After propensity score matching, the rate of reoperation for EDH, the EDH volume, ΔRBC, ΔHGB, ΔHCT, and perioperative thromboembolic complication rates were not significantly different between the groups. CONCLUSION: Perioperative AP continuation is safe for single-level lumbar MSD, even without biases.

Percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy for Upper Lumbar Disc Herniation versus lower lumbar disc herniation: clinical outcomes and technical consideration.

BACKGROUND: Upper lumbar disc herniation (ULDH) accounts for 1-10% of all lumbar disc herniations (LDH). This study aimed to evaluate the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with ULDH who underwent percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) compared with those with lower LDH. METHODS: 60 patients with ULDH or L4-L5 LDH treated with PTED between May 2016 and October 2021. MacNab criteria, visual analog scale (VAS) of back pain and leg pain, and Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) were evaluated before and after surgery. RESULTS: In the L1-L3 group, 59.1% of the patients had a positive femoral nerve tension test, and 81.8% of the patients had a sensory deficit. Both groups showed significant improvements in VAS scores for low back and leg pain, and JOA scores postoperatively. No significant differences in the degree of improvement were observed between the two groups. The excellent/good rate was 81.8% in the L1-L3 group and 84.2% in the L4-L5 group, showing no significant difference. CONCLUSION: PTED has comparable efficacy in treating ULDH as it does in treating lower LDH, it is a safe and effective treatment method for ULDH.

Does obesity and varying body mass index affect the clinical outcomes and safety of biportal endoscopic lumbar decompression? A comparative cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic spine surgery has recently grown in popularity due to the potential benefits of reduced pain and faster recovery time as compared to open surgery. Biportal spinal endoscopy has been successfully applied to lumbar disc herniations and lumbar spinal stenosis. Obesity is associated with increased risk of complications in spine surgery. Few prior studies have investigated the impact of obesity and associated medical comorbidities with biportal spinal endoscopy. METHODS: This study was a prospectively collected, retrospectively analyzed comparative cohort design. Patients were divided into cohorts of normal body weight (Bone Mass Index (BMI)18.0-24.9), overweight (BMI 25.0-29.9) and obese (BMI > 30.0) as defined by the World Health Organization (WHO). Patients underwent biportal spinal endoscopy by a single surgeon at a single institution for treatment of lumbar disc herniations and lumbar spinal stenosis. Demographic data, surgical complications, and patient-reported outcomes were analyzed. Statistics were calculated amongst treatment groups using analysis of variance and chi square where appropriate. Statistical significance was determined as p < 0.05. RESULTS: Eighty-four patients were followed. 26 (30.1%) were normal BMI, 35 (41.7%) were overweight and 23 (27.4%) were obese. Patients with increasing BMI had correspondingly greater American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) scores. There were no significant differences in VAS Back, VAS Leg, and ODI scores, or postoperative complications among the cohorts. There were no cases of surgical site infections in the cohort. All cohorts demonstrated significant improvement up to 1 year postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that obesity is not a risk factor for increased perioperative complications with biportal spinal endoscopy and has similar clinical outcomes and safety profile as compared to patients with normal BMI. Biportal spinal endoscopy is a promising alternative to traditional techniques to treat common lumbar pathology.

The Value of 3D SPACE MRI in Differentiating between Sequestrated Lumbar Disc Herniation and Tumors: Two Cases and Literature.

Background: Intervertebral disc herniation, defined as the protrusion or extrusion of the disc mass outside the disc space, is common and easy to diagnose on conventional Magnetic Resonance imaging (MRI) or Computed Tomography (CT) scans. However, the sequestrated disc fragments are challenging to detect, and intervertebral disc mass displacement into the dural sac, which can lead to serious neurological problems such as Cauda equina syndrome (CES). The sequestrated disc fragments do not have specific clinical or radiological characteristics that can differentiate an atypical disc mass from a tumor, making the diagnosis difficult preoperatively. Herein, we describe the use of Sampling Perfection with Application Optimized Contrast using different flip angle Evolution in Magnetic Resonance Imaging (3D SPACE MRI) in the diagnosis of the intervertebral disc fragment that mimicked a tumor. Case presentation: In this study, we report two cases of sequestered lumbar disc herniation. The first case was a 37-year-old patient with a 2-year history of intermittent left lower limb pain that aggravates with exercise and is relieved at rest, while the second case was a 42-year-old patient with a history of 40 days of numbness and pain in the left lower limb. Conclusion: 3D SPACE MRI is a beneficial diagnostic imaging tool for discriminating between disc mass that mimics a tumor and a tumor before surgery. If the disc fragment mimicking a tumor can be identified before the operation, open surgical treatment won't be necessary for all patients.

