Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Management of recurrent lumbar disc herniation: a comparative analysis of posterior lumbar interbody fusion and repeat discectomy

View through CrossRef
Background: For recurrent lumbar disc herniation, many experts suggest a repeat discectomy without stabilization due to its minimal tissue manipulation, lower blood loss, shorter hospital stay, and lower cost, recent research on the role of instability in disc herniation has made fusion techniques popular among spinal surgeons. The authors compare the postoperative outcomes of posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) and repeat discectomy for same-level recurrent disc herniation. Methods: The patients included had previously undergone discectomy and presented with a same-level recurrent lumbar disc herniation. The patients were placed into two groups: 1) discectomy only, 2) PLIF based on the absence or presence of segmental instability. Preoperative and postoperative Oswestry disability index scores, duration of surgery, blood loss, duration of hospitalization, and complications were analyzed. Results: The repeat discectomy and fusion groups had 40 and 34 patients, respectively. The patients were followed up for 2.68 (1–4) years. There was no difference in the duration of hospitalization (3.73 vs. 3.29 days P=0.581) and operative time (101.25 vs. 108.82 mins, P=0.48). Repeat discectomy had lower intraoperative blood loss, 88.75 ml (50–150) versus 111.47 ml (30–250) in PLIF (P=0.289). PLIF had better ODI pain score 4.21 (0–10) versus 9.27 (0–20) (P-value of 0.018). Recurrence was 22.5% in repeat discectomy versus 0 in PLIF. Conclusion: PLIF and repeat discectomy for recurrent lumbar disc herniation have comparable intraoperative blood loss, duration of surgery, and hospital stay. PLIF is associated with lower durotomy rates and better long-term pain control than discectomy. This is due to recurrence and progression of degenerative process in discectomy patients, which are eliminated and slowed, respectively, by PLIF.
Title: Management of recurrent lumbar disc herniation: a comparative analysis of posterior lumbar interbody fusion and repeat discectomy
Description:
Background: For recurrent lumbar disc herniation, many experts suggest a repeat discectomy without stabilization due to its minimal tissue manipulation, lower blood loss, shorter hospital stay, and lower cost, recent research on the role of instability in disc herniation has made fusion techniques popular among spinal surgeons.
The authors compare the postoperative outcomes of posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) and repeat discectomy for same-level recurrent disc herniation.
Methods: The patients included had previously undergone discectomy and presented with a same-level recurrent lumbar disc herniation.
The patients were placed into two groups: 1) discectomy only, 2) PLIF based on the absence or presence of segmental instability.
Preoperative and postoperative Oswestry disability index scores, duration of surgery, blood loss, duration of hospitalization, and complications were analyzed.
Results: The repeat discectomy and fusion groups had 40 and 34 patients, respectively.
The patients were followed up for 2.
68 (1–4) years.
There was no difference in the duration of hospitalization (3.
73 vs.
3.
29 days P=0.
581) and operative time (101.
25 vs.
108.
82 mins, P=0.
48).
Repeat discectomy had lower intraoperative blood loss, 88.
75 ml (50–150) versus 111.
47 ml (30–250) in PLIF (P=0.
289).
PLIF had better ODI pain score 4.
21 (0–10) versus 9.
27 (0–20) (P-value of 0.
018).
Recurrence was 22.
5% in repeat discectomy versus 0 in PLIF.
Conclusion: PLIF and repeat discectomy for recurrent lumbar disc herniation have comparable intraoperative blood loss, duration of surgery, and hospital stay.
PLIF is associated with lower durotomy rates and better long-term pain control than discectomy.
This is due to recurrence and progression of degenerative process in discectomy patients, which are eliminated and slowed, respectively, by PLIF.

Related Results

Stand-Alone Open Disectomy versus Fixation in Management of Recurrent Lumbar Disc Prolapse
Stand-Alone Open Disectomy versus Fixation in Management of Recurrent Lumbar Disc Prolapse
Abstract Background The strict definition of recurrent disc herniation is the presence of herniated disc material at the same le...
EPIDEMIOLOGICALRISK FACTORS OF RECURRENCE OF LUMBAR INTERVERTEBRAL DISC HERNIATION AFTER PRIMARY DISCECTOMY (LITERATURE REVIEW)
EPIDEMIOLOGICALRISK FACTORS OF RECURRENCE OF LUMBAR INTERVERTEBRAL DISC HERNIATION AFTER PRIMARY DISCECTOMY (LITERATURE REVIEW)
Primary discectomy for a lumbar intervertebral disc herniated (LDH) is usually accompanied by a rapid regression of clinical symptoms, however, in 5–15 % of cases, an X-ray positiv...
Functional Outcome of Micro Lumbar Discectomy in patients with Symptomatic Lumbar Disc Herniation
Functional Outcome of Micro Lumbar Discectomy in patients with Symptomatic Lumbar Disc Herniation
Introduction: Lumbar disc herniation is a common cause of back and leg pain. Though the majority of symptomatic lumbar discs can be conservatively treated, surgical decompression i...
Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion
Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion
One of the most common surgical cures for lumbar degenerative illnesses is lumbar fusion. Traditional open lumbar fusion is often used in clinical settings and has positive clinica...
Pre-operative magnetic resonance imaging as a predictor of success in lumbar disc herniation patients undergoing laminectomy
Pre-operative magnetic resonance imaging as a predictor of success in lumbar disc herniation patients undergoing laminectomy
Introduction. Lumbar disc herniation is a condition in which annulus fibrosus in the lumbar area is herniated with numerous etiologies, such as degenerative. One of the mainstay tr...

Back to Top