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.

Multimodal Applications of 3D-Navigation in Single-Level Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Impacts on Precision, Accuracy, Complications, and Radiation Exposure.

BACKGROUND: Three-dimensional (3D)-navigation in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) is an evolving procedure. It is used not only for its accuracy of pedicle screw fixation but also for other major steps in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Multimodal outcomes of this procedure are very limited in the literature. The purpose of this study was to examine the application of 3D-navigation in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF). METHODS: Patients who underwent single-level MI-TLIF using 3D-navigation between January 2017 and July 2019 were evaluated for navigation setting time, radiation exposure, volume of nucleus pulposus excised, cage placement, accuracy of pedicle screw placement, and cranial facet-joint violation. RESULTS: One hundred and two patients with a mean age of 60.2 years met the inclusion criteria. The mean presetting time of navigation was 46.65 ± 9.45 minutes. Radiation exposure, fluoroscopy use, and fluoroscopy time were 15.54 ± 0.65 mGy, 4.43 ± 0.87 Gy.cm², and 97.6 ± 11.67 seconds, respectively. The mean amount of nucleus pulposus excised from all quadrants was quantified. The cage was centrally placed in 87 patients, with 95.4% showing a Grade 0 pedicle breach and 94.6% showing Grade 0 cranial facet-joint violation. CONCLUSION: Registration and setting up 3D-navigation takes additional time. The amount of exposure to the patient is much less compared to routine computed tomography, and, importantly, the operating team is protected from radiation. Navigated MI-TLIF has high rates of accuracy with regard to placement of percutaneous pedicle screws and cages with the added advantage of protection of the cranial facet-joint.

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.