Percutaneous discectomy of the lumbar spine

Summary Ten patients with clinical and radiological evidence of herniated discs at lower lumbar levels were treated with partial discectomy by a lateral percutaneous approach. Eight patients had complete relief from radicular pain and were discharged within four days. They returned to normal daily activity within one month.

---

Résumé Dix malades présentant des signes cliniques et radiologiques de hernie discale L3–L4 et L4–L5 ont été traités par discectomie partielle, effectuée par voie per-cutanée à l'aide d'un trocart introduit par voie postéro-externe. Huit de ces patients ont été totalement soulagés de leurs douleurs et ont pu quitter l'hôpital au 4e jour. Ils ont repris une activité normale dans un délai d'un mois.

     

Guidelines for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 15: electrophysiological monitoring and lumbar fusion

Based on the medical evidence provided by the literature reviewed, there does not appear to be support for the hypothesis that any form of intraoperative monitoring improves patient outcomes following lumbar decompression or fusion procedures for degenerative spinal disease. Evidence does indicate that a normal evoked EMG response is predictive for intrapedicular screw placement (high NPV for breakout). The presence of an abnormal EMG response does not, however, exclude intrapedicular screw placement (low PPV). The majority of clinically apparent postoperative nerve injuries are associated with intraoperative changes in SSEP and/or DSEP monitoring. For this reason, changes in DSEP/SSEP monitoring appear to be sensitive to nerve root injury. There is a high-false positive rate, however, and changes in DSEP and SSEP recordings are frequently not related to nerve injury. A normal study has been shown to correlate with the lack of a significant postoperative nerve injury. There is no substantial evidence to indicate that the use of intraoperative monitoring of any kind provides useful information to the surgeon in terms of assessing the adequacy of nerve root decompression at the time of surgery.     

Open anterior approaches for lumbar spine procedures

With the advent of anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and artificial discs as common procedures for the treatment many spinal problems such as pseudoarthrosis, degenerative disc disease and internal disc disruption from trauma, anterior exposure has become an increasingly popular procedure for the general, thoracic, urologic and vascular surgeon. Despite this, the body of literature describing this procedure is lacking. Dividing the approach for anterior spinal surgery into the thoracolumbar, mid-lumbar, and lumbosacral regions, we describe the basic techniques and anatomy needed to perform these open approaches, specifically, repairs of disc spaces T12-L2, L2-5, and L5-S1, respectively. The technique for the retroperitoneal approach will be discussed in detail; however, issues involved with indications for transperitoneal approach and technical "pearls" will also be discussed.     

Guidelines for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 11: interbody techniques for lumbar fusion

The majority of reviewed medical evidence suggests that interbody techniques are associated with higher fusion rates compared with PLF when applied to patients with low-back pain due to DDD limited to one or two levels. The evidence is generally of poor quality and retrospective in nature. Conflicting evidence exists supporting the role of interbody graft placement for improvement of functional outcomes; however, there is no Class I or II evidence to suggest that the use of an interbody graft is associated with worse outcomes, and Class II evidence exists to suggest that outcomes are improved. Complication rates of interbody graft placement, particularly of circumferential procedures, are higher in most series. Many complications, however, are associated with pedicle screw fixation and not with interbody graft placement per se. In the context of a single-level stand-alone ALIF or ALIF with posterior instrumentation, there does not appear to be a substantial benefit to the addition of a PLF. The addition of a PLF to a construct that already includes an interbody graft is, however, associated with increased costs and complications. Therefore, although the addition of supplemental fixation (a 270 degrees fusion) may be necessary for biomechanical reasons, it may not be appropriate to subject the patient to the morbidity of a full posterior exposure for placement of graft material. Significant differences in clinical outcomes between the various interbody techniques have not been convincingly demonstrated. No general recommendation can therefore be made regarding the technique that should be used to achieve interbody fusion.     

经椎间孔髓核摘除并椎间融合术治疗高位腰椎间盘突出症

目的探讨经椎间孔入路髓核摘除椎管减压并椎间植骨融合内固定术治疗高位腰椎间盘突出症的临床疗效。方法对27例采用经椎间孔髓核摘除椎管减压并椎间植骨融合内固定术治疗的高位腰椎间盘突出症患者的临床资料进行回顾分析。观察指标包括术前及术后1年疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)、Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)及植骨融合情况。结果术前VAS评分(8.1±0.7)分,术后1年VAS评分(1.9±0.5)分,两者比较有明显差异(P0.05)。术前ODI评分(53.26±8.97)%,术后1年(18.47±5.37)%,两者比较有明显差异(P0.05)。术后1年椎间均融合,内固定物未出现松动和断裂。1例术后出现神经根牵拉损伤的症状,经对症处理6周后恢复。结论经椎间孔入路髓核摘除椎管减压并椎间植骨融合内固定术治疗高位腰椎间盘突出症临床疗效可靠。     

