PubMed · 8235831
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
H M Mayer. 1993-09-01. Conventional discectomy.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8235831/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
The history of surgery for ruptured disk of the human spine began approximately a century ago. Advances in the understanding of symptoms and signs of root or cord compression, their relationship to the pathology, and the refinement in imaging techniques have contributed to the present surgical management of rupture disk disease. Historical findings relevant to the cervical, thoracic, and lumbosacral regions of the spine, with relevant pathophysiology, imaging, and surgical treatment, including the evolution of various surgical approaches are discussed. Surgeons and other contributors in the medical field are cited for their respective contributions to the evolution of the present operative approaches for disk ruptures in the cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spinal regions.
OBJECTIVES: The primary rationale for surgery for disc prolapse is to relieve nerve root irritation or compression due to herniated disc material. Claims of the merits of alternative surgical procedures are made without clear evidence about clinical outcomes. The objective of this review was to assess the effects of surgical interventions for the treatment of lumbar disc prolapse. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Medline, Embase, Biosis, Dissertation Abstracts, Index to UK Thesis, and reference lists of the retrieved articles up to March 1997 and we corresponded with experts. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials of the surgical management of lumbar disc prolapse. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers assessed trial quality and extracted data from published papers. Additional information was sought from the authors if necessary. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-seven trials were found. There were methodological weaknesses in many of the trials. Sixteen of the 27 trials were of some form of chemonucleolysis. Ten trials compared different surgical techniques, although only one of these compared surgical discectomy with conservative management. Surgical discectomy produced better clinical outcomes than chemonucleolysis with chymopapain, and chemonucleolysis produced better clinical outcomes than placebo. Three trials showed no difference in clinical outcomes between microdiscectomy and standard discectomy. Three trials failed to show a significant reduction in scar formation or improved clinical outcomes by inserting an inter-position membra ne to cover the spinal dura after discectomy. Three trials of percutaneous discectomy provided moderate evidence that it produces poorer clinical outcomes than standard discectomy or chymopapain. We found no published randomised trials of laser discectomy. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Chemonucleolysis is more effective than placebo and it is less invasive but less effective than surgical disectomy. Surgical discectomy for carefully selected patients with sciatica due to lumbar disc prolapse provides faster relief from the acute attack than conservative management, although any positive or negative effects on the lifetime natural history of the underlying disc disease are unclear.
In a meta-analysis of 69 prospective and retrospective studies, we investigated the value of various surgical techniques in the treatment of lumbar disk herniations. This analysis includes standard diskectomy (5080 patients from nine series), microdiskectomy (5354/23), and comparison of both techniques (2494/10) and furthermore chemonucleolysis (2729/16), laser therapy (881/3), percutaneous nucleotomy (3506/18), comparisons of percutaneous techniques (942/5) with microdiskectomies (561/5) and standard diskectomies (1020/6). Outcomes were rated according to Macnab's criteria: I "excellent", II "good", III "improved", IV "same as before", V "worse", I/II "markedly improved", III "partially improved", IV/V "not improved", I-III "successful", and IV/V "unsuccessful". Results after microdiskectomy were "successful" more often (90% vs. 95%), "good/excellent" more often (82% vs. 73%), and patients left the hospital sooner than with standard diskectomy. Recurrence rates were comparable (4%). Results of both open techniques were clearly superior to those from any type of percutaneous treatment: chemonucleolysis und laser therapy were "successful" in 69% and 70% of cases respectively, with recurrence rates of 17% and 18%, endoscopic nucleotomy was "successful" in 84% of cases, and recurrence rate was 14%. Please ask the author for the reference database.