• Spine · Feb 2008

    Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study

    Two-year outcome after lumbar microdiscectomy versus microscopic sequestrectomy: part 1: evaluation of clinical outcome.

    • Martin Barth, Christel Weiss, and Claudius Thomé.
    • Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim of the Ruprecht-Karls-University of Heidelberg, Germany.
    • Spine. 2008 Feb 1;33(3):265-72.

    Study DesignSingle-center randomized prospective study at a university hospital.ObjectiveThe aim of the present study was to provide a 2-year outcome comparison of microdiscectomy (D) versus microscopic sequestrectomy (S) in terms of reherniation rates, clinical investigation, and self-rated parameters using a comprehensive questionnaire.Summary Of Background DataSimple fragment excision in cases of herniated lumbar discs has been repeatedly reported as an alternative to standard microdiscectomy, but prospective data with sufficient follow-up is lacking to date. Preliminary results of a prospective randomized study in patients with lumbar disc herniations indicated equal reherniation rates and a trend toward superior clinical results in patients undergoing only sequestrectomy after 4 to 6 months.Material And MethodsEighty-four patients with lumbar disc herniations were treated with microdiscectomy or microscopic sequestrectomy in equal parts. Patients were re-evaluated thoroughly clinically after 2 years. Results of this investigation (low back pain, sciatica, motor-, sensory-, reflex-, straight leg raising test-indexes) and self-rated parameters including SF-36 were analyzed for differences between groups and between time points.ResultsThirty-eight (D) and 40 (S) patients were attainable for follow-up. Reherniation rates did not differ significantly (10.5%, group D; 12.5%, group S; P = 1.0). Following dramatic improvement after surgery in both groups, results of the clinical investigation remained stable over time without significant differences between groups. In contrast, self-rated assessment demonstrated clinical deterioration of the surgical results within the first 2 years after microdiscectomy, while they rather improved after sequestrectomy. Because of this development, the outcome measures at 2 years pointed in favor of sequestrectomy with results being significant for important parameters such as use of analgesics, performance, and overall outcome.ConclusionReherniation rates within 2 years after sequestrectomy and microdiscectomy are comparable. However, outcome after microdiscectomy seems to worsen over time, whereas it remains stable after sequestrectomy. Thus, 2-year follow-up revealed clinical results favoring sequestrectomy. Performing sequestrectomy alone may therefore represent an advantageous alternative to standard microdiscectomy.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,624,503 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.