Clinical Outcomes of Percutaneous Endoscopic Transforaminal Discectomy for the Treatment of Disc Herniation: A 3-Year Retrospective Study.

AIM: Percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy (PELD) is a new minimally invasive spine surgery for patients with lumbar disc herniation (LDH). Based on the 3-year follow-up data, the effect of PELD on the clinical outcomes of patients with LDH through a retrospective cohort study was analyzed in this article, so as to provide guidance for clinical selection of surgical options. METHODS: The clinical data of 150 patients with LDH admitted to our hospital from January 2019 to October 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. According to the surgical methods recorded in the medical record system, the patients were divided into the open lumbar microdiscectomy (OLM) group (n = 50) and the PELD group (n = 100). The surgical and postoperative recovery indicators of the two groups were compared after matching. These included incision length, intraoperative blood loss, operation time, postoperative ambulation time and hospital stays, recovery rate, short-term complication rate, Lumbar visual analogue scale (VAS) score, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score. RESULTS: Compared with the OLM group, the PELD group had shorter incision length, shorter operation time, shorter postoperative ambulation time, shorter hospital stays, less intraoperative blood loss, lower short-term complication rate, lower lumbar pain and dysfunction scores at 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after operation, higher short-term excellent-and-good recovery rate, and higher quality-of-life scores at 3 years after operation (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with OLM, PELD in the treatment of LDH patients can reduce the operation time, blood loss, and length of hospital stays, suggesting a short-term postoperative recovery effect. Compared with OLM, PELD can also reduce the incidence of short-term complications, enhance the effect of pain control and improvement of dysfunction in the medium term, and improve the long-term quality of life.

A new technique for low back pain in lumbar disc herniation: percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy combined with sinuvertebral nerve ablation.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) has demonstrated efficacy in alleviating leg pain among patients with lumbar disc herniation. Nonetheless, residual back pain persists as a troubling issue for surgeons following the procedure. In the treatment of discogenic back pain, sinuvertebral nerve radiofrequency ablation has shown promising results. Nevertheless, the potential benefit of simultaneously implementing sinuvertebral nerve radiofrequency ablation during PELD surgery to address residual back pain has not been thoroughly investigated in current literature. METHODS: This retrospective study reviewed Lumbar disc herniation (LDH) patients with low back pain who underwent combined PELD and sinuvertebral nerve ablation in our department between January 2021 and September 2023. Residual low back pain post-surgery was assessed and compared with existing literature. RESULTS: A total of 80 patients, including 53 males and 27 females, were included in the study. Following surgical intervention, patients demonstrated remarkable improvements in pain and functional parameters. One month post-operatively, the VAS score for low back pain exhibited a 75% reduction (6.45 ± 1.3 to 1.61 ± 1.67), while the VAS score for leg pain decreased by 85% (7.89 ± 1.15 to 1.18 ± 1.26). Notably, the JOA score increased from 12.89 ± 5.48 to 25.35 ± 4.96, and the ODI score decreased form 59.48 ± 9.58 to 20.3 ± 5.37. These improvements were sustained at three months post-operatively. According to the modified Mac Nab criteria, the excellent and good rate was 88.75%. Residual low back pain is observed to be comparatively reduced compared to the findings documented in earlier literature. CONCLUSION: The combination of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy and sinuvertebral nerve ablation demonstrates effective improvement in low back pain for LDH patients.

Posterolateral approaches to the thoracic spine for calcific disc herniation: is wider exposure always better?

