» Articles » PMID: 31491760

Outcomes of Endoscopic Discectomy Compared with Open Microdiscectomy and Tubular Microdiscectomy for Lumbar Disc Herniations: a Meta-analysis

Overview
Date 2019 Sep 7
PMID 31491760
Citations 21
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: Endoscopic discectomy (ED) has been advocated as a less-invasive alternative to open microdiscectomy (OM) and tubular microdiscectomy (TM) for lumbar disc herniations, with the potential to decrease postoperative pain and shorten recovery times. Large-scale, objective comparisons of outcomes between ED, OM, and TM, however, are lacking. The authors' objective in this study was to conduct a meta-analysis comparing outcomes of ED, OM, and TM.

Methods: The PubMed database was searched for articles published as of February 1, 2019, for comparative studies reporting outcomes of some combination of ED, OM, and TM. A meta-analysis of outcome parameters was performed assuming random effects.

Results: Twenty-six studies describing the outcomes of 2577 patients were included. Estimated blood loss was significantly higher with OM than with both TM (p = 0.01) and ED (p < 0.00001). Length of stay was significantly longer with OM than with ED (p < 0.00001). Return to work time was significantly longer in OM than with ED (p = 0.001). Postoperative leg (p = 0.02) and back (p = 0.01) VAS scores, and Oswestry Disability Index scores (p = 0.006) at latest follow-up were significantly higher for OM than for ED. Serum creatine phosphokinase (p = 0.02) and C-reactive protein (p < 0.00001) levels on postoperative day 1 were significantly higher with OM than with ED.

Conclusions: Outcomes of TM and OM for lumbar disc herniations are largely equivalent. While this analysis demonstrated that several clinical variables were significantly improved in patients undergoing ED when compared with OM, the magnitude of many of these differences was small and of uncertain clinical relevance, and several of the included studies were retrospective and subject to a high risk of bias. Further high-quality prospective studies are needed before definitive conclusions can be drawn regarding the comparative efficacy of the various surgical treatments for lumbar disc herniations.

Citing Articles

Access Pain During Transforaminal Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy for Foraminal or Extraforaminal Disc Herniation.

Ahn Y, Choi J, Lee S Diagnostics (Basel). 2024; 14(20).

PMID: 39451660 PMC: 11508188. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics14202337.


Evaluating the efficacy of a cost-effective, fully three-dimensional-printed vertebra model for endoscopic spine surgery training for neurosurgical residents.

Akbulut B, Boluk M, Biceroglu H, Yurtseven T Asian Spine J. 2024; 18(5):630-638.

PMID: 39434230 PMC: 11538818. DOI: 10.31616/asj.2024.0288.


Development of a predictive model for 1-year postoperative recovery in patients with lumbar disk herniation based on deep learning and machine learning.

Chen Y, Lin F, Wang K, Chen F, Wang R, Lai M Front Neurol. 2024; 15:1255780.

PMID: 38919973 PMC: 11197993. DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2024.1255780.


Does obesity and varying body mass index affect the clinical outcomes and safety of biportal endoscopic lumbar decompression? A comparative cohort study.

Olson T, Upfill-Brown A, Adejuyigbe B, Bhatia N, Lee Y, Hashmi S Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2024; 166(1):246.

PMID: 38831229 PMC: 11147858. DOI: 10.1007/s00701-024-06110-1.


Lumbar percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy: a retrospective survey on the first 172 adult patients treated in Denmark.

Terkelsen J, Hundsholt T, Bjarkam C Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2024; 166(1):155.

PMID: 38538955 PMC: 10973006. DOI: 10.1007/s00701-024-06038-6.