Aim. To compare outcomes of revision lumbar discectomy to primary surgery in the same patient cohort. Methods. Prospective outcome data in 36 patients who underwent primary and subsequent revision surgery for lumbar disc herniation between 1995 and 2009. Outcome measures used were Visual Analogue Scores for back (VAB) and leg pain (VAL), the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Low Back Outcome Score (LBO). 5 early recurrences within 3 months were excluded. Results. Complete data was available in 31 patients 13F;18M. The average age was 39 years at index and 45 years at revision. Average interval between surgery of 39 months (range 6-122). Mean Pre op ODI 54 and VAL 73 primary procedure, final follow up of primary procedure ODI 33, VAL 43; prior to revision ODI 57, VAL 75; at last FU ODI 32 and VAL 40. There was no statistical difference between outcomes. In the primary discectomy group there was a statistically significant improvement in the VAL, ODI and LBO scores (P<0.05), with no significant improvement in the VAB (P=0.67). In the revision group there was a statistical significant improvement in all the outcomes (P<0.05). Overall, 45% of patients felt their outcome from revision discectomy was better/much better with 54% of patients rating their treatment as either good/excellent. Conclusion. Primary discectomy produced significant improvement in leg pain, ODI and LBO. Revision discectomy did the same, but also a significant improvement in VAB scores. There was no statistically significant difference in comparing the preoperative and postoperative scores for both procedures. Revision discectomy is a procedure which yields clinically significant and patient perceived improvements in spinal outcome measures with an unexplained improvement in VAB scores as compared to the primary procedure. This may challenge the belief of some surgeons in the need for fusion at the time of revision

Background: The usefulness of open (fenestration/ laminotomy) discectomy for the treatment of a herniated lumbar disc has been studied extensively. In the current prospective, randomized study, the results of this procedure were compared with those of Microendoscopic discectomy. Methods: One hundred and twelve patients who had objective evidence of a single level, central or para-central herniation of a lumbar disc caudal to the first lumbar vertebra were randomized into two groups; Group 1 (55 patients) was managed with Microendoscopic discectomy, and Group 2 (57 patients) was managed with open (fenestration/ laminotomy) discectomy. None of the patients had had a previous operation on the low back, and all had failed to respond to nonoperative measures. Analysis of the outcomes of both procedures was based on the patient’s self-evaluation before and after the operation through Oswestry scoring, the preoperative and postoperative clinical findings, and the patient’s ability to return to a functional status. The patients were followed at one week, 6 weeks, 6 months and for a minimum of one year postoperatively. Results: On the basis of the patient’s preoperative and postoperative self-evaluation, the findings on physical examination, and the patient’s ability to return to work or to normal activity, 53 patients (96 percent) in Group 1 and 54 patients (95 percent) in Group 2 were considered to have had a satisfactory outcome. The mean surgical time, mean anaesthesia time, postoperative stay, was significantly less in Group 1. The overall satisfaction score was higher after the endoscopic microdiscectomies than after the laminotomies and discectomies especially in immediate postoperative period (one and six weeks) as assessed through Oswestry scoring. Conclusions: The data from this randomized, prospective study suggest that Microendoscopic discectomy may be useful for the operative treatment of specific symptoms, including radiculopathy, that are caused by lumbar disc herniation, provided that patients are properly selected—that is, they must have a herniated disc at a single level as confirmed on imaging studies, have failed to respond to nonoperative management and have no evidence of spinal stenosis. All the major advantages of an endoscopic procedure like less hospital stay, lesser morbidity, and early return to work can be passed on to the patients without in anyway compromising the surgical goals viz. decompression of the canal and the compressed nerve root. However, endoscopic microdiscectomy is a demanding technique and should not be attempted without specific instruction and training

Aims: The aim of this study was to compare the results of Micro Endoscopic Discectomy (MED) toMicro Surgical Discectomy (MSD). Methods: 12 Patients were reviewed by an independent observer. This included the þrst 6 patients who underwent MED and 6 patients who underwent MSD selected randomly. There was no signiþcant difference between the two groups concerning age and sex distribution, occupation, preoper-ative time of work and clinical symptomatology. The disc herniations were located at L4-5 in 6 patients and L5-S1 in 6 patients. Patients were followed up for an average of 9 months (Range 2–22 months). They were assessed using the following questionnaires Oswestry low back pain and disability, Modiþed Gre-enough and Fraser and Mc Nab. Results: Both groups faired equally according to Mc Nab. The MED group appeared to require less postoperative analgesia especially opioid based preparations and were discharged earlier. The only complication was one patient in the MED requiring conversion to MSD. Conclusion: Our results indicate that MED is at least as effective as MSD, although it initially takes longer to perform due to the learning curve. However, the decrease in postoperative analgesia requirements and earlier discharge is beneþcial. In addition, we feel it has advantages over the percutaneous posterolateral discectomy for nerve root compression, which cannot treat sequestrated discs, or patients with disc herniations associated with recess stenosis

