Postoperative MRI findings 5 years after lumbar microdiscectomy
Lumbar microdiscectomy is a common procedure with satisfactory results; however, postoperative events like progressive adjacent level degeneration and perineural fibrosis can contribute to long-term pain. The purpose of the study was to evaluate MRI changes 5 years after lumbar microdiscectomy and assess their association with clinical parameters.
Materials and methods
A prospective study enrolling 61 patients who underwent microdiscectomy. Changes between preoperative and postoperative MRI findings were recorded, and these findings were tested for associations with demographic, clinical and perioperative parameters. The measured imaging parameters were degeneration of the operated and adjacent discs and endplates, morphology of the disc herniation, facet joints arthritis and the presence of postoperative perineural fibrosis.
Statistically significant differences were found between preoperative and postoperative morphology of the operated disc, facet joints arthritis and degeneration of the operated and caudal adjacent disc. There were no differences between preoperative and postoperative disc degeneration of the superior adjacent disc and in degeneration of the operated and adjacent endplates. Postoperatively perineural fibrosis was common; however, thecal sac compression and nerve root impingement were reduced. Age at the time of surgery was the only parameter associated with postoperative changes.
Five years after microdiscectomy, several postoperative MRI changes including operated disc’s morphology, facet joints arthritis and degeneration of the operated and caudal adjacent disc were shown. Taking into consideration that participants were on average middle-aged, these changes could be attributed not only to the impact of the surgery but also to the natural history of lumbar spine degeneration.
KeywordsLumbar microdiscectomy MRI changes Degeneration Perineural fibrosis
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 1.McGirt MJ, Eustacchio S, Varga P, Vilendecic M, Trummer M, Gorensek M, Ledic D, Carragee EJ (2009) A prospective cohort study of close interval computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging after primary lumbar discectomy. Factors associated with recurrent disc herniation and disc height loss. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34(19):2044–2051CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Fardon DF, Milette PC (2001) Nomenclature and classification of lumbar disc pathology. Recommendations of the combined task forces of the North American Spine Society, American Society of Spine Radiology, and American Society of Neuroradiology. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 26(5):E93–E113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Dalgic A, Yildirim AE, Okay O, Uckun O, Alagoz F, Polat O, Akdag R, Nacar O, Daglioglu E, Belen D (2015) Initial discectomy associated with aging lead to adjacent disc disease and recurrence. Turk Neurosurg 26(4):595–600Google Scholar
- 15.Swartz KR, Trost TG (2003) Recurrent lumbar disc herniation. Neurosurg Focus 15(3):E10Google Scholar
- 16.Park YK, Kim JH, Chung HS (2002) Outcome analysis of patients after ligament-sparing microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation. Neurosurg Focus 13:E4Google Scholar
- 22.Brinjikji W, Luetmer PH, Comstock B, Bresnahan BW, Chen LE, Deyo RA, Halabi S, Turner JA, Avins AL, James K, Wald JT, Kallmes DF, Jarvik JG (2015) Systematic literature review of imaging features of spinal degeneration in asymptomatic populations. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 36(4):811–816CrossRefGoogle Scholar