Guidelines for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 17: bone growth stimulators and lumbar fusion

There have been a number of randomized studies supporting the use of ES for the promotion of bone healing following lumbar fusion. All of the published studies have methodological flaws that prevent the studies from providing Class I medical evidence. There is, however, Class II and III evidence to support the use of direct current stimulation or CCS for enhancing fusion rates in high-risk patients undergoing lumbar PLF. A beneficial effect on fusion rates in patients not at "high risk" has not been convincingly demonstrated, nor has an effect been shown for these modalities in patients treated with interbody fusion. There is limited evidence both for and against the use of PEMFS for enhancing fusion rates following PLE Class II and III medical evidence supports the use of PEMFS for promoting arthrodesis following interbody fusion. Although some studies have purported to demonstrate functional improvement in some patient subgroups, other studies have not detected differences. All of the reviewed studies are significantly flawed by the use of a four-point patient satisfaction scale as the primary outcome measure. This outcome measure is not validated. Because of the use of this flawed outcome measure and because of the conflicting results reported in the better-designed studies that assess functional outcome, there is no consistent medical evidence to support or refute use of these devices for improving patient outcomes.     

Guidelines for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 8: lumbar fusion for disc herniation and radiculopathy

There is no convincing medical evidence to support the routine use of lumbar fusion at the time of a primary lumbar disc excision. There is conflicting Class III medical evidence regarding the potential benefit of the addition of fusion in this circumstance. Therefore, the definite increase in cost and complications associated with the use of fusion are not justified. Patients with preoperative lumbar instability may benefit from fusion at the time of lumbar discectomy; however, the incidence of such instability appears to be very low (< 5%) in the general lumbar disc herniation population. Patients who suffer from chronic low-back pain, or are heavy laborers or athletes with axial low-back pain, in addition to radicular symptoms may also be candidates for fusion at the time of lumbar disc excision. Patients with a recurrent disc herniation have been treated successfully with both reoperative discectomy and reoperative discectomy combined with fusion. In patients with a recurrent lumbar disc herniation with associated spinal deformity, instability, or associated chronic low-back pain, consideration of fusion in addition to reoperative discectomy is recommended.     

Indications for lumbar fusion in degenerative spine disease

The incidence of lumbar fusion surgeries has risen exponentially over the last 2 decades. Although a very useful and necessary surgery for specific conditions, spinal fusions have undeservingly earned a negative reputation. With stringent patient selection, lumbar fusions are highly efficacious. This article is intended to inform the reader of the indications for lumbar spinal fusion and discuss conditions that potentiate successful outcomes.     

椎板减压经椎间孔椎间盘切除椎间融合内固定治疗高位腰椎间盘突出症

目的:观察椎板减压经椎间孔椎间盘切除椎间植骨椎弓根螺钉内固定治疗高位腰椎间盘突出症的临床疗效。方法:2005年3月～2008年12月我院收治且获得随访的单间隙高位腰椎间盘突出症患者22例,其中L1/24例,L2/39例,L3/49例。均接受经椎间孔椎间盘切除椎间植骨椎弓根螺钉内固定术治疗,其中18例行单侧椎板切除减压,4例行全椎板切除减压。术前、术后1年随访时进行疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)、Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)评估和椎间隙相对高度(R)测量,观察植骨融合情况。结果:手术时间120～180min,平均132.6min,术中出血200～350ml,平均263ml。术中无硬膜损伤。1例术后出现对侧神经根牵拉伤,经对症处理后症状消失。均获得1年以上随访。术前VAS、ODI及R分别为8.3±0.6分、(52.32±9.17)%、0.211±0.052,术后1年时VAS、ODI及R分别为2.1±0.8分、(20.33±5.72)%、0.324±0.048,较术前均有明显改善(P0.05)。1例可能不融合,融合率为95%;内置物位置佳,无松动、脱出。结论:采用椎板减压经椎间孔椎间盘切除椎间植骨融合椎弓根螺钉内固定术治疗高位腰椎间盘突出症可获得较满意疗效。     