Introduction: This study is performed to investigate the efficacy of steroid, local anaesthesia (LA) or combination of both in reducing post operative pain in lumbar discectomy. Materials and Methods: The study was ethically approved. Patients undergoing primary single level lumbar discectomy were randomised by a closed envelope system into 4 groups of 1ml of steroid and 1ml of LA, 1ml of steroid and 1ml of saline, 1ml of LA and 1ml of saline and 2mls of saline as control. 10mg of adcortyl in 1ml and 1ml of 0.5% marcaine were used. Combinations of above were applied topically over the nerve root prior to closure. Preoperative, day 1 and eight weeks post operative visual analogue pain score were recorded. 10cm visual analogue pain score chart was used. 24 hours post operative opiate analgesia requirements and duration of inpatient stay were recorded. Data was analysed using Student t-test and Fisher exact t-test. Results: No significant differences seen in the mean pre operative pain score between all groups. Mean Day 1 post operative pain and analgesia requirement in steroid and LA, steroid only, LA only and control group were 0.9, 2.5, 2.1 and 3.3 respectively. Mean opiate analgesia requirement 24 hours post operatively were 32.4mg, 54mg, 32.4mg and 56.8mg respectively. Mean inpatient stay were 2.2day, 3.91day, 4.62day and 3.63day respectively. At 8 weeks post operatively, no significant differences in the pain score in all groups. Conclusions: Significant post operative pain reduction was achieved in the steroid and local anaesthesia group compared with other groups (p< 0.05). The results are reflected as well in significant reduction in the post operative analgesia requirement (p< 0.05) and the significant reduction in inpatient stay. (p< 0.05) We recommended the use of perioperative steroid and LA infiltration in lumbar discectomy. Improved post operative pain control reduces post operative opiate analgesia requirement and reduced inpatient stay

Introduction. This study was performed to investigate the efficacy of steroid and local anaesthesia (LA) in reducing post-operative pain in lumbar discectomy. Materials and methods. The study was ethically approved. Patients undergoing primary single level lumbar discectomy were randomised by a closed envelope system into 4 groups, which were (Group 1) 10mg of adcortyl in 1ml and 1ml of 0.5% marcaine, (Group 2) 10mg of adcortyl and 1ml of normal saline, (Group 3) 1ml of 0.5% marcaine and 1ml of normal saline and (Group 4) 2mls of normal saline as control. Combinations of the above were applied topically over the nerve root prior to closure. Pre-operative, day 1 and eight weeks post-operative pain scores were recorded. 24 hours post-operative opiate analgesia requirements and duration of inpatient stay were recorded. Data were analysed using student t-test for statistical significance. Results. 100 patients were recruited into the study. There were no significant differences seen in the mean age, gender and the mean pre-operative pain score between all groups. Mean day one pain score in groups 1,2,3 and 4 was 0.9,2.5, 2.1 and 3.3 respectively. Mean 24 hours post-operative opiate requirement was 32.4mg, 54mg, 48.8mg and 56.4mg respectively. Mean inpatient stay was 2.2 days, 3.9 days, 4.62 days and 3.63 days respectively. A significant different (p<0.05) was noted in day one post-operative mean pain score, mean 24 opiate requirement and mean inpatient stay in the corticosteroid and LA group. At 8 weeks post-operatively, no significant differences were seen in the pain score in all groups. Conclusions. Significant early post-operative pain reduction was achieved in the steroid and local anaesthesia group compared with other groups (p<0.05). A significant reduction in the 24-post operative analgesia requirement (p<0.05) and in inpatient stay (p<0.05) was also observed

