-
European Spine Journal : Official... Jan 2024Calcified lumbar disc herniation (CLDH) poses surgical challenges due to longstanding disease and adherence of herniated disc to the surrounding neural structures. The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Calcified lumbar disc herniation (CLDH) poses surgical challenges due to longstanding disease and adherence of herniated disc to the surrounding neural structures. The data regarding outcomes after surgery for CLDH are limited. This review was conducted to analyse the surgical techniques, perioperative findings and the postoperative clinical outcomes after surgery for CLDH.
METHODS
PRISMA guidelines were followed whilst conducting this systematic review and meta-analysis. The literature review was conducted on 3 databases (PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL). After thorough screening of all search results, 9 studies were shortlisted from which data were extracted and statistical analysis was done. Pooled analysis was done to ascertain the perioperative and postoperative outcomes after surgery for CLDH. Additional comparative analysis was done compared to CLDH with non-calcified lumbar disc herniation (NCLDH) cases.
RESULTS
We included 9 studies published between 2016 and 2022 in our review, 8 of these were retrospective. A total of 356 cases of CLDH were evaluated in these studies with a male preponderance (56.4%). Mean operative time was significantly lower in NCLDH cases compared to CLDH cases. The mean estimated blood loss showed a negative correlation with the percentage of males. Satisfactory clinical outcomes were observed in majority of patients. The risk of bias of the included studies was moderate to high.
CONCLUSION
Surgical difficulties in CLDH cases leads to increase in operative time compared to NCLDH. Good clinical outcomes can be obtained with careful planning; the focus of surgery should be on decompression of the neural structures rather than disc removal.
Topics: Humans; Male; Intervertebral Disc Displacement; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome; Lumbar Vertebrae; Diskectomy; Diskectomy, Percutaneous
PubMed: 37659048
DOI: 10.1007/s00586-023-07914-y -
Spine Feb 2024Systematic review and meta-analysis. (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE
Using a network meta-analysis (NMA), this study aimed to compare the risks of C5 palsy after three different procedures of anterior cervical decompression.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA
C5 palsy is a well-known complication affecting the quality of life after anterior procedures. Due to the limited evidence on the various procedures available, we evaluate the basis for selection to prevent palsy and achieve maximal decompression in cases spanning 3-6 levels.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We conducted a comprehensive search for C5 palsy and complications after 3representative procedures, including anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF), and their combination (hybrid), involving 3 to 6 intervertebral levels. The incidence of C5 palsy was compared using a NMA.
RESULTS
We identified 1655 patients in 11 studies who met inclusion criteria. Sixty-nine patients (4.2%) developed delayed C5 palsies. The incidences among ACDF, ACCF, and hybrid cases were 2.3% (16/684, 95% CI: 1.4% to 3.8%), 6.4% (39/613, 95% CI: 4.7% to 8.6%), and 3.9% (14/358, 95% CI: 2.3% to 6.5%), respectively ( P < 0.01). A NMA was performed for 15 pairwise comparisons across the 3 procedure arms: ACDF versus hybrid, 7/232 (3.0%) versus 11/234 (4.7%); hybrid versus ACCF, 14/301 (4.3%) versus 18/224 (8.0%); ACCF versus ACDF, 38/523 (7.8%) versus 16/619 (2.6%). Compared with ACDF, the risk of C5 palsy was significantly higher in ACCF (odds ratio: 2.72, 95% CI: 1.47 to 5.01), whereas ACDF versus hybrid did not significantly differ in risk (odds ratio: 1.56, 95% CI: 0.68 to 3.60).
CONCLUSION
We determined that ACCF was associated with a higher risk of postoperative C5 palsy than ACDF in cases spanning 3 to 6 intervertebral levels. If practicable, ACDF surgery may be an appropriate choice for cases requiring anterior decompression of 3 to 6 levels.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level III.
Topics: Humans; Cervical Vertebrae; Decompression, Surgical; Diskectomy; Network Meta-Analysis; Paralysis; Quality of Life; Retrospective Studies; Spinal Fusion; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37942814
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000004865 -
Turkish Neurosurgery 2024To assess, and to compare the efficacy of anterior endoscopic cervical discectomy (AECD) and anterior cervical discectomy with fusion (ACDF).
AIM
To assess, and to compare the efficacy of anterior endoscopic cervical discectomy (AECD) and anterior cervical discectomy with fusion (ACDF).
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Major databases, registries, and other relevant material were screened for prospective trials directly comparing AECD and ACDF. No restrictions were imposed. Meta-analysis was not conducted due to high heterogeneity.
RESULTS
After screening a total of 1339 articles, 2 studies enrolling 225 patients were included. One of these is a randomizedcontrolled- trial, including 120 patients, with a 14% lost to follow-up, showing no statistically significant differences in clinical outcomes according to the visual analogue scale (VAS) of the neck/arm and the North American Spine Society criteria regarding pain/neurological status. Radiological follow-up showed no adjacent-segment disease, with both groups presenting a statistically non-significant progression of a pre-existing adjacent-disc degeneration, and no difference in kyphosis. Recurrence was registered in 7.4% and 6.1% of patients who underwent AECD and ACDF, respectively. No statistically apparent differences in complications were observed. The second is a cohort study, including 135 patients with a 14.8% lost to follow-up. No statistically significant difference was found in clinical outcomes assessed using the VAS of the neck/arm and the neck disability index. No radiological data were provided. Recurrence was reported in 4% and 2% of patients in the AECD and ACDF group, respectively. No remarkable differences in complications were reported. Both studies reported that the surgical time was statistically shorter in AECD.
CONCLUSION
A definitive conclusion cannot be drawn. Single-level AECD seems to have results equivalent to ACDF, presenting even some benefits. Technical limitations combined with required surgical skills and experience should be considered. We recommend cautious employment in anticipation of future updates.
Topics: Humans; Diskectomy; Spinal Fusion; Cervical Vertebrae; Endoscopy; Treatment Outcome; Intervertebral Disc Degeneration
PubMed: 38650569
DOI: 10.5137/1019-5149.JTN.44424-23.2 -
British Journal of Neurosurgery Oct 2023Report of three patients undergoing lumbar epidural schwannoma tumourectomy. Percutaneous endoscopy has been routinely used in the treatment of disk herniation but has...
STUDY DESIGN
Report of three patients undergoing lumbar epidural schwannoma tumourectomy. Percutaneous endoscopy has been routinely used in the treatment of disk herniation but has not been reported in the management of intraspinal tumours.
METHODS
Three patients diagnosed with schwannoma by imaging and pathological examination underwent percutaneous full endoscopic tumourectomy. A 5-mm incision was made, the puncture needle passed through the skin, subcutaneous tissue and the deep fascia and vertebral muscles to the intervertebral foramen area. Next, a working cannula was inserted into the lesion area. Foraminotomy was completed by trephine and microscopic power drill if the foramen was stenosed. Tumour tissue was totally removed piecemeal. After probing the nerve foramen and the nerve root satisfactorily, the working cannula was removed and the incision sutured.
RESULTS
Three patients were operated successfully. Symptoms recovered in all cases and no complication or recurrence was found on follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS
This case report presents a new technique for non-infiltrating extradural lumbar tumour treatment, demonstrating feasibility and safety of percutaneous full endoscopic lumbar tumourectomy.
Topics: Humans; Treatment Outcome; Diskectomy, Percutaneous; Lumbar Vertebrae; Spinal Puncture; Endoscopy; Intervertebral Disc Displacement; Neurilemmoma; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 33739902
DOI: 10.1080/02688697.2020.1821173