经椎间孔内窥镜脊柱系统技术治疗脱垂型腰椎椎间盘突出症

目的探讨经椎间孔内窥镜脊柱系统(TESSYS)技术治疗脱垂型腰椎椎间盘突出症的疗效、围手术期并发症及处置对策。方法 2014年6月—2016年6月,泰州市人民医院骨科应用TESSYS技术治疗28例脱垂型腰椎椎间盘突出症患者,记录术前及术后各随访时间点的疼痛视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分及Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI),分析术中、术后并发症的发生情况,并探讨处置对策。结果所有患者随访3~24个月,平均11个月。患者术后VAS评分和ODI较术前明显降低,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。未发生神经损伤、椎管内血肿、感染等严重并发症。26例患者一次性顺利摘除脱垂髓核;2例患者术后即刻疗效不佳,1例经非手术治疗好转,1例再次行微创手术,末次随访疗效满意。结论 TESSYS技术是治疗脱垂型腰椎椎间盘突出症的有效方法,具有创伤小、恢复快等特点,但需注意预防并发症,谨慎的术中操作和严格的围手术期处理可预防或减少并发症的发生。     

Interobservational variation in determining fusion rates in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion procedures

The fusion rate represents one of the most commonly used criteria for evaluating the efficacy of spinal surgical techniques and the effectiveness of newly developed instrumentation and spinal implants. Reported fusion rates are not frequently supported by adequate information regarding by whom and how fusion was defined. In our prospective study we examined the fusion rate in patients undergoing first time anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for degenerative disease. Separate, well-defined radiographic fusion criteria were used and the 12-month post-operative X-rays were reviewed independently by a neurosurgeon, a neuroradiologist and an orthopedic surgeon, who were not involved in the patients’ management. The observed fusion rates were 77.3, 87.8 and 84.7% respectively. Statistical analysis demonstrated concordance rates of 87.8, 91 and 91.4% and Kappa coefficients of 0.585, 0.620 and 0.723 for each pair of evaluators. Another set of ratings of the same radiographs, by the same interviewers, was obtained 6 weeks after the initial one. The reported fusion rates were 78.2% for the neurosurgeon, 87.4% for the orthopedic surgeon, and 86.1% for the neuroradiologist. Statistical analysis demonstrated intra-observer concordance rates of 98.7, 92.2 and 97.9% respectively, while the Kappa coefficients were 0.963, 0.677 and 0.907 for each reviewer. Our findings confirm the necessity of defining and describing criteria for fusion whenever this rate is reported in clinical series. The lack of widely accepted, well-defined criteria makes comparison of these results difficult. The development of a well organized, prospective clinical study in which fusion and outcome will be assessed by both clinical and radiographic parameters could significantly contribute to a more accurate evaluation of overall outcome of cervical spinal procedures.     

Indications for lumbar spine fusion in the adult.

More than 20,000 lumbar spine fusions are performed annually in the United States. Results of surgery unfortunately are inconsistent and may reflect unsatisfactory patient selection. Indications for lumbar arthrodesis may arise in degenerative disk disease, deformity, distal extension of previous arthrodesis, trauma, spondylolisthesis, and spinal stenosis (in association with diskectomy or decompression). There are several techniques in the assessment of potential candidates for low lumbar arthrodesis.     

Effect of discectomy on the stress distribution in lumbar spine

The change of stress distribution of lumbar spine after discectomy was analysed with three-dimensional finite element method. It was showed that the stress level in posterior element was elevated, but the stress level in anterior element was lower than before. The most significant change of stress distribution was found in trabecular bone of vertebral bodies. The clinical relevance was discussed.     

改良TLIF治疗腰椎管狭窄症

[目的]探讨改良经椎间孔椎间盘切除椎体间融合术(mTLIF)治疗腰椎管狭窄症手术疗效。[方法]2015年12月～2017年1月,本科采用改良TLIF治疗老年退变性腰椎管狭窄症患者68例,其中,男41例,女27例,年龄65～81岁,平均(68.37±6.30)。采用VAS及ODI评价腰椎功能改善情况;应用SF-36量表对生活质量进行调查评估。拍摄腰椎正侧位X线片。[结果]本组患者手术顺利,平均手术时间(120.59±28.46) min、平均术中失血量(254.57±42.87) ml。其中,68例患者中64例(94.12%)获得12个月以上的随访。患者ODI评分由术前(55.32±8.29)分减少至末次随访时的(23.23±5.34)分,差异有统计意义(P0.05);VAS评分由术前(8.50±0.92)分减少至末次随访时的(1.93±0.75)分,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。SF-36评分由术前(463.91±40.18)分增加至末次随访时的(783.11±37.93)分,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。[结论]改良TLIF手术入路操作相对简单、有效,术中神经损伤的风险也较小,能彻底减压,同时能获得满意的稳定性和骨性融合。