Although interlaminar endoscopic lumbar discectomy (IELD) is considered to be less invasive than microscopic lumbar discectomy (MLD) in treatment of lumbar herniated nucleus pulposus, the radiologic change of multifidus muscles by each surgery has rarely been reported. The aim of the present study was to compare the quantitative and qualitative changes of multifidus muscles between two surgical approaches and to analyze the correlation between various parameters of multifidus muscles and long term surgical outcome. 21 patients who received MLD and 18 patients who received IELD in a single tertiary hospital were enrolled and their preoperative, postoperative (≤15 days), and follow-up (≥6 months) MRIs were analyzed. The cross-sectional area (CSA) and fatty degeneration rate (FD) were quantitatively estimated at the level of surgery. The correlations among CSA, FD, body mass index, follow-up visual analogue scale(VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index(ODI) were assessed. Mean intervals of postoperative MRI and follow-up MRI from surgery were 3.0±3.7 days and 14.5±10.7 months, respectively. During the follow-up period, VAS was improved from 7.1±1.3 to 2.1±1.8 in MLD and from 8.2±1.4 to 2.2±1.8 in IELD. In cases of MLD, comparing with preoperative MRI, ipsilateral CSA was significantly increased in postoperative MRI (795.6mm. 2. vs. 906.5mm. 2. , p<0.01), but it was not significantly different in follow-up MRI (795.6mm. 2. vs. 814.4mm. 2. , p=1.00). However, in case of IELD, the ipsilateral CSAs in preoperative, postoperative, and follow-up periods were 892.0 mm. 2. , 909.3 mm. 2. , and 900.3 mm. 2. , respectively. These changes were not significant over time (p=0.691). The ipsilateral FDs were not significantly changed between preoperative and follow-up periods in both MLD (21.4% vs. 20.9%, p=0.81) and IELD groups (23.5% vs. 21.8%, p=0.19). The increment of ipsilateral CSA had significant correlations with follow-up ODI (r=−0.368, p=0.02). Comparing with IELD, MLD induced more surgical trauma on multifidus muscle in postoperative period, but the muscular damage was recovered in follow-up period. IELD can minimize surgical trauma on multifidus muscle showing similar pain relief as MLD. Favorable surgical outcome in follow-up period may be related to increment of multifidus muscle volume. Figure 1. (A-C) The multifidus muscles in preoperative, postoperative, and follow-up periods, respectively, in patient with MLD. Comparing with preoperative period, the CSA of right multifidus muscle (ipsilateral side) was increased in postoperative period, but recovered in follow-up period. (D-F) The multifidus muscle in preoperative, postoperative, and follow-up periods, respectively, in patient with IELD. The CSA of left multifidus muscles (ipsilateral side) was not significantly changed over time. Comparing preoperative MRIs with follow-up MRIs, the FDs of multifidus muscles were not significantly changed regardless of surgical technique. Figure 2. The CSA was measured by marking region of interest (ROI) and FD was measured by calculating the rate of pixels beyond the threshold in ROI. All measurements were performed using ImageJ software (version 1.52a, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA). For any figures or tables, please contact the authors directly

Single level discectomy (SLD) is one of the most commonly performed spinal surgery procedures. Two key drivers of their cost-of-care are duration of surgery (DOS) and postoperative length of stay (LOS). Therefore, the ability to preoperatively predict SLD DOS and LOS has substantial implications for both hospital and healthcare system finances, scheduling and resource allocation. As such, the goal of this study was to predict DOS and LOS for SLD using machine learning models (MLMs) constructed on preoperative factors using a large North American database. The American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical and Quality Improvement (NSQIP) database was queried for SLD procedures from 2014-2019. The dataset was split in a 60/20/20 ratio of training/validation/testing based on year. Various MLMs (traditional regression models, tree-based models, and multilayer perceptron neural networks) were used and evaluated according to 1) mean squared error (MSE), 2) buffer accuracy (the number of times the predicted target was within a predesignated buffer), and 3) classification accuracy (the number of times the correct class was predicted by the models). To ensure real world applicability, the results of the models were compared to a mean regressor model. A total of 11,525 patients were included in this study. During validation, the neural network model (NNM) had the best MSEs for DOS (0.99) and LOS (0.67). During testing, the NNM had the best MSEs for DOS (0.89) and LOS (0.65). The NNM yielded the best 30-minute buffer accuracy for DOS (70.9%) and ≤120 min, >120 min classification accuracy (86.8%). The NNM had the best 1-day buffer accuracy for LOS (84.5%) and ≤2 days, >2 days classification accuracy (94.6%). All models were more accurate than the mean regressors for both DOS and LOS predictions. We successfully demonstrated that MLMs can be used to accurately predict the DOS and LOS of SLD based on preoperative factors. This big-data application has significant practical implications with respect to surgical scheduling and inpatient bedflow, as well as major implications for both private and publicly funded healthcare systems. Incorporating this artificial intelligence technique in real-time hospital operations would be enhanced by including institution-specific operational factors such as surgical team and operating room workflow

