Download PDF
J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg 2013; 74(02): 077-081
DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1333127
Original Article
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Endoscopic Interlaminar Management of Lumbar Disc Disease

Yad Ram Yadav
1   Department of Neurosurgery, NSCB Medical College and Hospital, Jabalpur, MP, India
,
Vijay Parihar
1   Department of Neurosurgery, NSCB Medical College and Hospital, Jabalpur, MP, India
,
Hemant Namdev
1   Department of Neurosurgery, NSCB Medical College and Hospital, Jabalpur, MP, India
,
Moneet Agarwal
1   Department of Neurosurgery, NSCB Medical College and Hospital, Jabalpur, MP, India
,
Pushp Raj Bhatele
2   Department of Radiodiagnosis, NSCB Medical College, Jabalpur, Jabalpur, MP, India
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

20 February 2012

23 August 2012

Publication Date:
12 February 2013 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Introduction The role of surgery by minimally invasive techniques for lumbar disc disease remains unclear in the Cochrane review. There are reports of significant advantages of endoscopy over open or microdiscectomy techniques, such as better visualization of the lesion, smaller incision sizes with lower short-term morbidity, reduced hospital stay, and better education.

Materials and Methods Four hundred consecutive lumber disc herniation patients underwent endoscopic interlaminar lumbar discectomy from January 2006 to December 2010 by single surgeon by Destandu system (Karl Storz, Germany). Single-level and double-level disc with unilateral or bilateral symptoms (including central, sequestrated, or migrated disc) were included. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores for back pain and leg pain and MacNab criteria were recorded pre- and postoperatively.

Results The mean VAS score before surgery was 7.9 as compared with a 1.5 score 3 months after surgery. Postoperative VAS scores were significantly better in 90% of cases. Overall, 91% of patients had good-to-excellent results according to MacNab criteria. Accidental intraoperative single-facet injury, minor dural tear, recurrence, postoperative discitis, and persistent paresthesia were seen in 3, 7, 2, 2, and 1 patients, respectively. The mean follow- up was 24 months (range 10 months to 5 years).

Conclusions Endoscopic interlaminar technique (ILT) was a safe and effective alternative procedure for lumber disc disease. This was associated with some complications, especially in the initial learning curve. Once the practitioner is over the learning curve and has acquired expertise, this procedure was safe and effective.

Keywords

lumbar disc herniation - spinal endoscopy - percutaneous lumbar disc decompression - endoscopic lumbar discectomy
 

