Lumbar Sequestrectomy Research Articles

Hypericum perforatum to Improve Postoperative Pain Outcome After Monosegmental Spinal Sequestrectomy (HYPOS): Results of a Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial.

Introduction: Patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery often suffer from severe radicular postoperative pain leading to the prescription of high-dose opioids. In Integrative Medicine, Hypericum perforatum is known as a remedy to relieve pain caused by nerve damage. Objectives: This trial investigated whether homeopathic Hypericum leads to a reduction in postoperative pain and a decrease in pain medication compared with placebo. Design: Randomized double blind, monocentric, placebo controlled clinical trial. Settings/Location: Department of Neurosurgery, Community Hospital Herdecke. Subjects: Inpatients undergoing lumbar sequestrectomy surgery. Interventions: Homeopathic treatment versus placebo in addition to usual pain management. Outcomes Measures: Primary endpoint was pain relief measured with a visual analog scale. Secondary endpoints were the reduction of inpatient postoperative analgesic medication and change in sensory and affective pain perception. Results: Baseline characteristics were comparable between the groups. Pain perception between baseline and day 3 did not significantly differ between the study arms. With respect to pain medication, total morphine equivalent doses did not differ significantly. However, a statistical trend and a moderate effect (d = 0.432) in the decrease of pain medication consumption in favor of the Hypericum group was observed. Conclusion: This is the first trial of homeopathy that evaluated the efficacy of Hypericum C200 after lumbar monosegmental spinal sequestrectomy. Although no significant differences between the groups could be shown, we found that patients who took potentiated Hypericum in addition to usual pain management showed lower consumption of analgesics. Further investigations, especially with regard to pain medication, should follow to better classify the described analgesic reduction. Clinical Trial Registration Number: German Clinical Trials Register No: DRKS00007913.

THE NATURAL HISTORY OF PATIENTS WITH ACUTE DISC HERNIATION: A SERIES OF 150 CASES

ABSTRACT Objective This study aims to analyze the characteristics of patients with acute lumbar/sciatic disc herniation who underwent conservative, pain block procedures and surgical treatment, in order to better understand the natural history of herniations and their surgical indications, as well as the impact of hernia volume. Methods We analyzed 150 patients with a diagnosis of acute lumbar disc herniation. The treatments considered were: conservative, infiltration/pain block procedures and microdiscectomy. For seven patients who were surgically treated, the lumbar sequestrectomy volume was submitted to pathological analysis. Results Of the 150 patients, 80% were treated conservatively; 15.31% were treated with pain block procedures and 4.66% underwent microdiscectomy. The mean age of the surgical group was 42.5 years, and 57.1% of the patients were men. Most of the hernias were at L5-S1 (55.5%), and 77.7% were on the left side. All patients had presented significant lumbar pain or sciatica for a long period prior to the surgery. The Lasègue sign was present in all patients. Of the total number of patients, 85.7% presented hypoesthesia and 42.8% presented focal motor deficits, among other findings. The mean hernia volume was 9.6 cm3. Conclusions Unresponsiveness to conservative treatment is an important indication for surgery. The clinical manifestations in patients with a lumbar/sciatic hernia can be very diverse, as can the disc herniation volume, so these are not good indicators for surgery. Level of evidence IV; Case series

Implementation of Transforaminal Endoscopic Lumbar Sequestrectomy in a German University Hospital Setting: A Long and Rocky Road.