Objectives: A retrospective study of patients undergoing second operation after initial lumbar discectomy, to investigate the reasons associated. Methods: In a period of three years a total number of 30 patients had a reoperation after lumbar discectomy. The initial operation performed before one month to five years. There is a evaluation of intraoperative findings and of a short period of follow up. Data were obtained from Spine Unit of Errikos Dunan Hospital. Results: Among 30 patients, 60% were recurrent disc herniations, 18% were fusions and 22% were decompressions. The follow up is from two months to three years for 25 patients, 4 patients had further spinal surgery. Very satisfied, satisfied were 80% of patients. Conclusion: Although reoperation after lumbar discectomy is uncommon, it is very possible to face it because of the increasing number of initial discectomies performed

The recent NICE guidelines on management of osteoarthritis outline weight loss as first line treatment in degenerative joint disease in the obese. There is little data surrounding the effects of obesity on the outcomes in spinal surgical interventions. Intervertebral discectomy is one treatment for prolapse of a lumbar vertebral disc. We aim to investigate the effect of obesity on outcomes for discectomy. Demographic details including age, sex, weight and BMI were recording with a pre-operative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). The fat thickness was measured at L5/S1 using calibrated MRI scans. Outcome measures included complications, length of surgery and change in ODI at 1 year following surgery. Obesity was defined as a body mass index of over 30. The units Serial patients undergoing discectomy were recruited into the study. Patients with bony decompression, instrumentation, revision surgery or multilevel disease were excluded. Fifty patients with a single level uncomplicated disc prolapse were entered into the study. Sixteen patients had a BMI over 30 and so were obese, whilst 34 had a BMI of less than 30. The mean pre-operative ODI was 46.5 in the obese group and 52 in the normal group this difference was not significant (p> 0.05). The mean post operative ODI was statistically improved in the high BMI group at 28 (18.5 point improvement) and 25.2 (29.1 point improvement) in the normal group. The ODI improvement was significantly better in the low BMI group (p=0.036). There was no significant difference in operative time (p=0.24). Only a single patient had a complication (dural leak), so no valid comparison could be made. The outcomes of spinal surgery in the obese are mixed. We found no increase in the complication rate or intra-operative time associated with an increased BMI. However, the improvement in ODI was significantly better in the normal BMI group

Purpose: Persistent radiculopathy secondary to lumbar disc herniation is a common problem that greatly compromises quality of life. In North America, lumbar discectomies are among the most common elective surgical procedures performed. There is still much debate about when conservative or surgical treatments should be offered to patients. Although the related literature is comprehensive, there are limited systematic reviews on the prognostic factors predicting the outcome of lumbar discectomy. The purpose of this review is to define the preoperative factors predicting clinical outcome after lumbar discectomy. Method: We conducted a computerized literature search using Ovid Medline and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. We included randomized controlled trials or prospective studies dealing with lumbar disc surgery. The preoperative predictors had to be clearly identified and correlated with outcome measures in terms of pain, disability, work capacity, analgesia consumption, or a combination of these measures. We assessed the articles as high or low quality studies using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale, and summarized the results of High Quality Studies. Results: A total of 39 articles were included. The two most prominent negative predictors were Workers’ Compensation status and depression according to 6 studies. Poor predictors reported in 4 articles were female gender, increasing age, and prolonged duration of leg or back pain. Lower education level, smoking, and higher levels of psychological complaints were negative predictors in 3 articles. A positive Lasègue sign was a positive predictor in 7 articles. Absence of back pain, positive patient expectations, and higher income were good prognostic factors in 3 studies. Patients with contained herniations did worse than those who had uncontained disc extrusions and sequestrations according to 4 studies. The level of herniation was not a predictive factor in 7 studies. Conclusion: Workers’ Compensation, depression, greater back versus leg pain, increasing age, female gender, contained herniations, and prolonged symptoms predict unfavourable postoperative outcomes after lumbar discectomy. Positive Lasègue sign, higher income, uncontained herniations, and positive patient expectations predict favourable postoperative outcomes. The level of herniation is not an established prognostic factor. The results of this review provide a preliminary framework for patient selection for lumbar disc surgery

