Download PDF
J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg 2020; 81(01): 017-027
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1694040
Original Article
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Implementation of Transforaminal Endoscopic Lumbar Sequestrectomy in a German University Hospital Setting: A Long and Rocky Road

Michael Bender
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Universitatsklinikum Giessen und Marburg, Giessen, Germany
,
Carolin Gramsch
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Universitatsklinikum Giessen und Marburg, Giessen, Germany
2   Department of Neuroradiology, Justus-Liebig-University Giessen, Giessen, Germany
,
Lukas Herrmann
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Universitatsklinikum Giessen und Marburg, Giessen, Germany
,
Seong Woong Kim
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Universitatsklinikum Giessen und Marburg, Giessen, Germany
,
Eberhard Uhl
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Universitatsklinikum Giessen und Marburg, Giessen, Germany
,
Karsten Schöller
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Universitatsklinikum Giessen und Marburg, Giessen, Germany
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

18 October 2018

20 February 2019

Publication Date:
29 August 2019 (online)

   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective Microsurgical diskectomy/sequestrectomy is the standard procedure for the surgical treatment of lumbar disk herniations. The transforaminal endoscopic sequestrectomy technique is a minimally invasive alternative with potential advantages such as minimal blood loss and tissue damage, as well as early mobilization of the patient. We report the implementation of this technique in a German university hospital setting.

Methods One single surgeon performed transforaminal endoscopic sequestrectomy from February 2013 to July 2016 for lumbar disk herniation in 44 patients. Demographic as well as perioperative, clinical, and radiologic data were analyzed from electronic records. Furthermore, we investigated complications, intraoperative change of the procedure to microsurgery, and reoperations. The postoperative course was analyzed using the Macnab criteria, supplemented by a questionnaire for follow-up. Pre- and postoperative magnetic resonance imaging volumetric analyses were performed to assess the radiologic efficacy of the technique.

Results Our study population had a median age of 52 years. The median follow-up was 15 months, and the median length of hospital stay was 4 days. Median duration of surgery was 100 minutes with a median blood loss of 50 mL. Surgery was most commonly performed at the L4–L5 level (63%) and in caudally migrated disk herniations (44%). In six patients, surgery was performed for recurrent disk herniations. The procedure had to be changed to conventional microsurgery in four patients. We observed no major complications. Minor complications occurred in six patients, and in four patients a reoperation was performed. Furthermore, a significantly lower Oswestry Disability Index score (p = 0.03), a lower Short Form 8 Health Survey (SF-8) score (p = 0.001), a lower visual analog scale (VAS) lower back pain score (p = 0.03) and VAS leg pain score (p = 0.0008) at the 12-month follow-up were observed in comparison with the preoperative examination. In MRI volumetry, we detected a median postoperative volume reduction of the disk herniation of 57.1% (p = 0.02).

Conclusions The transforaminal endoscopic sequestrectomy can be safely implemented in a university hospital setting in selected patients with primary and recurrent lumbar disk herniations, and it leads to good clinical and radiologic results. However, learning curve, caseload, and residents' microsurgical training requirements clearly affect the implementation process.

Keywords

transforaminal endoscopic surgery - lumbar disk herniation - learning curve - university hospital setting
 