Microsurgical diskectomy/sequestrectomy is the standard procedure for the surgical treatment of lumbar disk herniations. The transforaminal endoscopic sequestrectomy technique is a minimally invasive alternative with potential advantages such as minimal blood loss and tissue damage, as well as early mobilization of the patient. We report the implementation of this technique in a German university hospital setting. One single surgeon performed transforaminal endoscopic sequestrectomy from February 2013 to July 2016 for lumbar disk herniation in 44 patients. Demographic as well as perioperative, clinical, and radiologic data were analyzed from electronic records. Furthermore, we investigated complications, intraoperative change of the procedure to microsurgery, and reoperations. The postoperative course was analyzed using the Macnab criteria, supplemented by a questionnaire for follow-up. Pre- and postoperative magnetic resonance imaging volumetric analyses were performed to assess the radiologic efficacy of the technique. Our study population had a median age of 52 years. The median follow-up was 15 months, and the median length of hospital stay was 4 days. Median duration of surgery was 100 minutes with a median blood loss of 50 mL. Surgery was most commonly performed at the L4-L5 level (63%) and in caudally migrated disk herniations (44%). In six patients, surgery was performed for recurrent disk herniations. The procedure had to be changed to conventional microsurgery in four patients. We observed no major complications. Minor complications occurred in six patients, and in four patients a reoperation was performed. Furthermore, a significantly lower Oswestry Disability Index score (p = 0.03), a lower Short Form 8 Health Survey (SF-8) score (p = 0.001), a lower visual analog scale (VAS) lower back pain score (p = 0.03) and VAS leg pain score (p = 0.0008) at the 12-month follow-up were observed in comparison with the preoperative examination. In MRI volumetry, we detected a median postoperative volume reduction of the disk herniation of 57.1% (p = 0.02). The transforaminal endoscopic sequestrectomy can be safely implemented in a university hospital setting in selected patients with primary and recurrent lumbar disk herniations, and it leads to good clinical and radiologic results. However, learning curve, caseload, and residents' microsurgical training requirements clearly affect the implementation process.

The influence of surface EMG-triggered multichannel electrical stimulation on sensomotoric recovery in patients with lumbar disc herniation: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial (RECO)

BackgroundIntervertebral disc degeneration is one of the most common reasons for chronic low back pain and sensomotoric deficits, often treated by lumbar sequestrectomy. Nevertheless, the prognostic factors relevant for time and quality of recovery, of the surgical procedure, relative to conservative treatment, remain controversial and require further investigation. Surface electrical stimulation (SES) may be an influential intervention, already showing positive impact on motor and sensory recovery in different patient groups. Since mechanisms of SES still remain unclear, further inquiry is needed.Methods/DesignThis is a prospective, monocentric, randomized, controlled clinical trial. A total of 80 adult patients suffering from a lumbar disc herniation (LDH; 40 treated surgically, 40 conservatively) are allocated in a ratio of 1:1. Patients in the treatment group will receive surface electromyography (EMG)-triggered electrical stimulation for eight weeks, whereas patients in the control group will not obtain any additional treatment. The primary outcome parameter is defined as the cold detection threshold (CDT), determined by quantitative sensory testing (QST), 24 months after intervention. Secondary outcome parameters include the inquiry of sensory nerve function by two-point discrimination and QST, the assessment of motor nerve function by manual muscle testing, and validated scales and scores. These include: the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) assessing the domains pain, back-specific function, work disability, and patient satisfaction; the EQ-5D investigating the patient’s generic health status; the painDETECT questionnaire (PD-Q) to identify neuropathic pain components; and the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) to assess severity of depression. Moreover, neurological status, pain medication usage, and blood samples (CRP, TNFα, IL-1β, IL-6) will be evaluated. Study data generation (study site) and data storage, processing, and statistical analysis are clearly separated.DiscussionThe results of the RECO study will detect the effect of EMG-triggered multichannel SES on the improvement of mechanical and thermal sensitivity and the effect on motor recovery and pain, associated with clinical and laboratory parameters. Furthermore, data comparing surgical and conservative treatment can be collected. This will hopefully allow treatment recommendations for patients with LDH accompanied by a sensomotoric deficit.Trial registrationISRCTN, ISRCTN12741173. Registered on 15 January 2017.

Preoperative sport improves the outcome of lumbar disc surgery: a prospective monocentric cohort study

A lumbar disc herniation resulting in surgery may be an incisive event in a patient’s everyday life. The patient’s recovery after sequestrectomy may be influenced by several factors. There is evidence that regular physical activity can lower pain perception and improve the outcome after surgery. For this purpose, we hypothesized that patients performing regular sports prior to lumbar disc surgery might have less pain perception and disability thereafter. Fifty-two participants with a single lumbar disc herniation confirmed on MRI treated by a lumbar sequestrectomy were included in the trial. They were categorized into two groups based on their self-reported level of physical activity prior to surgery: group NS, no regular physical activity and group S, with regular physical activity. Further evaluation included a detailed medical history, a physical examination, and various questionnaires: Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Beck-Depression-Inventory (BDI), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Core Outcome Measure Index (COMI), and the EuroQoL-5Dimension (EQ- 5D). Surgery had an excellent overall improvement of pain and disability (p < 0.005). The ODI, COMI, and EQ-5D differed 6 months after intervention (p < 0.05) favoring the sports group. Leg and back pain on VAS was also significantly less in group B than in group A, 12 months after surgery (p < 0.05). Preoperative regular physical activity is an important influencing factor for the overall satisfaction and disability after lumbar disc surgery. The importance of sports may have been underestimated for surgical outcomes.