Purpose: Since 1990, we have used specific material, presented to us by T. Tajima (Japan) during his visit in 1989 for percutaneous surgical cervical discectomy. French material was developed in 1992. The purpose of this work is to present our experience with this technique over the last ten years. Material and methods: Indications were cervicobrachial neuralgia unresponsive to medical care and secondary to MRI or CT documented cervical disc herniation. We used the right anterolateral approach guided with the image amplifier for patients under local anaesthesia and neuroleptanalgesia ou general anaesthesia. A guide wire was positioned in the centre of the anterior aspect of the disc to insert a 2.5 mm working tube in the middle of the disc. A special trephin with an inverted inside thread induced an aspiration effect when turned into the disc, in line with the posterior wall of the vertebra. This enabled removal of several “carrots” measuring 1 to 2 cm long of discal or even disco-osteophytic material. The removal of the posterior third of the disc and the herniation was completed with a fine disc forceps. Results: There were 85 procedures in 82 patients, mean age 42 years (35 women, 47 men): 57 at one level, mainly C5C6, 27 at two levels simultaneously, and one at three levels during the same operation. Mean follow-up for the 80 results known was 15 months (3–90 months). There were nine failures (two required conventional surgical fusion), 14 fair results, and 57 good results, giving a total of 88.75% good and fair results. Unlike percutaneous surgical lumbar discectomy, where good results at three months may deteriorate at two years, good results at three months after percutaneous cervical discectomy remained good at two years. Discussion: This technique provides results as good as chemonucleolysis. An advantage of the technique that allergy or disco-osteophytic protrusions are not contraindications. We did not have any infection or injury to neighbouring tissue. Conclusion: When rigorous operative procedures are used in this area with potential risk, percutaneous surgical cervical discectomy can be a useful routine therapeutic tool

Introduction: Repetitive undertaking of a physical tasks results in an innate memory for that task. Development of this memory is an important component of surgical training and the ease and safety with which these changes are incorporated into a smoothly flowing procedure is represented by the so-called “learning curve”. Changes in equipment and technology may radically alter the paradigm used by surgeons for completing the task of an operation. An example of this is the integration of endoscopy. The hand-eye orientation, field of view, angle of approach, binocularity of vision and skew of the visual field are all altered in lumbar micro-endoscopic discectomy (MED), when compared to open microdiscectomy. Methods: This is a prospective observational study of the initial twenty-five cases of lumbar MED in the hands of a single surgeon. The twenty-five cases of open micro-discectomy immediately predating the current series are used as a cohort for comparison. Results: A definite alteration in the ability of the surgeon to undertake a new method of discectomy occurred. Three of the first seven cases of MED were converted to an open discectomy. None of the ensuing 18 cases was converted. The major learning outcomes to account for the change were familiarity with the radiological and videoscopic anatomy, and recognition of the importance of angles of approach. The average time for surgery in the first ten cases was significantly longer than the second fifteen. The time for surgery in the latter group was not significantly altered from the open cohort group. The facets of surgery responsible for the increased time in the first group were techniques of exposing the nerve root, comfort of the extent of decompression of the nerve root and excision of the disc and comfort with the orientation and cleaning of the camera. The quality of illumination and visualisation of the operative field improved over the study although the significance of this could not be quantified. Subjectively, surgeon “comfort” with the procedure developed relatively early in the “learning curve”. There was no significant difference in clinical outcome and complications between the two groups. Discussion: Minimal access techniques have been widely integrated into other fields of surgical endeavour. Open microdiscectomy is well accepted as a treatment for acute lumbar disc prolapse. The decision whether or not to change a surgeon’s operative technique should be based on the final anticipated clinical benefit of such a change compared to the cost and risk of changing. This study shows that there is a learning curve associated with lumbar MED, but that it can be integrated relatively easily into a surgical armamentarium

INTRODUCTION: Repetitive undertaking of a physical task results in an innate memory for that task. Development of this memory is an important component of surgical training and the ease and safety with which these changes are incorporated into a smoothly flowing procedure is represented by the so-called “learning curve”. Changes in equipment and technology may radically alter the paradigm used by surgeons for completing the task of an operation. An example of this is the integration of endoscopy. The hand-eye orientation, field of view, angle of approach, binocularity of vision and skew of the visual field are all altered in lumbar microendoscopic discectomy (MED), when compared to open microdiscectomy. METHODS: This is a prospective observational study of the initial twenty-five cases of lumbar MED in the hands of a single surgeon. The twenty-five cases of open microdiscectomy immediately predating the current series are used as a cohort for comparison. RESULTS: A definite alteration in the ability of the surgeon to undertake a new method of discectomy occurred. Three of the first seven cases of MED were converted to an open discectomy. None of the ensuing 18 cases was converted. The major learning outcomes to account for the change were familiarity with the radiological and videoscopic anatomy, and recognition of the importance of angles of approach. The average time for surgery in the first ten cases was significantly longer than the second fifteen. The time for surgery in the latter group was not significantly altered from the open cohort group. The facets of surgery responsible for the increased time in the first group were techniques of exposing the nerve root, comfort of the extent of decompression of the nerve root and excision of the disc and comfort with the orientation and cleaning of the camera. The quality of illumination and visualisation of the operative field improved over the study although the significance of this could not be quantified. Subjectively, surgeon “comfort” with the procedure developed relatively early in the “learning curve”. There was no significant difference in clinical outcome and complications between the two groups. DISCUSSION: Minimal access techniques have been widely integrated into other fields of surgical endeavour. Open microdiscectomy is well accepted as a treatment for acute lumbar disc prolapse. The decision whether or not to change a surgeon’s operative technique should be based on the final anticipated clinical benefit of such a change compared to the cost and risk of changing. This study shows that there is a learning curve associated with lumbar MED, but that it can be integrated relatively easily into a surgical armamentarium

Autologous chondrocyte transplantation is technically feasible and biologically relevant to repairing disc damage and retarding disc degeneration in animal models. Prospective clinical trials with open discectomy, cultivation of disc cells and transplantation by a minimally invasive procedure are ongoing (co.don chondro-transplant DISC). We used the decompressor (Stryker) for percutaneous lumbar discectomy to harvest disc cells for cultivation. A cannula was placed in the degenerated disc. The 1,5mm decompressor was introduced through the cannula. 0,5–1,5 millilitres of disc material was aspirated. In the laboratory the material was cultured using the patients serum. The cells were expandable. The capacity of the cells to produce matrix molecules was proven in vitro. The percutaneous discectomy of contained discs with signes of early degeneration, the expansion and the transplantation of autologous chondrocytes to the disc might be a possibility of repairing disc damage and retarding disc degeneration

Background: Traditionally, lumbar discectomy is performed under general anaesthesia because of ability to perform operations of long duration in prone position with a secure airway. Some recent reports suggest better outcomes with regional anaesthesia. Aim: The aim of this study was to compare the intra-operative and short-term post-operative outcome variables in patients undergoing primary single-level lumbar discectomy with epidural and general anaesthesia. Methods: This was a prospective randomized trial involving sixty patients over a two-year period in a tertiary hospital in India. Patients were allocated into two groups: Group A (n=30) patients received general anaesthesia and Group B (n=30) patients received epidural anaesthesia. Baseline and intra-operative haemodynamic parameters, surgical duration, surgical onset time, intra-operative blood loss, cost incurred by patient, nausea and vomiting and post-operative pain score were also recorded. Results: The groups were comparable for demographic data and baseline hemodynamic observations. Patients in the epidural anaesthesia group had significantly lower blood loss (p< 0.001), lower peak pain scores (p< 0.001), lesser surgical time (p< 0.001),and significantly reduced post-operative nausea and vomiting (p< 0.01) as compared to the general anaesthesia group. The cost incurred for epidural anaesthesia was two third of that incurred in general anaesthesia (p< 0.001). Epidural group had significantly more surgical onset time (p< 0.001). Conclusion: Lumbar discectomy can be safely performed using epidural anaesthesia. The intra-operative blood loss, surgical duration, cost incurred by the patient, postoperative nausea, vomiting and pain are significantly reduced in patients receiving epidural anaesthesia, thereby leading to a significantly higher patient satisfaction. In the present climate of NHS, where any initiative to cut down the cost of resources consumed is welcomed as long as the patient safety is not compromised, epidural anaesthetic may provide an effective alternative to general anaesthetic for lumbar discectomy

