Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Spine Journal 3/2009

01-08-2009 | Original Article

Microdiscectomy compared with standard discectomy: an old problem revisited with new outcome measures within the framework of a spine surgical registry

Authors: F. Porchet, V. Bartanusz, F. S. Kleinstueck, F. Lattig, D. Jeszenszky, D. Grob, A. F. Mannion

Published in: European Spine Journal | Special Issue 3/2009

Login to get access

Abstract

Studies comparing the relative merits of microdiscectomy and standard discectomy report conflicting results, depending on the outcome measure of interest. Most trials are small, and few have employed validated, multidimensional patient-orientated outcome measures, considered essential in outcomes research. In the present study, data were collected prospectively from six surgeons participating in a surgical registry. Inclusion criteria were: lumbar/lumbosacral degenerative disease; discectomy/sequestrectomy without additional fusion/stabilisation; German or English-speaking. Before and 3 and 12 months after surgery, patients completed the Core Outcome Measures Index comprising questions on leg/buttock pain, back pain, back-related function, symptom-specific well-being, general quality-of-life, and social and work disability. At follow-up, they rated overall satisfaction, global outcome, and perceived complications. Compliance with the registry documentation was excellent: 87% for surgeons (surgery forms), 91% for patients (for 12 months follow-up). 261 patients satisfied the inclusion criteria (225 microdiscectomy, 36 standard discectomy). The standard discectomy group had significantly greater blood-loss than the microdiscectomy (P < 0.05). There were no group differences in the proportion of surgical complications or duration of hospital stay (P > 0.05). The groups did not differ in relation to any of the patient-orientated outcomes or individual outcome domains (P > 0.05). Though not equivalent to an RCT, the study included every single eligible patient in our Spine Center and allowed surgeons to use their regular procedure; it hence had extremely high external validity (relevance/generalisability). There was no clinically relevant difference in outcome after lumbar disc excision dependent on the use of the microscope. The decision to use the microscope should rest with the surgeon.
Literature
2.
go back to reference Barrios C, Ahmed M, Arrotegui J, Bjornsson A, Gillstrom P (1990) Microsurgery versus standard removal of the herniated lumbar disc. A 3-year comparison in 150 cases. Acta Orthop Scand 61:399–403PubMedCrossRef Barrios C, Ahmed M, Arrotegui J, Bjornsson A, Gillstrom P (1990) Microsurgery versus standard removal of the herniated lumbar disc. A 3-year comparison in 150 cases. Acta Orthop Scand 61:399–403PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Black N (1996) Why we need observational studies to evaluate the effectiveness of health care. BMJ 312:1215–1218PubMed Black N (1996) Why we need observational studies to evaluate the effectiveness of health care. BMJ 312:1215–1218PubMed
4.
go back to reference Caspar W (1977) A new surgical procedure for lumbar disc herniation causing less tissue damage through a microsurgical approach. Adv Neurosurg 4:74–80 Caspar W (1977) A new surgical procedure for lumbar disc herniation causing less tissue damage through a microsurgical approach. Adv Neurosurg 4:74–80
9.
go back to reference Grob D, Bartanusz V, Jeszenszky D, Kleinstuck F, Lattig F, Porchet F, Mannion AF (2008) The patient’s perspective on complications after spine surgery. Eur Spine J (this issue) Grob D, Bartanusz V, Jeszenszky D, Kleinstuck F, Lattig F, Porchet F, Mannion AF (2008) The patient’s perspective on complications after spine surgery. Eur Spine J (this issue)
10.
go back to reference Hagg O, Fritzell P, Nordwall A, Group SLSS (2003) The clinical importance of changes in outcome scores after treatment for chronic low back pain. Eur Spine J 12:12–20PubMed Hagg O, Fritzell P, Nordwall A, Group SLSS (2003) The clinical importance of changes in outcome scores after treatment for chronic low back pain. Eur Spine J 12:12–20PubMed
12.
go back to reference Katayama Y, Matsuyama Y, Yoshihara H, Sakai Y, Nakamura H, Nakashima S, Ito Z, Ishiguro N (2006) Comparison of surgical outcomes between macro discectomy and micro discectomy for lumbar disc herniation: a prospective randomized study with surgery performed by the same spine surgeon. J Spinal Disord Tech 19:344–347. doi:10.1097/01.bsd.0000211201.93125.1c PubMedCrossRef Katayama Y, Matsuyama Y, Yoshihara H, Sakai Y, Nakamura H, Nakashima S, Ito Z, Ishiguro N (2006) Comparison of surgical outcomes between macro discectomy and micro discectomy for lumbar disc herniation: a prospective randomized study with surgery performed by the same spine surgeon. J Spinal Disord Tech 19:344–347. doi:10.​1097/​01.​bsd.​0000211201.​93125.​1c PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Lagarrigue J, Chaynes P (1994) Comparative study of disk surgery with or without microscopy. A prospective study of 80 cases. Neurochirurgie 40:116–120PubMed Lagarrigue J, Chaynes P (1994) Comparative study of disk surgery with or without microscopy. A prospective study of 80 cases. Neurochirurgie 40:116–120PubMed
17.
go back to reference Mixter WJ, Barr JS (1934) Rupture of the intervertebral disc with involvement of the spinal canal. N Engl J Med 211:210–225 Mixter WJ, Barr JS (1934) Rupture of the intervertebral disc with involvement of the spinal canal. N Engl J Med 211:210–225
18.
go back to reference Nystrom B (1987) Experience of microsurgical compared with conventional technique in lumbar disc operations. Acta Neurol Scand 76:129–141PubMedCrossRef Nystrom B (1987) Experience of microsurgical compared with conventional technique in lumbar disc operations. Acta Neurol Scand 76:129–141PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Peul WC, van Houwelingen HC, van den Hout WB, Brand R, Eekhof JA, Tans JT, Thomeer RT, Koes BW (2007) Surgery versus prolonged conservative treatment for sciatica. N Engl J Med 356:2245–2256. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa064039 PubMedCrossRef Peul WC, van Houwelingen HC, van den Hout WB, Brand R, Eekhof JA, Tans JT, Thomeer RT, Koes BW (2007) Surgery versus prolonged conservative treatment for sciatica. N Engl J Med 356:2245–2256. doi:10.​1056/​NEJMoa064039 PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Sachdev VP (1991) Lumbar diskectomy under the operating microscope. Mt Sinai J Med 58:147–149PubMed Sachdev VP (1991) Lumbar diskectomy under the operating microscope. Mt Sinai J Med 58:147–149PubMed
22.
go back to reference Tureyen K (2003) One-level one-sided lumbar disc surgery with and without microscopic assistance: 1-year outcome in 114 consecutive patients. J Neurosurg 99:247–250PubMed Tureyen K (2003) One-level one-sided lumbar disc surgery with and without microscopic assistance: 1-year outcome in 114 consecutive patients. J Neurosurg 99:247–250PubMed
24.
go back to reference Yasargil MG (1977) Microsurgical operation for herniated disc. Adv Neurosurg 4:81 Yasargil MG (1977) Microsurgical operation for herniated disc. Adv Neurosurg 4:81
Metadata
Title
Microdiscectomy compared with standard discectomy: an old problem revisited with new outcome measures within the framework of a spine surgical registry
Authors
F. Porchet
V. Bartanusz
F. S. Kleinstueck
F. Lattig
D. Jeszenszky
D. Grob
A. F. Mannion
Publication date
01-08-2009
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
European Spine Journal / Issue Special Issue 3/2009
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-009-0917-9

Other articles of this Special Issue 3/2009

European Spine Journal 3/2009 Go to the issue