  • References

  • 1 Gibson JN, Waddell G. Surgical interventions for lumbar disc prolapse: updated Cochrane Review. Spine 2007; 32: 1735-1747
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Postacchini F, Postacchini R. Operative management of lumbar disc herniation: the evolution of knowledge and surgical techniques in the last century. Acta Neurochir Suppl (Wien) 2011; 108: 17-21
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Yadav YR, Yadav S, Sherekar S, Parihar V. A new minimally invasive tubular brain retractor system for surgery of deep intracerebral hematoma. Neurol India 2011; 59: 74-77
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Baron EM, Levene HB, Heller JE, Jallo JI, Loftus CM, Dominique DA. Neuroendoscopy for spinal disorders: a brief review. Neurosurg Focus 2005; 19: E5
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Yadav YR, Parihar V, Agarwal M, Sherekar S, Bhatele P. Endoscopic vascular decompression of the trigeminal nerve. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 2011; 54: 110-114
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Zhou Y, Wang J, Chu TW , et al. [The clinical comparison of microendoscopic lumbar diskectomy with and without preservation of the ligamentum flavum]. Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi 2005; 43: 1321-1324
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Wada K, Sairyo K, Sakai T, Yasui N. Minimally invasive endoscopic bilateral decompression with a unilateral approach (endo-BiDUA) for elderly patients with lumbar spinal canal stenosis. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 2010; 53: 65-68
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Ikuta K, Tono O, Tanaka T , et al. Surgical complications of microendoscopic procedures for lumbar spinal stenosis. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 2007; 50: 145-149
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Gotfryd A, Avanzi O. A systematic review of randomised clinical trials using posterior discectomy to treat lumbar disc herniations. Int Orthop 2009; 33: 11-17
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Li SH, Li HZ, Zhao JR. [Clinical comparison between micro-endoscopic discectomy (MED) and open discectomy for treatment of lumbar disc herniation]. Zhongguo Gu Shang 2008; 21: 349-351
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Righesso O, Falavigna A, Avanzi O. Comparison of open discectomy with microendoscopic discectomy in lumbar disc herniations: results of a randomized controlled trial. Neurosurgery 2007; 61: 545-549 , discussion 549
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Wang M, Zhou Y, Wang J, Zhang Z, Li C. A 10-year follow-up study on long-term clinical outcomes of lumbar microendoscopic discectomy. J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg 2012; 73: 195-198
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Wang B, Lü G, Patel AA, Ren P, Cheng I. An evaluation of the learning curve for a complex surgical technique: the full endoscopic interlaminar approach for lumbar disc herniations. Spine J 2011; 11: 122-130
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Chang SS, Fu TS, Liang YC , et al. Results of microendoscopic discectomy performed in the 26 cases with a minimum 3 years follow-up. Chang Gung Med J 2009; 32: 89-97
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Teli M, Lovi A, Brayda-Bruno M , et al. Higher risk of dural tears and recurrent herniation with lumbar micro-endoscopic discectomy. Eur Spine J 2010; 19: 443-450
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Jhala A, Mistry M. Endoscopic lumbar discectomy: Experience of first 100 cases. Indian J Orthop 2010; 44: 184-190
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Ruetten S, Komp M, Merk H, Godolias G. Full-endoscopic interlaminar and transforaminal lumbar discectomy versus conventional microsurgical technique: a prospective, randomized, controlled study. Spine 2008; 33: 931-939
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Schick U, Döhnert J, Richter A, König A, Vitzthum HE. Microendoscopic lumbar discectomy versus open surgery: an intraoperative EMG study. Eur Spine J 2002; 11: 20-26
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Huang TJ, Hsu RW, Li YY, Cheng CC. Less systemic cytokine response in patients following microendoscopic versus open lumbar discectomy. J Orthop Res 2005; 23: 406-411
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Muramatsu K, Hachiya Y, Morita C. Postoperative magnetic resonance imaging of lumbar disc herniation: comparison of microendoscopic discectomy and Love's method. Spine 2001; 26: 1599-1605
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Ruetten S, Komp M, Godolias G. A New full-endoscopic technique for the interlaminar operation of lumbar disc herniations using 6-mm endoscopes: prospective 2-year results of 331 patients. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 2006; 49: 80-87
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Choi G, Prada N, Modi HN, Vasavada NB, Kim JS, Lee SH. Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar herniectomy for high-grade down-migrated L4-L5 disc through an L5-S1 interlaminar approach: a technical note. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 2010; 53: 147-152
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Zhou Y, Wang J, Chu TW , et al. [Micro-endoscopic strategies and options for recurrent lumbar disc herniation]. Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi 2008; 46: 1475-1479
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Smith JS, Ogden AT, Shafizadeh S, Fessler RG. Clinical outcomes after microendoscopic discectomy for recurrent lumbar disc herniation. J Spinal Disord Tech 2010; 23: 30-34
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Ruetten S, Komp M, Merk H, Godolias G. Recurrent lumbar disc herniation after conventional discectomy: a prospective, randomized study comparing full-endoscopic interlaminar and transforaminal versus microsurgical revision. J Spinal Disord Tech 2009; 22: 122-129
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Sairyo K, Sakai T, Higashino K, Inoue M, Yasui N, Dezawa A. Complications of endoscopic lumbar decompression surgery. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 2010; 53: 175-178
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Zhai XJ, Bi DW, Fu H, Zu G. [Treatment of lumbar disc herniation with lateral recess stenosis by microendoscopic discectomy]. Zhongguo Gu Shang 2008; 21: 120-121
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Matsumoto M, Watanabe K, Tuji T , et al. Microendoscopic discectomy for lumbar disc herniation with bony fragment due to apophyseal separation. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 2007; 50: 335-339
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Zhang XB. [Endoscopic surgical procedures for the treatment of multi-segment lumbar intervertebral disc herniation with posterior approach]. Zhongguo Gu Shang 2009; 22: 295-296
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Liu WG, Wu XT, Min J , et al. [Long-term outcomes of percutaneous lumbar discectomy and microendoscopic discectomy for lumbar disc herniation]. Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi 2009; 89: 750-753
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Oztürk C, Tezer M, Aydogan M, Sarier M, Hamzaoglu A. Posterior endoscopic discectomy for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation. Acta Orthop Belg 2006; 72: 347-352
    PubMedGoogle Scholar