Effect of Anular Closure on Disk Height Maintenance and Reoperated Recurrent Herniation Following Lumbar Diskectomy: Two-Year Data

Abstract

Objective To assess the potential benefits of disk reherniation reduction and disk height maintenance in limited diskectomy combined with the implantation of the anular closure device.

Summary and Background Data Postoperative disk height loss is apparent in most patients undergoing lumbar diskectomy for herniated nucleus pulposus. Less favorable patient outcomes are associated with significant loss in disk height that can occur after aggressive disk tissue removal. More conservative disk removals, however, are often burdened by the increased risk of recurrent disk herniation.

Methods Two prospective single-arm studies on patients treated with limited diskectomy and an anular closure device were conducted. Outcome measures included disk height maintenance relative to preoperative values, Oswestry Disability Index, back pain, leg pain, and complications such as reherniations. Patients were evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively at 6 weeks and at 3-, 6-, 12-, and 24-month time points.

Results A total of 75 patients were included in this cohort consisting of 40 men and 35 women with an average age of 40 years. Disk height maintenance within the group overall was 90% at 24 months. Overall, 97% of the treated disks demonstrated disk height maintenance of at least 75% of preoperative levels at 12 months and 92% at 24 months. Disk height maintenance was correlated with less nucleus removal. Patient disability, back pain, and leg pain were significantly improved from preoperative levels at 6 weeks and maintained over the course of study. There was a single symptomatic reherniation requiring surgical intervention within this series.

Conclusions Limited lumbar diskectomy combined with the use of an anular closure device provided very low rates of disk reherniation and exhibited excellent disk height maintenance and sustained disability, leg pain, and back pain improvement within a 24-month postoperative study period. As with prior diskectomy studies, disk height maintenance was correlated with lower nucleus removal, although recurrence was less than in prior reports of limited diskectomy. Anular closure may allow for achievement of both objectives.