OBJECTIVE: To compare the costotransversectomy (CTV) and transpedicular (TP) approaches versus the transfacet (TF) approach for the surgical treatment of calcific thoracic spine herniations (cTDH), in terms of surgical and clinical outcomes. BACKGROUND: Surgical approaches for cTDH are debated. Anterior approaches are recommended, while posterolateral approaches are preferred for non-calcific, paramedian, and lateral hernias. Currently, there is limited evidence about the superiority of a more invasive surgical approach, such as CTV or TP, over TF, a relatively less invasive approach, in terms of neurological outcome, pain, and surgical complications, for the treatment of cTDH. METHODS: A retrospective, observational, monocentric study was conducted on patients who underwent posterolateral thoracic approaches for symptomatic cTDH, between 2010 and 2023, at our institute. Three groups were drafted, based on the surgical approach used: TF, TP, and CTV. All procedures were assisted by intraoperative CT scan, spinal neuronavigation, and intraoperative neuromonitoring. Analyzed factors include duration of surgery, amount of bone removal, intraoperative blood loss, CSF leak, need of instrumentation for iatrogenic instability, degree of disc herniation removal, myelopathy recovery. Afterwards, a statistical analysis was performed to investigate the bony resection of the superior posterior edge of the vertebral soma. The primary outcome was the partial or total herniation removal. RESULTS: This study consecutively enrolled 65 patients who underwent posterolateral thoracic surgery for cTDH. The TF approach taking the least, and the CTV the longest time (p < 0.01). No statistical difference was observed between the three mentioned approaches, in terms of intraoperative blood loss, dural leakage, post-resection instrumentation, total herniation removal, or myelopathy recovery. An additional somatic bony resection was successful in achieving total herniation removal (p < 0.01), and the extent of bony resection was directly proportional to the extent of hernia removal (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: No statistically significant differences were highlighted between the TP, TF, and CTV regarding the extent of cTDH removal, the postoperative complications, and the neurological improvement. The described somatic bone resection achieved significant total herniation removal and was directly proportional to the preop against postop anteroposterior diameter difference.

Limited discectomy versus aggressive discectomy by spinal endoscopy with the transforaminal approach for lumbar disc herniation: a retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of limited discectomy (LD) and aggressive discectomy (AD) performed via spinal endoscopy using the transforaminal approach in patients with lumbar disc herniation(LDH) METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of patients who underwent percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy (PETD) at the L4-L5 lumbar spine segments in our department from January 2017 to December 2020. The follow-up period extended to 24 months postoperatively. Patients were categorized into the LD and AD groups based on the extent of intraoperative disc removal. We retrospectively collected and analyzed clinical and radiological data. RESULTS: The study followed 65 patients, with 36 in the LD group and 29 in the AD group. No statistically significant differences were noted in recurrence rates, the excellent and good Macnab rates, preoperative Disc Height Index (DHI), and preoperative Modic changes between the groups (P >0.05). However, significant differences were observed in operation duration, postoperative DHI and postoperative Modic change (P<0.05). No significant differences in Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were detected between the groups preoperatively, or one and two years postoperatively (P>0.05). Nevertheless, notable differences in VAS and ODI scores were present one month postoperatively (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: As a conventional surgical method for treating LDH, PETD can achieve satisfactory clinical results in both LD and AD, with no significant variance in recurrence rates. However, AD is associated with longer operation times, and greater postoperative reductions in DHI and greater postoperative Modic changes compared to LD.

Clinical efficacy and complications of MIS-TLIF and TLIF in the treatment of upper lumbar disc herniation: a comparative study.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment modality for upper lumbar disc herniation remains unclear. Herein, we compared the clinical efficacy and application value of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for upper lumbar disc herniation. We aimed to provide new evidence to guide surgical decisions for treating this condition. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 81 patients with upper lumbar disc herniation admitted between January 2017 and July 2018, including 41 and 40 patients who underwent MIS-TLIF and TLIF, respectively. Demographic characteristics, preoperative functional scores, perioperative indicators, and postoperative complications were compared. We performed consecutive comparisons of visual analog scale (VAS) scores of the lumbar and leg regions, Oswestry disability index (ODI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores (JOA), and MacNab scores at the final follow-up, to assess clinical outcomes 5 years postoperatively. RESULTS: VAS scores of the back and legs were significantly lower in the MIS-TLIF than the TLIF group at 3 months and 1 year postoperatively (P < 0.05). Intraoperative bleeding and postoperative hospitalization time were significantly lower, and the time to return to work/normal life was shorter in the MIS-TLIF than in the TLIF group (P < 0.05). The differences in JOA scores and ODI scores between the two groups at 3 months, 1 year, and 3 years postoperatively were statistically significant (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The early clinical efficacy of MIS-TLIF was superior to that of TLIF, but no differences were found in mid-term clinical efficacy. Further, MIS-TLIF has the advantages of fewer medical injuries, shorter hospitalization times, and faster postoperative functional recovery.

