Microdiskectomy versus Endoscopic Diskectomy
Since the first diskectomy was performed in 1934, major advances have been made in the understanding of the regional anatomy and pathophysiology of lumbar disk herniation. In addition, major technological advances in image intensification and materials engineering have allowed surgeons to perform lumbar diskectomy through increasingly limited exposures: In an era of increased cost containment, minimally invasive procedures are being emphasized to provide equivalent or superior results while minimizing perioperative morbidity and its resultant costs to insurers and to society as a whole. Although currently somewhat limited, endoscopic diskectomy may provide a superior alternative to conventional microdiskectomy.
KeywordsObesity Dian Fluoro
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References and Recommended Reading
- 2.Burman MS: Myeloscopy or direct visualization of the spinal canal and its contents.J Bone Joint Surg1931, 13:695–696Google Scholar
- 3.Pool JL: Direct visualization of dorsal nerve roots of cauda equina by means of myeloscope.Arch Neurol Psychiatry1938, 39:1308–1312Google Scholar
- 4.Hijikata S, Yamagishi N, Nakayama T,et al.: Percutaneous discectomy: A new treatment method for lumbar disc herniation. Journal of Toden Hospital 1975, 5:5Google Scholar
- 5.Kambin P, Gellman H: Percutaneous lateral discectomy of the lumbar spine: Apreliminary report.Clin Orthop1983, 174:127–132Google Scholar
- 7.Mathews HH: Transforaminal endoscopic microdiscectomy.Neurosurg Clin North Am1996, 7(1):59–63Google Scholar
- 8.Onik G, Maroon JC, Davis GW: Automated percutaneous discectomy: A prospective multi-institutional study.Neurosurgery1990, 2:228–232Google Scholar
- 14.Surgical Technique: MEDTM System [introducer set]. Memphis: Sofamor Danek Group; 1996Google Scholar
- 18.Mayer HM, Brock M: Complications of percutaneous diskectomy. In Complications of Spinal Surgery. Neurosurgical Topics. Edited by Tarlov EC. Park Ridge, IL: American Association of Neurological Surgeons; 1991:115–127Google Scholar