Gender differences after lumbar sequestrectomy: a prospective clinical trial using quantitative sensory testing

BackgroundQuantitative sensory testing (QST) gained popularity to evaluate the time course of recovery in sensory dysfunction and the results of different treatment options. Concerning sex differences in lumbar spine surgery, female gender seems to play a major role as a negative prognostic factor in different spinal disorders. For this purpose, we hypothesised that there are also comparable differences in pain patterns in men and women after lumbar sequestrectomy using QST.MethodsWe applied the QST protocol of the German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain in 53 patients (21 women and 32 men) with a single lumbar disc herniation confirmed on MRI treated by a lumbar sequestrectomy. Further evaluation included a detailed medical history, a physical examination, and various questionnaires: Beck-Depression-Inventory, Oswestry Disability Index, Core Outcome Measure Index, painDETECT-Questionnaire and EQ-5D thermometer.ResultsOur analyses showed lower heat thresholds in females preoperatively, that adjusted to that of males 1 week postoperatively. Pressure pain thresholds were lower in women as well, but differed between genders throughout the study. Vibration perception deficits resolve earlier in female than in male patients. Both, women and men, had an excellent overall improvement, postoperatively.ConclusionOur results clearly revealed pre- and postoperative differences in pain perception between genders. These differences have to be taken into account in the evaluation of outcome between genders. Therefore, QST seems to be a good method to evaluate the time course of recovery after surgery.

The value of quantitative sensory testing in spine research

The improvement of pain and functionality is the major goal of a surgical intervention. Thus, the purpose of the present prospective study was to evaluate whether subjective sensory deficits in patients with lumbar radiculopathy caused by a lumbar disc herniation are related to clinical status, using several outcome scores and the quantitative sensory testing (QST) pre- and 12 months postoperatively. We applied the QST in 52 patients with a single lumbar disc herniation treated by lumbar sequestrectomy pre- and 12 months postoperatively. Further evaluation included numeric rating scale (NRS) for leg, EuroQoL-5D (EQ-5D), Core Outcome Measure Index (COMI), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) and PaindDetect questionnaire (PD-Q). Patients were then categorized into two groups based on their subjective recovery of sensory function. The patients’ self-assessment and QST were correlated with each other for the pre- and postoperative visit after 12 months. The two groups showed postoperative differences in mechanical and vibration detection threshold as well as in the postoperative PD-Q (p < 0.005). Multidimensional scores did not consistently match the QST parameters in patients with a lumbar disc herniation. Commonly used clinical scores in spine research show low or no correlation with QST. Nevertheless, mechanical thresholds seem to play an important role to detect and follow up a sensory deficit investigated by QST.

Improvement of sensory function after sequestrectomy for lumbar disc herniation: a prospective clinical study using quantitative sensory testing.

Previous studies have investigated sensory recovery in patients with lumbar disc herniation using rather subjective methods. There have been no reports on changes of sensory function in patients suffering from a preoperative sensory deficit using quantitative sensory testing (QST). The aims of this prospective study were (1) to assess the recovery of preoperative sensory dysfunction after lumbar sequestrectomy and (2) to quantify the strength of relationship between a sensory deficit and the patient's quality of life. We applied the QST protocol of the German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain (DFNS) in fifty-two patients with a single lumbar disc herniation confirmed on MRI treated by lumbar sequestrectomy. Further evaluation included a detailed medical history, a physical examination, numeric rating scale for leg, EQ-5D questionnaire, and thermometer. Disc surgery resulted in a significant reduction of leg pain and a significant gain of quality of life. Thermal, mechanical, and vibration perception thresholds showed an obvious side-to-side difference preoperatively (p<0.005). An early recovery of mechanical and vibration perception thresholds was detected, whereas cold perception needed more than 6months to recover (p<0.05). Quality of life was independent from perception thresholds, but correlated significantly with pain reduction. Our data clearly show that there is a subjective and quantifiable improvement in sensory dysfunction postoperatively. The current data suggest that a sensory dysfunction does not influence a patient's quality of life.

Is sequestrectomy a viable alternative to microdiscectomy? A systematic review of the literature.

Traditionally, lumbar discectomy involves removal of the free disc fragment followed by aggressive or conservative excision of the intervertebral disc. In selected patients, however, it is possible to remove only the free fragment or sequester without clearing the intervertebral disc space. However, there is some controversy about whether that approach is sufficient to prevent recurrent symptoms and to provide adequate pain relief. This systematic review was designed to pose two questions: (1) Does performing a sequestrectomy only without conventional microdiscectomy lead to an increased reherniation rate; and (2) is there a difference in the patient-reported levels of radicular pain? Systematic MEDLINE and EMBASE searches were carried out to identify all articles published in peer-reviewed journals reporting the outcomes of interest for conventional microdiscectomy versus sequestrectomy for lumbar disc herniation from L2 to the sacrum (Level III evidence and above); hand-searching of bibliographies was also performed. A minimum of Level II evidence was required with a followup rate of greater than 75%. Followup in all studies was from 18 to 86months. Seven studies met the inclusion criteria for this review. The studies were analyzed for operating time, hospital stay, pre- and postoperative visual analog scale, and reherniation rate. Patients in both the microdiscectomy and sequestrectomy groups showed comparable improvement of visual analog scale (VAS) score for leg pain. VAS score improvement ranged from 5.6 to 6.5 points in the microdiscectomy groups and 5.5 to 6.6 in the sequestrectomy group. The reherniation rate in the microdiscectomy group ranged from 2.3% to 11.8% and in the sequestrectomy groups from 2% to 12.5%. This review of the available literature suggests that, compared with conventional microdiscectomy, microsurgical lumbar sequestrectomy can achieve comparable reherniation rates and reduction in radicular pain when a small breach in the posterior fibrous ring is found intraoperatively.

Long term results of lumbar sequestrectomy versus aggressive microdiscectomy

It remains unknown whether aggressive microdiscectomy (AD) provides a better outcome than simple sequestrectomy (S) with little disc disruption for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation with radiculopathy. We compared the long term results for patients with lumbar disc herniation who underwent either AD or S. The patients were split into two groups: 85 patients who underwent AD in Group A and 40 patients who underwent S in Group B. The patients were chosen from a cohort operated on by the same surgeon using either of the two techniques between 2003 and 2008. The demographic characteristics were similar. The difference in complication rates between the two groups was not statistically significant. During the first 10days post-operatively, the Visual Analog Scale score for back pain was 4.1 in Group A and 2.1 in Group B, and the difference was statistically significant (p<0.005). The Oswestry Disability Index score was 11% in Group A and 19% in Group B at the last examination. The reherniation rate was 1.5% in Group A and 4.1% in Group B (p<0.005). We argue that reherniation rates are much lower over the long term when AD is used with microdiscectomy. AD increases back pain for a short time but does not change the long term quality of life. To our knowledge this is the first study with a very long term follow-up showing that reherniation is three times less likely after AD than S.

Prospective Comparative Study of Lumbar Sequestrectomy and Microdiscectomy

During microsurgical disc operation, usually a sequestrectomy and a nucleotomy are performed. Whether a nucleotomy is necessary in any case is disputed. The aim of this study is to examine this question on the basis of clinical results and to compare rates of recurrence between the two groups. A prospective analysis was performed in 100 patients with sequestrectomy and the first 100 consecutive patients with microdiscectomy out of a cohort of 1,245 patients, who were operated by six surgeons between 2003 and 2006. The study is designed with special emphasis on the actual pain status, the functional capacity and recurrence. Despite more comorbidities the hospitalization was significantly shorter in the sequestrectomy-treated group. This group revealed more favourable results on pain scales (VAS visual analogue scale). The percentage of back pain in the discectomy-treated group was significantly higher. This went along with a significantly higher consumption of painkillers. At follow-up (34 months after surgery on average), there were no differences in the activities of daily live, measured by patient's questionnaires (ODI Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire). Complete questionnaires were available for 46 of the sequestrectomy patients, and for 45 of the discectomy patients. Early reherniation occurred in two patients after discectomy and late reherniation in one patient after sequestrectomy. Sequestrectomy alone is a safe operative modality. Sequestrectomy does not seem to entail a higher rate of recurrences compared with microdiscectomy and the results are as favourable as or better than results after discectomy.