  • References

  • 1 Cheng YP, Lee KW, Lin PY. , et al. Full-endoscopic interlaminar removal of chronic lumbar epidural hematoma after spinal manipulation. Surg Neurol Int 2014; 5: 55
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Andrews DW, Lavyne MH. Retrospective analysis of microsurgical and standard lumbar discectomy. Spine 1990; 15 (04) 329-335
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Brouwer PA, Brand R, van den Akker-van Marle ME. , et al. Percutaneous laser disc decompression versus conventional microdiscectomy in sciatica: a randomized controlled trial. Spine J 2015; 15 (05) 857-865
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Bokov A, Isrelov A, Skorodumov A, Aleynik A, Simonov A, Mlyavykh S. An analysis of reasons for failed back surgery syndrome and partial results after different types of surgical lumbar nerve root decompression. Pain Physician 2011; 14 (06) 545-557
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Fan G, Han R, Zhang H, He S, Chen Z. Worldwide research productivity in the field of minimally invasive spine surgery: a 20-year survey of publication activities. Spine 2017; 42 (22) 1717-1722
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Jasper GP, Francisco GM, Telfeian AE. Endoscopic transforaminal discectomy for an extruded lumbar disc herniation. Pain Physician 2013; 16 (01) E31-E35
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Lühmann D, Burkhardt-Hammer T, Borowski C, Raspe H. Minimally invasive surgical procedures for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation. GMS Health Technol Assess 2005; 1: Doc07
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Xin G, Shi-Sheng H, Hai-Long Z. Morphometric analysis of the YESS and TESSYS techniques of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy. Clin Anat 2013; 26 (06) 728-734
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Nellensteijn J, Ostelo R, Bartels R, Peul W, van Royen B, van Tulder M. Transforaminal endoscopic surgery for symptomatic lumbar disc herniations: a systematic review of the literature. Eur Spine J 2010; 19 (02) 181-204
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Jasper GP, Francisco GM, Telfeian AE. Clinical success of transforaminal endoscopic discectomy with foraminotomy: a retrospective evaluation. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2013; 115 (10) 1961-1965
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Gibson JNA, Subramanian AS, Scott CEH. A randomised controlled trial of transforaminal endoscopic discectomy vs microdiscectomy. Eur Spine J 2017; 26 (03) 847-856
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Pan Z, Ha Y, Yi S, Cao K. Efficacy of transforaminal endoscopic spine system (TESSYS) technique in treating lumbar disc herniation. Med Sci Monit 2016; 22: 530-539
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Cong L, Zhu Y, Tu G. A meta-analysis of endoscopic discectomy versus open discectomy for symptomatic lumbar disk herniation. Eur Spine J 2016; 25 (01) 134-143
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Hsu HT, Chang SJ, Yang SS, Chai CL. Learning curve of full-endoscopic lumbar discectomy. Eur Spine J 2013; 22 (04) 727-733
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Macnab I. Negative disc exploration. An analysis of the causes of nerve-root involvement in sixty-eight patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1971; 53 (05) 891-903
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB. The Oswestry Disability Index. Spine 2000; 25 (22) 2940-2952 ; discussion 2952
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Price DD, McGrath PA, Rafii A, Buckingham B. The validation of visual analogue scales as ratio scale measures for chronic and experimental pain. Pain 1983; 17 (01) 45-56
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Turner-Bowker DM, Bayliss MS, Ware Jr JE, Kosinski M. Usefulness of the SF-8 Health Survey for comparing the impact of migraine and other conditions. Qual Life Res 2003; 12 (08) 1003-1012
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Ahn Y, Lee HY, Lee SH, Lee JH. Dural tears in percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy. Eur Spine J 2011; 20 (01) 58-64
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Peul WC, van Houwelingen HC, van den Hout WB. , et al; Leiden-The Hague Spine Intervention Prognostic Study Group. Surgery versus prolonged conservative treatment for sciatica. N Engl J Med 2007; 356 (22) 2245-2256
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Weinstein JN, Lurie JD, Tosteson TD. , et al. Surgical versus nonoperative treatment for lumbar disc herniation: four-year results for the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT). Spine 2008; 33 (25) 2789-2800
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Strömqvist F, Strömqvist B, Jönsson B, Karlsson MK. The outcome of lumbar disc herniation surgery is worse in old adults than in young adults. Acta Orthop 2016; 87 (05) 516-521
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Liu X, Yuan S, Tian Y. , et al. Comparison of percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy, microendoscopic discectomy, and microdiscectomy for symptomatic lumbar disc herniation: minimum 2-year follow-up results. J Neurosurg Spine 2018; 28 (03) 317-325
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Wang Y, Luo G, Wang J, Zhu M, Li C, Teng H. Early postoperative magnetic resonance imaging findings after percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy and their correlations with clinical outcomes. World Neurosurg 2018; 111: e241-e249
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Floris R, Spallone A, Aref TY. , et al. Early postoperative MRI findings following surgery for herniated lumbar disc. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 1997; 139 (03) 169-175
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Annertz M, Jönsson B, Strömqvist B, Holtås S. Serial MRI in the early postoperative period after lumbar discectomy. Neuroradiology 1995; 37 (03) 177-182
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Martín-Láez R, Martínez-Agüeros JA, Suárez-Fernández D, Montiaga-Núñez F, Vázquez-Barquero A. Complications of endoscopic microdiscectomy using the EASYGO! system: is there any difference with conventional discectomy during the learning-curve period?. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2012; 154 (06) 1023-1032
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Joswig H, Richter H, Haile SR, Hildebrandt G, Fournier JY. Introducing interlaminar full-endoscopic lumbar diskectomy: a critical analysis of complications, recurrence rates, and outcome in view of two spinal surgeons' learning curves. J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg 2016; 77 (05) 406-415
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Yörükoğlu AG, Göker B, Tahta A. , et al. Fully endoscopic interlaminar and transforaminal lumbar discectomy: analysis of 47 complications encountered in a series of 835 patients. Neurocirugia (Astur) 2017; 28 (05) 235-241
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Tenenbaum S, Arzi H, Herman A. , et al. Percutaneous posterolateral transforaminal endoscopic discectomy: clinical outcome, complications, and learning curve evaluation. Surg Technol Int 2011; 21: 278-283
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Morgenstern R, Morgenstern C, Yeung AT. The learning curve in foraminal endoscopic discectomy: experience needed to achieve a 90% success rate. SAS J 2007; 1 (03) 100-107
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Singh S, Sardhara JC, Khatri D. , et al. Technical pearls and surgical outcome of early transitional period experience in minimally invasive lumbar discectomy: a prospective study. J Craniovertebr Junction Spine 2018; 9 (02) 122-129
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Sanusi T, Davis J, Nicassio N, Malik I. Endoscopic lumbar discectomy under local anesthesia may be an alternative to microdiscectomy: a single centre's experience using the far lateral approach. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2015; 139: 324-327
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Wilson DH, Harbaugh R. Lumbar discectomy: a comparative study of microsurgical and standard technique. In: Hardy RW. , ed. Lumbar Disc Disease. New York, NY: Springer; 1982: 147-156
    Google Scholar
  • 35 Goald HJ. Microlumbar discectomy: follow-up of 477 patients. J Microsurg 1980; 2 (02) 95-100
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Yeung AT, Tsou PM. Posterolateral endoscopic excision for lumbar disc herniation: surgical technique, outcome, and complications in 307 consecutive cases. Spine 2002; 27 (07) 722-731
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Schaffer JL, Kambin P. Percutaneous posterolateral lumbar discectomy and decompression with a 6.9-millimeter cannula. Analysis of operative failures and complications. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1991; 73 (06) 822-831
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Lee DY, Lee SH. Learning curve for percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo) 2008; 48 (09) 383-388 ; discussion 388–389
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar