Subscribe to RSS
DOI: 10.1055/s-2007-1004543
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York
Open versus Minimally Invasive Lumbar Microdiscectomy: Comparison of Operative Times, Length of Hospital Stay, Narcotic Use and Complications
Publication History
Publication Date:
28 February 2008 (online)

Abstract
To determine if a minimally invasive approach to lumbar microdiscectomy reduces post-operative pain, length of hospital stay, or frequency of complications we retrospectively compared medical records of single level microdiscectomy patients by a single surgeon performed using a traditional open approach versus a minimally invasive approach. Thirty-five patients were in the open group: 63% male, average age 41.2 years, and 31 patients were in the minimally invasive group: 68% male, average age 42.1 years. There was no difference in surgical time or blood loss between the open and minimally invasive groups: 84.1 versus 76.8 minutes and 51.4 versus 69.7 mL, respectively. There were no significant complications intraoperatively or within the 30 day post-op period for either group. The average dose of intravenous morphine taken was 12.9 mg for the minimally invasive group and 15.7 mg for the open group (P=0.04). The average dose of hydrocodone was 13.4 mg for the minimally invasive group and 20.9 mg for the open group (P=0.03). The open group took an average of 11.7 mg oxycodone, the minimally invasive none. 45.2% of patients in the minimally invasive group were discharged on the same day as surgery compared to 5.75% in the open group (P=0.001). Microdiscectomy was performed safely and effectively through a minimally invasive expanding retractor system and operating microscope. Surgical times, blood loss, complications, and outcome were similar to a traditional open microdiscectomy while pain medication requirements and hospitalization were significantly less.
Key words
minimally invasive - microdiscectomy - outcomes - surgical techniques
References
- 1 Perez-Cruet MJ, Foley KT, Isaacs RE. et al . Microendoscopic lumbar discectomy: technical note. Neurosurgery. 2002; 51 S129-136
- 2 Javedan S, Sonntag VK. Lumbar disc herniation: microsurgical approach. Neurosurgery. 2003; 52 160-162
- 3 Sun EC, Wang JC, Endow K. et al . Adjacent two-level lumbar discectomy: outcome and SF-36 functional assessment. Spine. 2004; 29 E22-E27
- 4 Pappas CT, Harrington T, Sonntag VK. Outcome analysis in 654 surgically treated lumbar disc herniations. Neurosurgery. 1992; 30 862-866
- 5 Wenger M, Mariani, Kalbarczyk A. et al . Long term outcome of 104 patients after lumbar sequestrectomy according to Williams. Neurosurgery. 2001; 19 329-331
- 6 Williams RW. Lumbar disc disease. Microdiscectomy. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 1993; 4 101-108
- 7 Mixter WJ, Barr JS. Rupture of the intervertebral disc with involvement of the spinal canal. N Engl J Med. 1934; 5 210-215
- 8 Koebbe CJ, Maroon JC, Abla A. et al . Lumbar microdiscectomy: a historical perspective and current technical considerations. Neurosurg Focus. 2002; 13 E3
- 9 Smith L, Garvin PJ, Gesler RM. et al . Enzyme dissolution of nucleus pulposus. Nature. 1963; 198 1311-1312
- 10 Nordby EJ, Fraser RD, Javid MJ. Chemonucleolysis. Spine. 1996; 21 1102-1105
- 11 Sutton JC. Chemonucleolysis in the management of lumbar disc disease: a minimum six year follow up evaluation. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1986; 206 46-60
- 12 Wittenberg RH, Oppel S, Rubenthaler FA. et al . Five year results from chemonucleolysis with chymopapain or collagenase: a prospective randomized study. Spine. 2001; 26 1835-1841
-
13 Guyer RD, Corbin TP. Minimally invasive posterior fusion and internal fixation with the Atavi system. In: Kambin P (ed.)
