Tubular Diskectomy vs Conventional Microdiskectomy for Sciatica A Randomized Controlled Trial

被引:170
作者
Arts, Mark P. [1 ,2 ]
Brand, Ronald [3 ]
van den Akker, M. Elske [5 ]
Koes, Bart W. [4 ]
Bartels, Ronald H. M. A. [6 ]
Peul, Wilco C. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Med Ctr Haaglanden, Dept Neurosurg, NL-2512 VA The Hague, Netherlands
[2] Leiden Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Neurosurg, Leiden, Netherlands
[3] Leiden Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Med Stat & Bioinformat, Leiden, Netherlands
[4] Erasmus MC, Dept Gen Practice, Rotterdam, Netherlands
[5] Leiden Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Med Decis Making, Leiden, Netherlands
[6] Radboud Univ Nijmegen, Med Ctr, Dept Neurosurg, NL-6525 ED Nijmegen, Netherlands
来源
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION | 2009年 / 302卷 / 02期
关键词
LUMBAR DISC HERNIATION; LOW-BACK-PAIN; MICROENDOSCOPIC DISKECTOMY; CONSERVATIVE TREATMENT; LEARNING-CURVE; MICRODISCECTOMY; QUESTIONNAIRE; OUTCOMES;
D O I
10.1001/jama.2009.972
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
100201 [内科学];
摘要
Context Conventional microdiskectomy is the most frequently performed surgery for patients with sciatica due to lumbar disk herniation. Transmuscular tubular diskectomy has been introduced to increase the rate of recovery, although evidence is lacking of its efficacy. Objective To determine outcomes and time to recovery in patients treated with tubular diskectomy compared with conventional microdiskectomy. Design, Setting, and Patients The Sciatica Micro-Endoscopic Diskectomy randomized controlled trial was conducted among 328 patients aged 18 to 70 years who had persistent leg pain (>8 weeks) due to lumbar disk herniations at 7 general hospitals in the Netherlands from January 2005 to October 2006. Patients and observers were blinded during the follow-up, which ended 1 year after final enrollment. Interventions Tubular diskectomy (n = 167) vs conventional microdiskectomy (n = 161). Main Outcome Measures The primary outcome was functional assessment on the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RDQ) for sciatica (score range: 0-23, with higher scores indicating worse functional status) at 8 weeks and 1 year after randomization. Secondary outcomes were scores on the visual analog scale for leg pain and back pain (score range: 0-100 mm) and patient's self-report of recovery (measured on a Likert 7-point scale). Results Based on intention-to-treat analysis, the mean RDQ score during the first year after surgery was 6.2 (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.6 to 6.8) for tubular diskectomy and 5.4 (95% CI, 4.6 to 6.2) for conventional microdiskectomy (between-group mean difference, 0.8; 95% CI, -0.2 to 1.7). At 8 weeks after surgery, the RDQ mean (SE) score was 5.8 (0.4) for tubular diskectomy and 4.9 (0.5) for conventional microdiskectomy (between-group mean difference, 0.8; 95% CI, -0.4 to 2.1). At 1 year, the RDQ mean (SE) score was 4.7 (0.5) for tubular diskectomy and 3.4 (0.5) for conventional microdiskectomy (between-group mean difference, 1.3; 95% CI, 0.03 to 2.6) in favor of conventional microdisketomy. On the visual analog scale, the 1-year between-group mean difference in improvement was 4.2 mm (95% CI, 0.9 to 7.5 mm) for leg pain and 3.5 mm (95% CI, 0.1 to 6.9 mm) for back pain in favor of conventional microdiskectomy. At 1 year, 107 of 156 patients (69%) assigned to tubular diskectomy reported a good recovery vs 120 of 151 patients (79%) assigned to conventional microdiskectomy (odds ratio, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.35 to 0.99]; P = .05). Conclusions Use of tubular diskectomy compared with conventional microdiskectomy did not result in a statistically significant improvement in the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire score. Tubular diskectomy resulted in less favorable results for patient self-reported leg pain, back pain, and recovery. Trial Registration isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN51857546 JAMA. 2009;302(2):149-158
引用
收藏
页码:149 / 158
页数:10
相关论文
共 24 条
[1]
Management of sciatica due to lumbar disc herniation in the Netherlands: a survey among spine surgeons [J].
Arts, Mark P. ;
Peul, Wilco C. ;
Koes, Bart W. ;
Thomeer, Ralph T. W. M. .
JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-SPINE, 2008, 9 (01) :32-39
[2]
Cost-effectiveness of microendoscopic discectomy versus conventional open discectomy in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation: a prospective randomised controlled trial [ISRCTN51857546] [J].
Arts, MP ;
Peul, WC ;
Brand, R ;
Koes, BW ;
Thomeer, RT .
BMC MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDERS, 2006, 7 (1)
[3]
Outcome assessments in the evaluation of treatment of spinal disorders - Summary and general recommendations [J].
Bombardier, C .
SPINE, 2000, 25 (24) :3100-3103
[4]
VALIDATING THE SF-36 HEALTH SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE - NEW OUTCOME MEASURE FOR PRIMARY CARE [J].
BRAZIER, JE ;
HARPER, R ;
JONES, NMB ;
OCATHAIN, A ;
THOMAS, KJ ;
USHERWOOD, T ;
WESTLAKE, L .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1992, 305 (6846) :160-164
[5]
Lumbar microdiscectomy: subperiosteal versus transmuscular approach and influence on the early postoperative analgesic consumption [J].
Brock, Marko ;
Kunkel, Philip ;
Papavero, Luca .
EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2008, 17 (04) :518-522
[6]
Caspar W., 1977, Adv. Neurosurg, V4, P74
[7]
The visual analogue pain intensity scale: what is moderate pain in millimetres? [J].
Collins, SL ;
Moore, RA ;
McQuay, HJ .
PAIN, 1997, 72 (1-2) :95-97
[8]
Foley KT., 1997, TECH NEUROSURG, V3, P301
[9]
Westeinde Sciatica Trial:: randomized controlled study of bed rest and physiotherapy for acute sciatica [J].
Hofstee, DJ ;
Gijtenbeek, JMM ;
Hoogland, PH ;
van Houwelingen, HC ;
Kloet, A ;
Lötters, F ;
Tans, JTJ .
JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY, 2002, 96 (01) :45-49
[10]
A minimal clinically important difference was derived for the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire for low back pain [J].
Jordan, K ;
Dunn, KM ;
Lewis, M ;
Croft, P .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2006, 59 (01) :45-52