Prognostic factors for residual symptoms following percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy.

To explore the risk factors for residual symptoms following percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD). A retrospective case-controlled study. From January 2015 to December 2020, consecutive patients who underwent PELD for lumbar disc herniation (LDH) in our department were retrospectively studied. All the patients were followed-up at least two years. Residual symptoms were analyzed for association with baseline data, clinical feature, physical examination, and radiographic characteristics, which were used to detected the risk factors. A total of 339 patients were included in this study, with a mean follow-up of 28.7 ± 3.6 months. Of the enrolled patients, 90 (26.5%) patients experienced residual low back pain (LBP), and 76 (22.4%) patients experienced leg numbness (LN). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that intervertebral disc calcification on CT scans (odd ratio, 0.480; 95% confidence interval: 0.247 ~ 0.932; P < 0.05) was independent risk factor for postoperative residual LBP with odd ratio and longer symptom duration was risk factor for postoperative residual LN (odd ratio, 2.231; 95% confidence interval:1.066 ~ 4.671; P < 0.05). Residual symptoms following transforaminal endoscopic surgery are quite prevalent. Intervertebral disc calcification is a protective factor for residual low back pain, and a longer symptom duration is a risk factor for residual leg numbness.

Tubular vs. mini-open lumbar discoidectomy: surgical-clinical outcome.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical-surgical results of the tubular vs. mini-open approach in lumbar discoidectomy. The tubular approach promises to reduce the number of rest days and an earlier return to daily activities and work. METHOD: A case-control study of patients operated on for disc herniation using tubular surgery (case) and mini-open (control) was carried out. The variables investigated were as follow: radicular and lumbar pain, sex, age, failure in conservative treatment, single-level lumbar hernia, surgical time, bleeding, length of hospital stay, persistence of symptoms, complications, occupational activity, and reintegration into everyday activities. RESULTS: Through 100 surgeries performed, two groups were created, tubular and mini-open, with 50 patients each, with L4-L5 or L5-S1 disc herniation, respectively. The most affected level was L4-L5 (69%). Of the total cases, a significant improvement was found (p < 0.05) at 15 postoperative days in the VAS and ODI scale in the tubular group with respect to mini-open. Complications such as surgical wound infection, durotomy, and persistent pain occurred. CONCLUSIONS: The tubular approach is a safe and effective option for herniated discs of the lumbar segment, and reduces surgical times, bleeding, and the time of reinsertion to daily activities of the patient.

OBJETIVO: Evaluar los resultados clínico-quirúrgicos del abordaje tipo tubular en comparación con el mini-open en la discoidectomía lumbar. El abordaje tubular promete reducir el número de días de reposo y una reincorporación más temprana a las actividades diarias y laborales. MÉTODO: Se realizó un estudio de casos y controles de pacientes operados por hernia discal mediante cirugía tubular (casos) o mini-open (controles). Las variables investigadas fueron: dolor radicular y lumbar, sexo, edad, falla en el tratamiento conservador, hernia lumbar de un solo nivel, tiempo quirúrgico, sangrado, tiempo de estancia hospitalaria, persistencia de síntomas, complicaciones, tipo de actividad ocupacional y reinserción a las actividades cotidianas. RESULTADOS: Se realizaron 100 cirugías y se crearon dos grupos, tubular y mini-open, con 50 pacientes cada uno, con hernia discal de L4-L5 o L5-S1, respectivamente. El nivel más afectado fue L4-L5 (69%). Del total de los casos, se encontró mejoría significativa (p < 0.05) a los 15 días posquirúrgicos en la escala EVA y ODI en el grupo tubular con respecto al mini-open. Ocurrieron complicaciones como infección de herida quirúrgica, durotomía y dolor persistente. CONCLUSIONES: El abordaje tubular es una opción segura y efectiva para hernias discales del segmento lumbar, y reduce los tiempos quirúrgicos, el sangrado y el tiempo de reinserción a las actividades cotidianas del paciente.