Arthroscopic and Endoscopic Spinal Surgery . New Jersey: Humana Press 2005: 227-237 - 14 Kotilainin E. Microinvasive lumbar disc surgery. A study on patients treated with microdiscectomy or percutaneous nucleotomy for disc herniation. Ann Chir Gynaecol. 1994; 209 1-50
- 15 Mochida J, Toh E, Nomura T, Nishimua K. The risks and benefits of percutaneous nucleotomy for lumbar disc herniation. A 10 year longitudinal study. J Bone Joint Surg [Br]. 2001; 83 501-505
- 16 Sahlstrand T, Lonntoft M. A prospective study of preoperative and postoperative sequential magnetic resonance imaging and early clinical outcome in automated percutaneous discectomy. J Spinal Disord Tech. 1999; 12 368-374
- 17 Choy DS. Techniques of percutaneous laser disc decompression with the Nd:YAG laser. J Clin Laser Med Surg. 1995; 13 187-193
- 18 Gangi A, Dietemann H, Ide C. et al . Percutaneous laser disk decompression under CT and fluoroscopic guidance: indications, technique, and clinical experience. Radiographics. 1996; 16 89-96
- 19 Quigley MR, Maroon JC. Laser discectomy: a review. Spine. 1994; 19 53-56
- 20 Kambin P. Arthroscopic microdiscectomy. Arthroscopy. 1992; 8 287-295
- 21 Mayer HM, Brock M. Percutaneous endoscopic discectomy: surgical technique and preliminary results compared to microsurgical discectomy. J Neurosurg. 1993; 78 216-225
- 22 Obenchain TG. Speculum lumbar extraforaminal microdiscectomy. Spine. 2001; 1 415-420
- 23 Yeung AT, Tsou PM. Posterolateral endoscopic excision for lumbar disc herniation: Surgical technique, outcome, and complications in 307 consecutive cases. Spine. 2002; 27 2081-2082
- 24 Haines SJ, Jordan N, Boen JR. et al . Discectomy strategies for lumbar disc herniation: results of the LAPDOG trial. Clin Neurosci. 2002; 9 411-417
- 25 Kwo HC, Steudel WI. Comparison of the microsurgical lumbar intervertebral disc operation with the conventional technique in free sequestered intervertebral disc prolapse. A retrospective study based on 267 cases. Neurochurgia (Stutt). 1999; 29 181-185
- 26 Goffin J. Microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 1994; 96 130-134
- 27 Isaacs RE, Podichetty V, Fessler RG. Microendoscopic discectomy for recurrent disc herniations. Neurosurg Focus. 2002; 15 E11
- 28 Ahn Y, Lee SH, Park WM. et al . Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy for recurrent disc herniation: surgical technique, outcome, and prognostic factors of 43 consecutive cases. Spine. 2004; 29 E326-332
- 29 Schizas C, Tsiridis E, Saksena J. Microendoscopic discectomy compared with standard microsurgical discectomy for the treatment of uncontained or large contained disc herniations. Neurosurgery. 2005; 57 ((ONS suppl 3)) 357-360
- 30 Mathews HH, Long BH. Minimally invasive techniques for treatment of intervertebral disk herniation. A Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2002; 10 80-85
- 31 Nowitzke AM. Assessment of the learning curve for lumbar microendoscopic discectomy. Neurosurgery. 2005; 56 755-762
- 32 Palmer S. Use of a tubular retractor system in microscopic lumbar discectomy: 1 year prospective results in 135 patients. Neurosurg Focus. 2002; 13 E5
- 33 Mack PF, Hass D, Lavyne MH. et al . Postoperative narcotic requirement after microscopic lumbar discectomy is not affected by intraoperative ketorolaqc or bupivacaine. Spine. 2001; 26 658-661
- 34 Stevens KJ, Spenciner DB, Griffiths KL. et al . Comparison of minimally invasive and conventional open posterolateral lumbar fusion using magnetic resonance imaging and retraction pressure studies. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2006; 19 77-86
- 35 Ersayli DT, Gurbet A, Bekar A. et al . Effects of perioperatively administered bupivacaine and bupivacaine-methylprednisolone on pain after lumbar discectomy. Spine. 2006; 31 2221-2226
- 36 Chadduck JB, Sneyd JR, Pobereskin LH. The role of bupivacaine in early postoperative pain control and lumbar decompression. J Neurosurg. 1999; 90 ((1 Suppl)) 67-72
- 37 Glasser RS, Knego RS, Delashaw JB. et al . The perioperative use of corticosteroids and bupivacaine in the management of lumbar disc disease. J Neurosurg. 1993; 78 383-388
Correspondence
J.F. HarringtonMD
Department of Neurosurgery
Rhode Island Hospital
235 Plain St.
Providence
02905 Rhode Island
USA
Phone: +1/401/521 99 99
Fax: +1/401/521 99 11
Email: fredharrington@cox.net