Transforaminal percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy for upper lumbar disc herniation: clinical outcome, prognostic factors, and technical consideration

Wooridul Spine Hospital, 50-3 Dongin-dong, Jung-gu, Daegu, 700-732 South Korea
Acta Neurochirurgica (Impact Factor: 1.79). 03/2009; 151(3):199-206. DOI: 10.1007/s00701-009-0204-x

ABSTRACT BackgroundCompared with lower lumbar disc herniations, upper lumbar disc herniations at L1–L2 and L2–L3 have specific characteristics
that result in different surgical outcomes after conventional open discectomy. There are no published studies on the feasibility
of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy for upper lumbar disc herniation. The purpose of this study was to assess the
clinical outcome, prognostic factors and the technical pitfalls of PELD for upper lumbar disc herniation.

MethodForty-five patients with a soft disc herniation at L1–L2 or L2–L3 underwent percutaneous endoscopic discectomy. Posterolateral
transforaminal endoscopic laser-assisted disc removal was performed under local anesthesia. Clinical outcomes was assessed
using the Prolo scale. The prognostic factors associated with outcome were then analyzed.

FindingsThe mean follow-up was 38.8months (range, 25–52months). The outcome of the 45 patients was excellent in 21 (46.7%), good
in 14 patients (31.1%), fair in six patients (13.3%), and poor in four patients (8.9%). Four patients with a poor outcome
underwent further open surgery. Mean scores on a visual analog scale decreased from 8.38 to 2.36 (P < 0.0001). Age less than 45years and a lateral disc herniation were independently associated with an excellent outcome (P < 0.05).

ConclusionsPatient selection and an anatomically modified surgical technique promote a more successful outcome after percutaneous endoscopic
discectomy for upper lumbar disc herniation.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: To compare the early postoperative results of three surgical approaches to lumbar disc herniations that migrated cranially. Minimally invasive techniques such as the translaminar and endoscopic transforaminal approaches are utilized in patients with lumbar disc herniations to gain access to cranially located disc material and to avoid the potentially destabilizing resection of ligament and bone tissue, which is associated with an extended interlaminar approach. Methods: This retrospective study compares the postoperative pain and functional capacity levels of 69 patients who underwent an interlaminar (Group A, n=27), a translaminar (Group B, n=22) or an endoscopic transforaminal procedure (Group C, n=20). Results: Median VAS scores for leg pain decreased significantly from before to after surgery in all groups. Surgical revisions were required in thirteen cases (five in Group A, one in Group B, and seven in Group C, p=.031). After six weeks, there were significant differences in back pain and functional outcome scores and in the results for the MacNab criteria but not in leg pain scores. Conclusions: The interlaminar and translaminar techniques were the safest and fastest ways of gaining access to cranially migrated disc material and the most effective approaches over a period of six weeks.
    11/2014; 2014:Article ID 702163. DOI:10.1155/2014/702163
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical and radiological risk factors for exiting root injuries during transforaminal endoscopic discectomy. METHODS: We retrospectively examined cohort data from 233 patients who underwent percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy for lumbar disc herniation between January 1st, 2010 and December 31st, 2011. We divided the patients into the two groups: those who presented a postoperative exiting root injury, such as postoperative dysesthesia or motor weakness (Group A, n = 20), and those who did not suffer from a root injury (Group B, n = 213). We examined the clinical and radiological factors relating exiting root injuries. We measured the active working zone with the exiting root to the upper facet distance (Distance A), the exiting root to disc surface distance at the lower facet line (Distance B) and the exiting root to the lower facet distance (Distance C) in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). RESULTS: Group A exhibited a shorter Distance C (6.4 ± 1.5 versus 4.4 ± 0.8 mm, p < 0.001) and a longer operation time (67.9 ± 21.8 versus 80.3 ± 23.7 min, p = 0.017) relative to Group B. The complication rate decreased by 23 % per each 1-mm increase in Distance C (p = 0.000). In addition, the complication rate increased 1.027-fold per each 1-min increase in the operation time (p = 0.027). CONCLUSION: We recommend measuring the distance from the exiting root to the facet at the lower disc level according to a preoperative MRI scan. If the distance is narrow, an alternative surgical method, such as microdiscectomy or conventional open discectomy, should be considered.
    European Spine Journal 06/2013; DOI:10.1007/s00586-013-2849-7 · 2.47 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract In the last 25 years of spinal surgery, tremendous improvements have been made. The development of smart technologies with the overall aim of reducing surgical trauma has resulted in the concept of minimally invasive surgical techniques. Enhancements in microsurgery, endoscopy and various percutaneous techniques, as well as improvement of implant materials, have proven to be milestones. The advancement of training of spine surgeons and the integration of image guidance with precise intraoperative imaging, computer- and robot-assisted treatment modalities constitute the era of reducing treatment morbidity in spinal surgery. This progress has led to the present era of preserving spinal function. The promise of the continuing evolution of spinal surgery, the era of restoring spinal function, already appears on the horizon. The current state of minimally invasive spine surgery is the result of a long-lasting and consecutive development of smart technologies, along with stringent surgical training practices and the improvement of instruments and techniques. However, much effort in research and development is still mandatory to establish, maintain and evolve minimally invasive spine surgery. The education and training of the next generation of highly specialized spine surgeons is another key point. This paper will give an overview of surgical techniques and methods of the past 25 years, examine what is in place today, and suggest a projection for spine surgery in the coming 25 years by drawing a connection from the past to the future.
    Minimally invasive therapy & allied technologies: MITAT: official journal of the Society for Minimally Invasive Therapy 08/2013; 22(4):227-41. DOI:10.3109/13645706.2013.821414 · 1.18 Impact Factor


Available from