Unilateral biportal endoscopy via two different approaches for upper lumbar disc herniation: a technical note.

BACKGROUND: The traditional surgical procedures for upper lumbar disc herniation (ULDH) usually lead to frequent complications. We aim to investigate the clinical efficacy of the unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) technique in treating upper lumbar disc herniation (ULDH). METHODS: From January 2020 to December 2021, the clinical data of 28 patients with ULDH treated with the UBE technique were collected and analyzed for surgery time under UBE, postsurgical drainage, postsurgical hospital stay, and complications. The clinical efficacy was evaluated according to the modified MacNab score, Oswestry disability index (ODI), and visual analogue scale (VAS) of low back pain and lower limb pain before the surgery; one week, one month, and three months after the surgery; and at the last follow-up. RESULTS: All patients underwent the UBE surgery successfully. The surgery time under UBE for non-fusion cases was 47.50 ± 11.84 min (monosegment) and 75.00 ± 20.66 min (two segments), while that for fusion cases was 77.50 ± 21.02 min. The postsurgical drainage for non-fusion cases was 25.00 ± 13.94 mL (monosegment) and 38.00 ± 11.83 mL (two segments), while that for fusion cases was 71.25 ± 31.72 mL. The postsurgical hospital stay was 8.28 ± 4.22 days. The follow-up time was 15.82 ± 4.54 months. The VAS score for each time period after the surgery was significantly lower (P < 0.05), while the ODI was significantly higher than that before the surgery (P < 0.05). According to the modified MacNab scoring standard, the ratio of excellent to good was 96.43% at the last follow-up. Two patients experienced transient numbness and pain in their lower limbs and no activity disorder after the surgery, and they recovered after conservative treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical effect of UBE technique in treating ULDH was reliable. According to the needs of the disease, the interlaminar approach or paraspinal approach of the UBE technique was selected. This technique took into account the effect of treatment, achieved the purpose of minimal invasiveness, and did not require special instruments. Therefore, it has the potential for clinical application.

Comparison of the Outcomes of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion and Cervical Disc Replacement for Cervical Disc Disease.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the radiological outcome and development of heterotopic ossification (HO) following single-segment anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and cervical disc replacement (CDR) for cervical disc herniation and evaluate their impact on surgical success. STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive comparative study. Place and Duration of the Study: Neurosurgery Department at Bozyaka Education and Research Hospital, Izmir, Turkiye, between January 2020 and June 2022. METHODOLOGY: Patients aged 18-70 years with radicular neck pain unresponsive to conventional medical treatment and an MRI-confirmed diagnosis were included. Patients with osteoporosis (OP) were excluded. Patients were randomised into two treatment groups (ACDF and CDR) and stratified by age and symptom severity. Radiographic assessments and HO classification according to McAfee were performed. RESULTS: Among the included patients, 56 underwent ACDF and 45 underwent CDR. The mean patient age was 48.29 ± 9.530 and 41.84 ± 7.239 years in the ACDF and CDR groups, respectively (p <0.001). The postoperative disc height increased in both groups. The T1 slope was significantly higher preoperatively and in the early postoperative period in the CDR group than in the ACDF group (p = 0.001). HO was graded as 1, 2, 3, and 4 in 28 (27.7%), 6 (5.9%), 7 (6.9%), and 4 (3%) patients, respectively. CONCLUSION: ACDF and CDR provided similar improvements in radiological measurements and pain relief. Although both procedures significantly enhanced the patient's quality of life and disability scores, HO was more prevalent following CDR during long-term follow-up. KEY WORDS: Cervical disc replacement, Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, Spinal surgery techniques, Heterotopic ossification.

