Five-year Reoperation Rates and Causes for Reoperations Following Lumbar Microendoscopic Discectomy and Decompression.
Adult
Aged
Decompression, Surgical
/ statistics & numerical data
Diskectomy
/ statistics & numerical data
Female
Humans
Intervertebral Disc Degeneration
Intervertebral Disc Displacement
/ surgery
Laminectomy
Lumbar Vertebrae
/ surgery
Male
Middle Aged
Postoperative Period
Reoperation
/ statistics & numerical data
Retrospective Studies
Sciatica
/ surgery
Scoliosis
/ surgery
Spinal Stenosis
/ surgery
Spondylolisthesis
/ surgery
Journal
Spine
ISSN: 1528-1159
Titre abrégé: Spine (Phila Pa 1976)
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7610646
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Jan 2020
01 Jan 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
16
8
2019
medline:
18
3
2020
entrez:
16
8
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Retrospective study of prospectively collected outcome data. The aim of this study was to investigate reoperation cases and determine whether or not the experience period of a single surgeon was associated with the causes of reoperations following lumbar microendoscopic discectomy for disc herniation (MEDH) and microendoscopic decompression for spinal stenosis (MEDS). There have been few studies that investigated reoperation cases following MEDH and MEDS. Between June 2005 (first experience of MEDH) and September 2013, the same surgeon had been using MEDH and/or MEDS on 441 consecutive patients. The follow-up rate was 89.3%. The causes and rates of reoperations (RORs) were determined at 5 years after the initial operations. We also investigated the experience period of a single surgeon (EPS, interval between June 2005 and initial operation: median, 37 months). The 5-year reoperation rate for all patients combined was 12.4% (49/394). The main causes for reoperations were recurrence of disc herniation (ROR, 7.01%) and increase of postoperative spondylolisthesis and/or instability (ROR, 9/394 = 2.28%); two of the nine cases were caused by excessive decompression, and the EPSs were 11 and 16 months. The other causes for reoperations were postoperative epidural hematoma (ROR, 0.76%; median EPS, 20 months), insufficient decompression (ROR, 0.25%; EPS, 17 months), and residual segmental scoliosis (ROR, 7.69%); two segmental scoliosis cases did not provide relief from sciatica, and therefore L4/5 transforaminal interbody fusions were performed. Postoperative epidural hematoma and excessive or insufficient decompression were often observed in the initial series of patients as the causes for reoperations. We think that it is important to be aware of and prevent such potential problems in any initial series of patients, as there are limitations to any surgical indications for the use of microendoscopic decompression for degenerative segmental scoliosis because of original traction and/or kinking of nerve roots. 4.
Sections du résumé
STUDY DESIGN
METHODS
Retrospective study of prospectively collected outcome data.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to investigate reoperation cases and determine whether or not the experience period of a single surgeon was associated with the causes of reoperations following lumbar microendoscopic discectomy for disc herniation (MEDH) and microendoscopic decompression for spinal stenosis (MEDS).
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA
BACKGROUND
There have been few studies that investigated reoperation cases following MEDH and MEDS.
METHODS
METHODS
Between June 2005 (first experience of MEDH) and September 2013, the same surgeon had been using MEDH and/or MEDS on 441 consecutive patients. The follow-up rate was 89.3%. The causes and rates of reoperations (RORs) were determined at 5 years after the initial operations. We also investigated the experience period of a single surgeon (EPS, interval between June 2005 and initial operation: median, 37 months).
RESULTS
RESULTS
The 5-year reoperation rate for all patients combined was 12.4% (49/394). The main causes for reoperations were recurrence of disc herniation (ROR, 7.01%) and increase of postoperative spondylolisthesis and/or instability (ROR, 9/394 = 2.28%); two of the nine cases were caused by excessive decompression, and the EPSs were 11 and 16 months. The other causes for reoperations were postoperative epidural hematoma (ROR, 0.76%; median EPS, 20 months), insufficient decompression (ROR, 0.25%; EPS, 17 months), and residual segmental scoliosis (ROR, 7.69%); two segmental scoliosis cases did not provide relief from sciatica, and therefore L4/5 transforaminal interbody fusions were performed.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Postoperative epidural hematoma and excessive or insufficient decompression were often observed in the initial series of patients as the causes for reoperations. We think that it is important to be aware of and prevent such potential problems in any initial series of patients, as there are limitations to any surgical indications for the use of microendoscopic decompression for degenerative segmental scoliosis because of original traction and/or kinking of nerve roots.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
METHODS
4.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31415462
doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003206
pii: 00007632-202001010-00017
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
71-77Références
Foley KT, Smith MM. Microendoscopic discectomy. Tech Neurosurg 1997; 3:301–307.
