Lumbar revision microdiscectomy in patients with recurrent lumbar disc herniation: A single-center prospective series

INTRODUCTION

Recurrent lumbar disc herniation (RLDH) following initial microdiscectomy is the most common cause for reoperations.[7] Notably, revision for RLDH is more complex and challenging, thus typically warranting increased exposure offered by more “open” aggressive discectomy (AD). This study evaluated the risk factors for RLDH and clinical outcomes for 22 patients who originally underwent lumbar microdiscectomy followed by secondary AD for RLDH.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

With IRB approval, we prospectively studied outcomes for 22 patients who originally underwent microdiscectomies, but secondarily whose RLDH were managed with 19 AD versus 2 simple excisions of extruded fragments (2014 and 2019) [Table 1]. Patients all underwent X-ray and MR studies to define RLDH. Outcome criteria included: the visual analog scale (VAS; low back/radicular pain) and the Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) Scores.[2] Nineteen primary operations were performed by a single surgeon, while three were transferred from other institutions [Figure 1]. Clinical demographic data, the average follow-up duration (28.8 mos.: range 24-70), and level of RLDH were studied (e.g., L4-5 [12 patients; 54.54%] and L5-S1 levels [10 patients; 45.45%]) [Table 2].

Table 1:: Inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Close

Figure 1:: Primary discectomy done on January 11, 2014 at L 4-5 level of 46-year-old man. (a) Dynamic X-ray shows no instability (b), and (c,d) sagittal and axial view of T2W magnetic resonance imaging shows disc herniation.

Export to PPT

Table 2:: Demographic profile of the patients with revision discectomy in RLDH (n=22).

RESULTS

The operative time for secondary AD was 95.0 ± 9.0 min (range 65–125 min), the mean blood loss 85 ml (range, 70–150 ml), and average postoperative hospital stay was 5 days (range, 4–8 day). The mean VASs and JOA scores were significantly improved postoperatively [Tables 3 and 4]. Surgical results were excellent in 6 (27.27%), good in 14 (63.64%), and fair in 2 (9.09%) patients. The JOA mean recovery score was 88.8 (±32.25), while the average satisfactory JOA rate was 86.36%. Six (27.27%) patients developed postoperative complications: dural tear (one patient), superficial wound infection (two patients), transient neurological deficit (one patient), postoperative instability (one patient), and additional recurrent herniation (one patient).

Table 3:: Clinical outcomes of patients with revision discectomy in RLDH (n=22).

Table 4:: Clinical outcomes of patients with revision discectomy in RLDH (n=22).

DISCUSSION

Surgical options for RLDH

The main two surgical options for RLDH include revision lumbar discectomy (e.g., repeat microdiscectomy vs. AD) [Figure 2] and/ or instrumented fusion. Notably, however, revision surgery is much more difficult than primary surgery due to perineural scarring.[2] Although recent papers document that both approaches may be equally efficacious for RLDH cases, AD exposures offer better visualization and lesser rate of complications (e.g., CSF leaks, infection, retained disc, and reoperation), including instability (e.g., more restricted bony exposure).[4]

Close

Figure 2:: Revision discectomy is done of the same patient on February 20, 2018 after 4 years. (a-d) shows recurrence disc herniation in sagittal and axial magnetic resonance imaging in T2W image, (e) and (f) preoperative dynamic X-ray in lateral position showing no instability.

Export to PPT

CONCLUSION

The management of the RLDH requires following original microdiscectomy that warrants AD for better visualization and safer operative dissection (e.g., to more readily deal with postoperative scar formation).