Keywords

anular closure - diskectomy - disk height - reherniation

• References

• 1 Kambin P, Cohen LF, Brooks M, Schaffer JL. Development of degenerative spondylosis of the lumbar spine after partial discectomy. Comparison of laminotomy, discectomy, and posterolateral discectomy. Spine 1995; 20 (5) 599-607
• 2 Barth M, Diepers M, Weiss C, Thomé C. Two-year outcome after lumbar microdiscectomy versus microscopic sequestrectomy: part 2: radiographic evaluation and correlation with clinical outcome. Spine 2008; 33 (3) 273-279
• 3 Yorimitsu E, Chiba K, Toyama Y, Hirabayashi K. Long-term outcomes of standard discectomy for lumbar disc herniation: a follow-up study of more than 10 years. Spine 2001; 26 (6) 652-657
• 4 McGirt MJ, Ambrossi GL, Datoo G , et al. Recurrent disc herniation and long-term back pain after primary lumbar discectomy: review of outcomes reported for limited versus aggressive disc removal. Neurosurgery 2009; 64 (2) 338-344 ; discussion 344–345
• 5 Atlas SJ, Keller RB, Wu YA, Deyo RA, Singer DE. Long-term outcomes of surgical and nonsurgical management of sciatica secondary to a lumbar disc herniation: 10.  year results from the Maine lumbar spine study. Spine 2005; 30 (8) 927-935
• 6 Loupasis GA, Stamos K, Katonis PG, Sapkas G, Korres DS, Hartofilakidis G. Seven- to 20-year outcome of lumbar discectomy. Spine 1999; 24 (22) 2313-2317
• 7 Carragee EJ, Han MY, Suen PW, Kim D. Clinical outcomes after lumbar discectomy for sciatica: the effects of fragment type and anular competence. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2003; 85-A (1) 102-108
• 8 Mariconda M, Galasso O, Attingenti P, Federico G, Milano C. Frequency and clinical meaning of long-term degenerative changes after lumbar discectomy visualized on imaging tests. Eur Spine J 2010; 19 (1) 136-143
• 9 Pye SR, Reid DM, Smith R , et al. Radiographic features of lumbar disc degeneration and self-reported back pain. J Rheumatol 2004; 31 (4) 753-758
• 10 Waris E, Eskelin M, Hermunen H, Kiviluoto O, Paajanen H. Disc degeneration in low back pain: a 17-year follow-up study using magnetic resonance imaging. Spine 2007; 32 (6) 681-684
• 11 Torgerson WR, Dotter WE. Comparative roentgenographic study of the asymptomatic and symptomatic lumbar spine. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1976; 58 (6) 850-853
• 12 Mochida J, Nishimura K, Nomura T, Toh E, Chiba M. The importance of preserving disc structure in surgical approaches to lumbar disc herniation. Spine 1996; 21 (13) 1556-1563 ; discussion 1563–1564
• 13 Hanley Jr EN, Shapiro DE. The development of low-back pain after excision of a lumbar disc. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1989; 71 (5) 719-721
• 14 Frymoyer JW, Newberg A, Pope MH, Wilder DG, Clements J, MacPherson B. Spine radiographs in patients with low-back pain. An epidemiological study in men. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1984; 66 (7) 1048-1055
• 15 McGirt MJ, Eustacchio S, Varga P , et al. A prospective cohort study of close interval computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging after primary lumbar discectomy: factors associated with recurrent disc herniation and disc height loss. Spine 2009; 34 (19) 2044-2051
• 16 Adams MA, McNally DS, Dolan P. 'Stress' distributions inside intervertebral discs. The effects of age and degeneration. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1996; 78 (6) 965-972
• 17 Schaller B. Failed back surgery syndrome: the role of symptomatic segmental single-level instability after lumbar microdiscectomy. Eur Spine J 2004; 13 (3) 193-198
• 18 Mochida J, Toh E, Nomura T, Nishimura K. The risks and benefits of percutaneous nucleotomy for lumbar disc herniation. A 10-year longitudinal study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2001; 83 (4) 501-505
• 19 Carragee EJ, Spinnickie AO, Alamin TF, Paragioudakis S. A prospective controlled study of limited versus subtotal posterior discectomy: short-term outcomes in patients with herniated lumbar intervertebral discs and large posterior anular defect. Spine 2006; 31 (6) 653-657
• 20 Rogers LA. Experience with limited versus extensive disc removal in patients undergoing microsurgical operations for ruptured lumbar discs. Neurosurgery 1988; 22 (1 Pt 1) 82-85
• 21 Watters III WC, McGirt MJ. An evidence-based review of the literature on the consequences of conservative versus aggressive discectomy for the treatment of primary disc herniation with radiculopathy. Spine J 2009; 9 (3) 240-257
• 22 Lebow RL, Adogwa O, Parker SL, Sharma A, Cheng J, McGirt MJ. Asymptomatic same-site recurrent disc herniation after lumbar discectomy: results of a prospective longitudinal study with 2-year serial imaging. Spine 2011; 36 (25) 2147-2151
• 23 Atlas SJ, Keller RB, Chang Y, Deyo RA, Singer DE. Surgical and nonsurgical management of sciatica secondary to a lumbar disc herniation: five-year outcomes from the Maine Lumbar Spine Study. Spine 2001; 26 (10) 1179-1187
• 24 Bouma GJ, Barth M, Ledic D, Vilendecic M. The high-risk discectomy patient: prevention of reherniation in patients with large anular defects using an anular closure device. Eur Spine J 2013; 22 (5) 1030-1036
• 25 Zhao K, Yang C, Zhao C, An KN. Assessment of non-invasive intervertebral motion measurements in the lumbar spine. J Biomech 2005; 38 (9) 1943-1946
• 26 Reitman CA, Hipp JA, Nguyen L, Esses SI. Changes in segmental intervertebral motion adjacent to cervical arthrodesis: a prospective study. Spine 2004; 29 (11) E221-E226
• 27 Pearson AM, Spratt KF, Genuario J , et al. Precision of lumbar intervertebral measurements: does a computer-assisted technique improve reliability?. Spine 2011; 36 (7) 572-580
• 28 Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB. The Oswestry Disability Index. Spine 2000; 25 (22) 2940-2952 ; discussion 2952
• 29 Litcher-Kelly L, Martino SA, Broderick JE, Stone AA. A systematic review of measures used to assess chronic musculoskeletal pain in clinical and randomized controlled clinical trials. J Pain 2007; 8 (12) 906-913