Khoo LT, Fessler RG. Microendoscopic decompressive laminotomy for the treatment of lumbar stenosis. Neurosurgery 2002; 51:S146–S154.
Wong AP, Smith ZA, Lall RR, et al. The microendoscopic decompression of lumbar stenosis: a review of the current literature and clinical results. Minim Invasive Surg 2012; 2012:325095.
Nowitzke AM. Assessment of the learning curve for lumbar microendoscopic discectomy. Neurosurgery 2005; 56:755–762.
Matsumoto M, Watanabe K, Hosogane N, et al. Recurrence of lumbar disc herniation after microendoscopic discectomy. J Neurol Surg A 2013; 74:222–227.
Ikuta K, Tono O, Tanaka T. Surgical complications of microendoscopic procedures for lumbar spinal stenosis. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 2007; 50:145–149.
Aihara T, Toyone T, Murata Y, et al. Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis: a comparative study of 5-year outcomes following decompression with fusion and microendoscopic decompression. Asian Spine J 2018; 12:132–139.
Taillard W. Le spondylolisthesis chez l’enfant et l’adolescent. Acta Orthop Scand 1954; 24:115–144.
Wiltse LL, Winter RB. Terminology and measurement of spondylolisthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1983; 65:768–772.
Kristof RA, Aliashkevich AF, Schuster M, et al. Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis-induced radicular compression: nonfusion-related decompression in selected patients without hypermobility on flexion-extension radiographs. J Neurosurg 2002; 97: (3 suppl): 281–286.
Aihara T, Toyone T, Aoki Y, et al. Surgical management of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a comparative study of outcomes following decompression with fusion and microendoscopic decompression. J Musculoskelet Res 2012; 15:1250020-1-10.
Kato M, Namikawa T, Matsumura A, et al. Radiographic risk factors of reoperation following minimally invasive decompression for lumbar canal stenosis associated with degenerative scoliosis and spondylolisthesis. Global Spine J 2017; 7:498–505.
Hwang HJ, Park HK, Lee GS, et al. Predictors of reoperation after microdecompression in lumbar spinal stenosis. Korean J Spine 2016; 13:183–189.
Ikuta K, Tono O, Oga M. Clinical outcome of microendoscopic posterior decompression for spinal stenosis associated with degenerative spondylolisthesis—minimum 2-year outcome of 37 patients. Minim Invas Neurosurg 2008; 51:267–271.
Minamide A, Yoshida M, Yamada H, et al. Clinical outcomes after microendoscopic laminotomy for lumbar spinal stenosis: a 5-year follow-up study. Eur Spine J 2015; 24:396–403.
Aihara T, Endo K, Suzuki H, et al. Long-term outcomes following lumbar microendoscopic discectomy and microendoscopic decompression: minimum 10-year follow-up evaluation performed using a patient-based outcome measure. J Neurol Surg A in press.
Häkkinen A, Kiviranta I, Neva MH, et al. Reoperations after first lumbar disc herniation surgery; a special interest on residives during a 5-year follow-up. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2007; 8:2.
Lang Z, Li JS, Yang F, et al. Reoperation of decompression alone or decompression plus fusion surgeries for degenerative lumbar diseases: a systematic review. Eur Spine J 2018; 27: June 28.
Fujiwara Y, Manabe H, Izumi B, et al. The impact of hypertension on the occurrence of postoperative spinal epidural hematoma following single level microscopic posterior lumbar decompression surgery in a single institute. Eur Spine J 2017; 26:2606–2615.
Kelleher MO, Timlin M, Persaud O, et al. Success and failure of minimally invasive decompression for focal lumbar spinal stenosis in patients with and without deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2010; 35:E981–E987.
Nomura K, Yoshida M. Assessment of the learning curve for microendoscopic decompression surgery for lumbar spinal canal stenosis through an analysis of 480 cases involving a single surgeon. Global Spine J 2017; 7:54–58.