Cervical Disk Replacement Versus Anterior Cervical Diskectomy and Fusion: Effect of Procedural Variant on Patients With a Prolonged Preoperative Duration of Symptoms From Disk Herniation.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with a prolonged preoperative symptom duration (PSD) in the setting of cervical disk herniation (DH) may suffer inferior outcomes after surgical intervention. Comparison between anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion (ACDF) versus cervical disk arthroplasty (CDA) in this at-risk population has not yet been conducted. METHODS: Patients undergoing ACDF or CDA for DH with a PSD > 180 days were selected. Six-week (6W) and final follow-up (FF) patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) as well as magnitude of postoperative improvements (∆PROM) were compared between cohorts using multivariable linear regression. Intercohort achievement rates of minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in each PROM were compared. RESULTS: Seventy-seven of 190 patients were in the CDA cohort. 6W Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-Physical Function (PROMIS-PF) was superior in the CDA cohort. The ACDF cohort demonstrated notable improvements in the 6W Neck Disability Index (NDI), visual analog scale-neck pain (VAS-N), visual analog scale-arm pain (VAS-A), and 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). The CDA cohort demonstrated notable improvements in 6W PROMIS-PF, NDI, VAS-N, and VAS-A. FF VAS-A was better in the CDA cohort. The ACDF cohort demonstrated notable improvements in FF PROMIS-PF, NDI, VAS-N, and VAS-A. The CDA cohort demonstrated notable improvements in all FF PROMs. ∆PROM-6W in PROMIS-PF was greater in the CDA cohort. CONCLUSION: Patients with prolonged PSD due to cervical DH demonstrated notable improvements in physical function, disability, pain, and mental health regardless of fusion versus arthroplasty techniques. Accounting for demographic variations, patients undergoing CDA demonstrated a greater magnitude of improvement and superior scores in physical function at the first postoperative follow-up. Rates of clinically tangible improvements in PROMs did not markedly vary by surgical procedure. Patients undergoing CDA may perceive greater early improvements to physical function compared with patients undergoing ACDF for prolonged PSD due to DH.

Cauda equina syndrome with surgical intervention in pregnancy during the periviable period.

INTRODUCTION: Cauda equina syndrome (CES) following lumbar disc herniation is exceedingly rare in pregnancy and there is limited literature outlining management of CES in pregnancy. There is further limited data addressing the management of periviable pregnancies complicated by CES. CASE PRESENTATION: A 38-year-old female at 22 weeks gestation presented with worsening lower back pain radiating to the right posterior lower extremity. She was initially managed with conservative therapy, but re-presented with worsening neurologic symptoms, including fasciculations and perineal numbness. Magnetic resonance imaging showed a large herniated disc at L4-5, and given concern for CES, she underwent emergent decompression surgery, which was complicated by a superficial wound dehiscence. She ultimately carried her pregnancy to term and had a cesarean delivery. The patient's residual neurologic symptoms continued to improve with physical therapy throughout the postpartum period. DISCUSSION: Cauda equina syndrome is a rare spinal condition with potentially devastating outcomes if not managed promptly. Diagnosis and management of CES in pregnancy is the same as in non-pregnant patients, however, standardization of patient positioning for surgery, surgical approach, anesthetic use, and fetal considerations is lacking. A multidisciplinary approach is critical, especially at periviable gestational ages of pregnancy. Our case and review of the literature demonstrates that patients in the second trimester can be managed surgically with prone positioning, intermittent fetal monitoring, and continued management of the pregnancy remains unchanged. Given the rarity of these cases, there is a need for a consensus on management and continued care in pregnant patients with CES.

Simultaneous L1-2 Bulged Disc and Mobile Spinal Schwannoma Causing Cauda Equina Syndrome: A Rare Case Report.