Aim of the present study was to investigate clinical outcomes and quality of life after standard discectomy for lumbar disc herniation on a minimum 25-year follow-up throughout validated tools. Between 1973 and 1979, a total of 343 patients underwent single or double level standard lumbar discectomy at the Orthopaedic Department of Naples Federico II University Hospital, Italy. Fifty patients died from causes unrelated to disc surgery. Out of the remnants, one hundred fifty-eight patients could be traced and contacted by mail (46.1% survey rate). All of them (100% response rate) completed and sent back three questionnaires: the official Italian version of the Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36), the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire, and a questionnaire ideated by the authors to evaluate the degree of satisfaction with surgery. Forty-two patients even accepted to undergo clinic examination. The study population consisted of 97 males and 61 females. The mean age at the time of surgery was 37.8 +/− 8.7 years (18–62), whereas on follow up it was 65.8 +/− 8.9 (44–89). The average follow up in the study group was 27 years (25–31). The eight SF-36 scales averaged 72.53 +/− 31.3 for physical functioning, 63.1 +/− 30.1 for bodily pain, 61.30 +/− 44.4 for role-physical, 54.57 +/− 22.2 for general health, 56.62 +/− 19.2 for vitality, 72.08 +/− 30 for social functioning, 67.56 +/− 41.4 for role-emotional, and 62.28 +/− 19 for mental health. The mean SF-36 physical composite score (PCS) and mental composite score (MCS) were 44.2 +/− 11.6 (17.3–64.5) and 45.7 +/− 9,9 (13.2–62.4), respectively. The mean Oswestry Disability Score was 16.67 +/− 22.82 (0–96). One hundred forty-two patients (89.9%) were satisfied with the results of surgery, whereas sixteen (10.1%) were dissatisfied. One hundred and one (89.2%) would have had the same operation again. Nineteen patients underwent recurrent back surgery, giving a reoperation rate of 12%. As for the objective findings, we noted slight improvement of motor disturbances, hyporeflexia, and radicular tension signs with respect to preoperative period. Lumbar alignment abnormalities and trunk mobility did not show significant changes. On multivariate analysis worst SF-36 PCS scores were associated with increasing age (P = 0.039), low educational level (P = 0.002), and reoperation (P = 0.008). Similar correlations were appreciated for the Oswestry Disability Score. Negative role of female gender (P = 0.012) in determining the score of SF-36 MCS was also detected. To the best of our knowledge, no patient-oriented evaluation of lumbar discectomy outcomes has been reported with a similar ultra-long-term follow-up. The minimum 25-year results obtained in the present study were satisfying for both general health and disability indicators. The general health scores were similar to age-adjusted normative values

Introduction: Following surgical discectomy for pro-lapsed lumbar intervertebral disc, a proportion of patients develop leg symptoms on the side contra-lateral to the original surgery. Among other causes, subsequent disc space narrowing together with on-going degenerative changes may cause root entrapment in the lateral recess or in the intervertebral canal at the level of the previous disc prolapse. It has been previously reported that the results of discectomy are less successful in patients with pre-existing spinal stenosis. It may be argued that patients with a narrow spinal canal would be more prone to the development of contra-lateral symptoms. The aim of this study was to determine whether any measurement on the pre-operative CT scan could predict the development of contra-lateral symptoms, or provide an indication for prophylactic decompression of the contra-lateral side at the time of the original surgery. Materials & Methods: In a retrospective cohort of 43 patients following lumbar discectomy, eight subsequently developed symptoms on the contra-lateral side of whom three required subsequent contra-lateral surgery. A relationship was demonstrated between a measurement taken on the pre-operative CT scan (the oblique sub-facet distance) and the occurrence of contra-lateral symptoms following discectomy. Conclusion: An oblique sub-facet distance of 8mm or less predicted the development of contra-lateral symptoms with a sensitivity of 75 % and a specificity of 74%

