Treatment of Recurrent Disc Herniation: A Systematic Review

被引:47
作者
Drazin, Doniel [1 ]
Ugiliweneza, Beatrice [2 ]
Al-Khouja, Lutfi [1 ]
Yang, Dongyan [3 ]
Johnson, Patrick [4 ]
Kim, Terrence [5 ]
Boakye, Maxwell [2 ]
机构
[1] Cedars Sinai Med Ctr, Neurosurg, Los Angeles, CA 90048 USA
[2] Univ Louisville, Dept Neurosurg, Louisville, KY 40292 USA
[3] Univ Louisville, Dept Epidemiol & Populat Hlth, Louisville, KY 40292 USA
[4] Cedars Sinai Med Ctr, Dept Neurosurg, Los Angeles, CA 90048 USA
[5] Cedars Sinai Med Ctr, Deparment Orthoped, Los Angeles, CA 90048 USA
来源
CUREUS | 2016年 / 8卷 / 05期
关键词
recurrent disc herniation; recurrent lumbar disc herniation; spine; spinal fusion; revision fusion; minimally invasive lumbar fusion; interbody fusion; back pain;
D O I
10.7759/cureus.622
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 [临床医学]; 100201 [内科学];
摘要
Intervertebral disc herniation is one of the most common causes of back and extremity pain. The most commonly used surgical treatment is lumbar discectomy. About 0.5-25% go on to develop recurrent disc herniation (rDH) after a successful first discectomy. Currently, there aren't any guidelines to assist surgeons in determining which approach is most appropriate to treat rDH. A recent survey showed significant heterogeneity among surgeons regarding treatment options for rDH. It remains unclear which methods lead to better outcomes, as there are no comparative studies with a sufficient level of evidence. In this study, we aimed to perform a systematic review to compare treatment options for rDH and determine if one intervention provides better outcomes than the other; more specifically, whether outcome differences exist between discectomy alone and discectomy with fusion. We applied the PICOS (participants, intervention, comparison, outcome, study design) format to develop this systematic review through PubMed. Twenty-seven papers from 1978-2014 met our inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Nine papers reported outcomes after discectomy and seven of them showed good or excellent outcomes (70.60%-89%). Ten papers reported on minimally invasive discectomy. The percent change in visual analog scale (VAS) ranged from -50.77% to -86.57%, indicating an overall pain reduction. Four studies out of the ten reported good or excellent outcomes (81% to 90.2%). Three studies looked at posterolateral fusion. Three studies analyzed posterior lumbar interbody fusion. For one study, we found the VAS percentage change to be -46.02%. All reported good to excellent outcomes. Six studies evaluated the transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. All reported improvement in pain. Four used VAS, and we found the percent change to be -54% to -86.5%. The other two used the Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score, and we found the percent change to be 68.3% to 93.3%. We did not find enough evidence to support any significant difference in outcomes between discectomy alone and discectomy with fusion. The limitation of our study includes the lack of standardized outcomes reporting in the literature. However, reviewing the selected articles shows that fusion may have a greater improvement in pain compared to reoperation without fusion. Nonetheless, our study shows that further and more in-depth investigation is needed on the of treatment of rDH.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 57 条
[1]
Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy for recurrent disc herniation: Surgical technique, outcome, and prognostic factors of 43 consecutive cases [J].
Ahn, Y ;
Lee, SH ;
Park, WM ;
Lee, HY ;
Shin, SW ;
Kang, HY .
SPINE, 2004, 29 (16) :E326-E332
[2]
Discectomy for primary and recurrent prolapse of lumbar intervertebral discs [J].
Ahsan, Kamrul ;
Najmus-Sakeb ;
Hossain, Alamgir ;
Khan, Shahidul Islam ;
Awwal, M. A. .
JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY, 2012, 20 (01) :7-10
[3]
RECURRENT LUMBAR DISC HERNIATION AFTER SINGLE-LEVEL LUMBAR DISCECTOMY: INCIDENCE AND HEALTH CARE COST ANALYSIS [J].
Ambrossi, Giannina L. Garces ;
McGirt, Matthew J. ;
Sciubba, Daniel M. ;
Witham, Timothy F. ;
Wolinsky, Jean-Paul ;
Gokaslan, Ziya L. ;
Long, Donlin M. .
NEUROSURGERY, 2009, 65 (03) :574-578
[4]
Microdiscectomy for recurrent L5-S1 disc herniation [J].
Berjano, Pedro ;
Pejrona, Matteo ;
Damilano, Marco .
EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2013, 22 (12) :2915-2917
[5]
Surgical treatment of recurrent lumbar disc herniation by transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion [J].
Chen, Zhiming ;
Zhao, Jie ;
Liu, AiGang ;
Yuan, Jiandong ;
Li, Zhonghai .
INTERNATIONAL ORTHOPAEDICS, 2009, 33 (01) :197-201
[6]
Reoperation after lumbar disc surgery in two hundred and seven patients [J].
Cheng, Jiwei ;
Wang, Hongwei ;
Zheng, Wenjie ;
Li, Changqing ;
Wang, Jian ;
Zhang, Zhengfeng ;
Huang, Bo ;
Zhou, Yue .
INTERNATIONAL ORTHOPAEDICS, 2013, 37 (08) :1511-1517
[7]
Ipsilateral recurrent lumbar disc herniation - A prospective, controlled study [J].
Cinotti, G ;
Roysam, GS ;
Eisenstein, SM ;
Postacchini, F .
JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-BRITISH VOLUME, 1998, 80B (05) :825-832
[8]
Recurrent lumbar disc herniation after discectomy: outcome of repeat discectomy [J].
Dai, LY ;
Zhou, Q ;
Yao, WF ;
Shen, L .
SURGICAL NEUROLOGY, 2005, 64 (03) :226-231
[9]
MICROSURGICAL REOPERATION FOLLOWING LUMBAR-DISK SURGERY - TIMING, SURGICAL FINDINGS, AND OUTCOME IN 92 PATIENTS [J].
EBELING, U ;
KALBARCYK, H ;
REULEN, HJ .
JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY, 1989, 70 (03) :397-404
[10]
El Shazly Ayman A, 2013, Asian J Neurosurg, V8, P139, DOI 10.4103/1793-5482.121685