BACKGROUND Aside from the rarity of mobile spinal schwannomas, the coexistence of these tumors with herniated intervertebral disc is also scarce. Furthermore, cauda equina syndrome (CES), as a manifestation of intraspinal schwannomas has been reported rarely. Described here is a case of simultaneous lumbar disc bulge and mobile spinal schwannoma presented with intermittent symptoms of CES. CASE REPORT A 62-year-old man presented with severe but intermittent leg pain for 2 weeks, which later progressed to an episode of lower extremity weakness and difficulty in urination. Magnetic resonance imaging revealed an intraspinal tumor that moved in position relative to the L1-2 disc bulge on scans 6 h apart, with associated spontaneous regression in symptoms. The tumor was found to be a mobile spinal schwannoma, originated from a nerve root. A standard microdissection technique was used to remove the tumor through a spinous process-sparing unilateral approach, with complete laminectomy of L1. Use of intraoperative ultrasound facilitated the accurate tumor localization. Postoperatively, the patient no longer had symptoms. CONCLUSIONS This report presents a combination of a common spinal pathology, intervertebral disc herniation, alongside a rare condition, mobile spinal schwannoma, whose uncommon clinical manifestations, such as CES can cause irreversible neurological deficits. Surgeons need to remain vigilant of potential atypical scenarios when treating patients. Surgical treatment challenges regarding the mobility of tumors, such as accurate localization, should be addressed using intraoperative imaging to avoid wrong-level surgery. To mitigate the irreversible neurological complications, patients should receive comprehensive information for alarming signs of CES.

Immediate Effects, Detailed Clinical Outcomes, and Prognostic Factors of Chemonucleolysis Using Condoliase for Lumbar Disc Herniation.

Chemonucleolysis utilizing condoliase is a minimally invasive treatment for lumbar disc herniation (LDH) aimed at reducing intervertebral disc pressure and enhancing symptoms. In this study, lower limb pain was measured using the numeric rating scale (NRS) the day after treatment and 1 and 3 months after treatment. Prognostic factors were assessed, categorizing participants into an improvement group (I-group) for NRS lower limb pain scores of ≥3.5 and a non-improvement group (N-group) for scores of <3.5. This study included a total of 225 patients treated between April 2020 and March 2023. The mean age was 46.5 ± 16.5 years, with 151 males. The mean duration of illness was 6.2 ± 8.52 months. As of the day after treatment, 60 cases were classified into the I-group, 118 cases at 1 month after surgery, and 152 cases at 3 months after surgery. The disease duration before treatment was significantly shorter in the I-group at 1 (8.19 ± 8.74 [I-group] vs. 5.17 ± 8.04 [N-group] months) and 3 months (8.51 [I-group] ± 7.35 vs. 5.69 ± 8.87[N-group] months) after treatment. The comparison of baseline leg pain NRS shows a difference in leg pain NRS in the I-group when compared on the day after treatment (6.02 ± 2.64 [I-group] vs. 7.50 ± 1.79 [N-group]), 1 (5.13 ± 2.69 [I-group] vs. 7.58 ± 1.66 [N-group]), and 3 months (4.42 ± 2.70 [I-group] vs. 7.34 ± 1.77 [N-group]). Chemonucleolysis using condoliase for LDH can improve symptoms the day after treatment and can be a minimally invasive treatment to avoid surgery.

Lumbar lordosis and sacral slope do not differ in two types of postoperative lumbar disc re-herniation: a cross-sectional observational study.

BACKGROUND: To identify the differences of lumbar lordosis (LL) and sacral slope (SS) angles between two types of postoperative lumbar disc re-herniation, including the recurrence of same level and adjacent segment herniation (ASH). METHODS: We searched the medical records of lumbar disc herniation (LDH) patients with re-herniation with complete imaging data (n = 58) from January 1, 2013 to December 30, 2020 in our hospital. After matching for age and sex, 58 patients with LDH without re-herniation from the same period operated by the same treatment group in our hospital were served as a control group. Re-herniation patients were divided into two groups, same-level recurrent lumbar disc herniation group (rLDHG) and adjacent segment herniation group with or without recurrence (ASHG). The preoperative, postoperative and one month after operation LL and SS were measured on standing radiographs and compared with the control group by using t-test, ANOVA, and rank-sum test. Next, we calculated the odds ratios (ORs) by unconditional logistic regression, progressively adjusted for other confounding factors. RESULTS: Compared with the control group, the postoperative LL and SS were significantly lower in LDH patients with re-herniation. However, there were no differences in LL and SS between ASHG and rLDHG at any stage. After progressive adjustment for confounding factors, no matter what stage is, LL and SS remained unassociated with the two types of re-herniation. CONCLUSIONS: Low postoperative LL and SS angles are associated with degeneration of the remaining disc. Low LL and SS may be independent risk factors for re-herniation but cannot determine type of recurrence (same or adjacent disc level).