Study Design: Retrospective review. Objectives: Rugby union has recently become a highly-paid professional sport. Players requiring anterior cervical discectomy wish to know the effect this will have on their career. To answer this question, the result of the above procedure in professional rugby players was studied. Methods: A retrospective notes review and telephone interview were conducted on 19 professional rugby players who had a cervical discectomy between 1998 and 2003. Pre and post operative symptoms and numbers returning to rugby after surgery were assessed. Results: Neck pain was eradicated in eight (42%) of the players, nine (47%) achieved partial relief and two were not helped. Brachalgia was eradicated in fifteen (79%) individuals, improved in two (10.5%) and two (10.5%) had no relief. Fourteen (74%) returned to rugby union, the majority at six months post operatively (range – five to 17 months). Thirteen (68.5%) returned to their pre-operative level of rugby; one dropped to a lesser division and five have never played rugby again (three due to physical inability, one due to club reluctance to insure and one because of a separate injury). Two of the players that returned to rugby have subsequently retired because of neck symptoms. They played three and two years post-operatively at first-class level. Conclusion: Return to rugby union after anterior cervical discectomy is both likely and safe and therefore need not be a career ending procedure

Objective: To extend the follow up period of previous studies undertaken by the senior author, looking at the clinical outcome and radiological changes observed in patients with either myelopathy or radiculopathy, following anterior cervical discectomy without fusion. Design: Prospective, observational cohort study of patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy without fusion and followed up for five years, radiologically, with serial plain radiographs, and clinically, using validated outcome measures including SF36, neck disability index and analogue visual pain scores. Subjects: 109 Patients undergoing anterior cervical dis-cectomy without fusion under the senior author’s care. Outcome measures:. Radiological. Occurrence of segmental cervical kyphosis. Loss of overall cervical alignment. Clinical. SF36, Neck disability index, Visual analogue neck and arm pain scores. Results: A total cohort of 109 patients, of mean age 56 years, were followed up after anterior cervical discectomy without fusion, for up to 5 years. Segmental kyphosis was demonstrated on 44%, and loss of overall cervical alignment on 60% of follow up plain radiographs during the third postoperative year. In the cohorts of patients with either loss of cervical alignment or segmental kyphosis at one year the mean clinical outcome scores (Wilcoxon’s matched pairs signed ranks test) continued to improve at the 5 year follow up. The annual rate of loss of cervical alignment in patients unaffected at the first post operative year was around 10% but there was no significant rate of progression of segmental kyphosis. Comparison of the relationship between these radiological changes and clinical outcome (Mann-Whitney U test) did not show any significant correlation. Conclusions: This study assesses patients over the period during which the anticipated alignment changes associated with undertaking simple anterior cervical discectomy could be having progressive detrimental clinical effects. Where such radiological changes occur they most commonly occur during the first post operative year. However, clinical outcome measures in these patients all improve at one year follow up, and still continue to improve or plateau up to five years post operatively. As anticipated, the most significant clinical improvement, occurs during the first post operative year. During the longer follow up period there is no significant detrimental effect of the radiological changes discussed on clinical outcome

Objective: To identify risk factors associated with patients that required revision surgery for sciatica. Design: A retrospective study of 580 patients who underwent surgery for intractable sciatica attributable to pro-lapsed lumbar intervertebral disc from 1986 to 2000 inclusive. Subjects: The study included a total of 580 patients. Of these seven patients had an operation at two levels, 25 patients had had a primary operation elsewhere and were therefore excluded; four sets of notes remain missing. The total number of primary operations analysed was therefore 558. Outcome measures: Parameters such as gender, age, level and side of discectomy were entered into a database for analysis. Diagnostic and clinical parameters were also entered; these included the value of the angle of the straight leg raise recorded and absence or presence of neurological deficit (altered sensation, reduced motor power, and absent or diminished reflexes). Operative findings recorded and entered were the type of disc at operation (i. e. protrusion, extrusion and sequestration) and the presence of free cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), however minor, indicating a dural tear. Results: The total number of primary discectomies was 558 of which 43 went on to require a second operation, giving a revision rate of 7.71%. Of the primary discectomies, 356 were protrusions, 92 extrusions and 110 sequestration. Of the 43 that went onto revision surgery, 35 were protrusions, two extrusion and six sequestration. A significant association was found with primary disc protrusions, this type of disc prolapse was almost three times more likely to go on to need revision surgery compared to extruded or sequestrated discs. Data analysed on primary protrusions showed these patients had a significantly greater straight leg raise angle and reduced incidence of positive neurological findings and so could be identified clinically. Conclusions: This lead us to conclude that the group of patients with primary protrusions could be selected out and treated conservatively since they are three times more likely to require revision surgery