Repeat discectomy and spinal fusion in the treatment of recurrent lumbar disc herniation: systematic review of the literature

Q3 Medicine Hirurgia Pozvonochnika Pub Date : 2023-10-03 DOI:10.14531/ss2023.3.43-49
Serik Kaliulovich Makirov, Gerald Musa, Dimitri T. Keri Ndandja, Gennady Egorovich Chmutin, Alexander Valeryevich Kim, Dmitri Vladimirovich Hovrin, Olzhas Bekenovich Otarov
{"title":"Repeat discectomy and spinal fusion in the treatment of recurrent lumbar disc herniation: systematic review of the literature","authors":"Serik Kaliulovich Makirov, Gerald Musa, Dimitri T. Keri Ndandja, Gennady Egorovich Chmutin, Alexander Valeryevich Kim, Dmitri Vladimirovich Hovrin, Olzhas Bekenovich Otarov","doi":"10.14531/ss2023.3.43-49","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective. To conduct a literature review of studies comparing the treatment of recurrent lumbar disc herniation using discectomy and spinal fusion. Material and Methods. A comprehensive search across four electronic databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, Science Direct, and Cochrane) was conducted. Studies comparing the outcomes of discectomy and spinal fusion for recurrent lumbar disc herniation were analyzed. Postoperative complications, cost and duration of surgery, length of hospital stay, pain score, and recurrence rate were compared. Results. Ten studies comprising data of 1066 patients met the inclusion criteria. Discectomy was performed in 620 of them, while 446 patients underwent spinal fusion surgery. Discectomy yielded good results in VAS scores for leg and back pain, but after 3–6 months, there was no significant difference compared to spinal fusion. The recurrence rate for discectomy varied from 7.27 % to 22.91 %, while fusion had 0 % same-level recurrence. Fusion surgery had fewer complications: 1.72–28.00 % (average 11.6 %) vs 5.25–32.73 % (average 15.7 %) for discectomy. However, spinal fusion had longer operation time, greater blood loss and longer hospital stay compared to discectomy. Conclusion. Discectomy and spinal fusion are effective treatment options for recurrent lumbar disc herniation. At the same time, discectomy demonstrates a high level of initial relief of symptoms and is more cost-effective. However, the risk of recurrence is significant, and the progression of degeneration and instability may result in pain recurrence within a year. Fusion surgery provides stability and eliminates the risk of recurrence, but the main challenge is the cost of surgery. The choice of technique should be based on individual patient factors, and the advantages and disadvantages of each approach should be carefully considered.","PeriodicalId":37253,"journal":{"name":"Hirurgia Pozvonochnika","volume":"113 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hirurgia Pozvonochnika","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14531/ss2023.3.43-49","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective. To conduct a literature review of studies comparing the treatment of recurrent lumbar disc herniation using discectomy and spinal fusion. Material and Methods. A comprehensive search across four electronic databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, Science Direct, and Cochrane) was conducted. Studies comparing the outcomes of discectomy and spinal fusion for recurrent lumbar disc herniation were analyzed. Postoperative complications, cost and duration of surgery, length of hospital stay, pain score, and recurrence rate were compared. Results. Ten studies comprising data of 1066 patients met the inclusion criteria. Discectomy was performed in 620 of them, while 446 patients underwent spinal fusion surgery. Discectomy yielded good results in VAS scores for leg and back pain, but after 3–6 months, there was no significant difference compared to spinal fusion. The recurrence rate for discectomy varied from 7.27 % to 22.91 %, while fusion had 0 % same-level recurrence. Fusion surgery had fewer complications: 1.72–28.00 % (average 11.6 %) vs 5.25–32.73 % (average 15.7 %) for discectomy. However, spinal fusion had longer operation time, greater blood loss and longer hospital stay compared to discectomy. Conclusion. Discectomy and spinal fusion are effective treatment options for recurrent lumbar disc herniation. At the same time, discectomy demonstrates a high level of initial relief of symptoms and is more cost-effective. However, the risk of recurrence is significant, and the progression of degeneration and instability may result in pain recurrence within a year. Fusion surgery provides stability and eliminates the risk of recurrence, but the main challenge is the cost of surgery. The choice of technique should be based on individual patient factors, and the advantages and disadvantages of each approach should be carefully considered.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
重复椎间盘切除术和脊柱融合术治疗复发性腰椎间盘突出症:文献的系统回顾
目标。对比较椎间盘切除术和脊柱融合术治疗复发性腰椎间盘突出症的研究进行文献综述。材料和方法。对四个电子数据库(PubMed、Google Scholar、Science Direct和Cochrane)进行了全面的搜索。比较椎间盘切除术和脊柱融合术治疗复发性腰椎间盘突出症的结果的研究进行了分析。比较术后并发症、手术费用、手术时间、住院时间、疼痛评分和复发率。结果。10项包含1066例患者数据的研究符合纳入标准。其中620例行椎间盘切除术,446例行脊柱融合术。椎间盘切除术在腿部和背部疼痛的VAS评分上取得了良好的效果,但在3-6个月后,与脊柱融合术相比没有显著差异。椎间盘切除术的复发率从7.27%到22.91%不等,而融合术的复发率为0%。融合手术并发症较少:1.72 - 28.00%(平均11.6%),而椎间盘切除术为5.25 - 32.73%(平均15.7%)。然而,与椎间盘切除术相比,脊柱融合术的手术时间更长,出血量更大,住院时间更长。结论。椎间盘切除术和脊柱融合术是治疗复发性腰椎间盘突出症的有效选择。与此同时,椎间盘切除术显示出高水平的初步症状缓解,更具成本效益。然而,复发的风险是显著的,退变和不稳定的进展可能导致疼痛在一年内复发。融合手术提供了稳定性并消除了复发的风险,但主要的挑战是手术的成本。技术的选择应基于患者的个体因素,并应仔细考虑每种入路的优缺点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Hirurgia Pozvonochnika
Hirurgia Pozvonochnika Medicine-Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
审稿时长
7 weeks
期刊最新文献
Degenerative changes in the intervertebral joints of the cervical spine after anterior interbody fusion and intervertebral disc arthroplasty Neurogenic dysfunction of the lower urinary tract in infectious and inflammatory diseases of the spine: is there a correlation with clinical and radiological variants of myelopathy? Preliminary result of the analysis of a single-center cohort Osteoplasty of vertebral bone defects caused by pedicle screw loosening using orthobiological approaches: a pilot study of case series Lumbar fusion through the anterolateral mini-approach: comparison of anterior interbody (OLIF-AF) and percutaneous pedicle (OLIF-PF) fixations in the surgical treatment of single-level stenosis Thoracoscopic microdiscectomy for disc herniation in the thoracic spine: surgical technique and analysis of early results
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1