Recurrent sciatica due to periligamentous trapped epidural gas after spinal sequestrectomy

The authors describe the unusual case of a 50-year-old woman who suffered from sciatic pain due to periligamentous trapped epidural gas after lumbar sequestrectomy. The patient underwent removal of free herniated disc material via a translaminar approach through the L-5 lamina without discectomy. Four days later she suffered from recurrent pain, and neuroimaging studies revealed an epidural gas formation at the site of the sequestrectomy. After evacuation of the gas, her pain resolved. Postoperative intraspinal gas may be symptomatic in the rare case.

Outcome after lumbar sequestrectomy compared with microdiscectomy: a prospective randomized study

Microdiscectomy currently constitutes the standard treatment for herniated lumbar discs. Although limiting surgery to excision of fragments has occasionally been suggested, prospective data are lacking. Therefore, the objective of this study was to compare early outcome and recurrence rates after sequestrectomy and microdiscectomy. Eighty-four consecutive patients 60 years of age or younger who harbored free, subligamentary, or transanular herniated lumbar discs refractory to conservative treatment were randomized to one of two treatment groups. Intraoperative parameters and findings were documented as well as pre- and postoperative symptoms such as pain, Patient Satisfaction Index (PSI), Prolo Scale score, and Short Form (SF)-36 subscale results. Follow up of at least 12 months was available in 73 patients (87%). Preoperative intergroup symptoms did not differ significantly. Surgery was significantly shorter in the sequestrectomy-treated group. Overall, low-back pain and sciatica were drastically reduced in both groups and most sensorimotor deficits improved. At 4 to 6 months, SF-36 subscales and PSI scores showed a trend in favor of sequestrectomy, leaving 3% of patients unsatisfied compared with 18% of those treated with discectomy. Outcome according to the Prolo Scale was good or excellent in 76% of discectomy-treated patients and 92% of sequestrectomy-treated patients. Reherniation occurred in four patients after discectomy (10%) and two patients after sequestrectomy (5%) within 18 months. Sequestrectomy does not seem to entail a higher rate of early recurrences compared with microdiscectomy. Analysis of early outcome demonstrated a trend toward superior results when sequestrectomy is performed. Although long-term follow-up data are mandatory, sequestrectomy may be an advantageous alternative to standard microdiscectomy.

Long-term Outcome of 104 Patients after Lumbar Sequestrectomy According to Williams

OBJECTIVE The authors report the late outcome of 104 consecutive patients after Williams’ sequestrectomy for virgin lumbar disc herniation. METHODS The clinical records and the mailed questionnaires of 38 women and 66 men operated consecutively between March 1991 and November 1993 were analyzed retrospectively. In these 104 patients, 105 Williams’ sequestrectomies were performed. RESULTS The mean age at operation was 50.5 years (range, 23.2–86.7 yr), and follow-up ranged from 4.1 to 6.9 years (mean, 5.3 yr). Success rates, including excellent, good, and fair results, were 92.5%, 94.7%, and 93.3% for lumbalgia, radicular pain, and neurological dysfunction, respectively. Only a few patients did not improve or presented with worsened symptoms. Three of four patients with cauda equina syndrome recovered immediately after the intervention. There were eight (7.7%) minor postoperative complications, which were treated conservatively. Three women and three men (5.8%) underwent a revision procedure for a recurrent lumbar disc herniation at the same level after 0.4 to 3.1 years (mean, 1.8 yr). Two (1.9%) of these patients underwent further operations because of reherniation, and they required internal instrumentation eventually because of failed back surgery syndrome. CONCLUSION Williams’ conservative approach with sequestrectomy alone is a safe operative modality. It should be used whenever possible. As demonstrated in our series with a long follow-up time, the results are as favorable as or better than results after standard microsurgical lumbar discectomy with curettement of the interspace. Whether the incidence of failed back surgery syndrome can be reduced by this approach remains to be proved.