Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Advanced Scientific Considerations for Surgery in Patients with Lumbar Disk Herniation

  • Chapter
Advanced Concepts in Lumbar Degenerative Disk Disease

Abstract

This chapter discusses key aspects in the diagnosis, prognosis, and surgical treatment of lumbar disc herniation with persistent complaints. The importance of natural history, clinical assessments, and imaging with MRI is viewed with regard to decision for surgery. The appropriate wait and see time before indicating surgery is regarded in relation to the comparison of conservative treatment with surgery. Existing evidence shows that short-term improved outcome should be balanced against the surgical burden and associated risks. Further, comparative evidence between different surgical techniques shows no clear advantage of different techniques.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Deyo RA, Mirza SK. Trends and variations in the use of spine surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;443:139–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Verwoerd AJ, Peul WC, Willemsen SP, Koes BW, Vleggeert-Lankamp CL, El Barzouhi A, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of history taking to assess lumbosacral nerve root compression. Spine J. 2014;14(9):2028–37.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Hancock MJ, Koes B, Ostelo R, Peul W. Diagnostic accuracy of the clinical examination in identifying the level of herniation in patients with sciatica. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011;36(11):E712–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. van der Windt DA, Simons E, Riphagen II, Ammendolia C, Verhagen AP, Laslett M, et al. Physical examination for lumbar radiculopathy due to disc herniation in patients with low-back pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;2:CD007431.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Koes BW, van Tulder MW, Peul WC. Diagnosis and treatment of sciatica. BMJ. 2007;334(7607):1313–7.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Orde van Medisch Specialisten, ZonMw. Choosing wisely Netherlands Campaign. 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  7. El Barzouhi A, Vleggeert-Lankamp CL, Lycklama ANG, Van der Kallen BF, van den Hout WB, Verwoerd AJ, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging interpretation in patients with sciatica who are potential candidates for lumbar disc surgery. PLoS One. 2013;8(7):e68411.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. El Barzouhi A, Vleggeert-Lankamp CL, Nijeholt GJ, Van der Kallen BF, van den Hout WB, Koes BW, et al. Influence of low back pain and prognostic value of MRI in sciatica patients in relation to back pain. PLoS One. 2014;9(3):e90800.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Peul WC, Van Houwelingen HC, van den Hout WB, Brand R, Eekhof JA, Tans JT, et al. Surgery versus prolonged conservative treatment for sciatica. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(22):2245–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. El Barzouhi A, Vleggeert-Lankamp CL, Nijeholt GJ, Van der Kallen BF, van den Hout WB, Koes BW, et al. Predictive value of MRI in decision making for disc surgery for sciatica. J Neurosurg Spine. 2013;19(6):678–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. El Barzouhi A, Vleggeert-Lankamp CL, Nijeholt GJ, Van der Kallen BF, van den Hout WB, Jacobs WC, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in follow-up assessment of sciatica. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(11):999–1007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. El Barzouhi A, Vleggeert-Lankamp CL, Lycklama ANG, Van der Kallen BF, van den Hout WB, Koes BW, et al. Reliability of gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging findings and their correlation with clinical outcome in patients with sciatica. Spine J. 2014;14(11):2598–607.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Verwoerd AJ, Luijsterburg PA, Lin CW, Jacobs WC, Koes BW, Verhagen AP. Systematic review of prognostic factors predicting outcome in non-surgically treated patients with sciatica. Eur J Pain. 2013;17(8):1126–37.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Weber H. Lumbar disc herniation. A controlled, prospective study with ten years of observation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1983;8(2):131–40.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Osterman H, Seitsalo S, Karppinen J, Malmivaara A. Effectiveness of microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation: a randomized controlled trial with 2 years of follow-up. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006;31(21):2409–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Weinstein JN, Tosteson TD, Lurie JD, Tosteson AN, Hanscom B, Skinner JS, et al. Surgical vs nonoperative treatment for lumbar disk herniation: the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT): a randomized trial. JAMA. 2006;296(20):2441–50.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Buttermann GR. Treatment of lumbar disc herniation: epidural steroid injection compared with discectomy. A prospective, randomized study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86-A(4):670–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Jacobs WC, van Tulder M, Arts M, Rubinstein SM, van Middelkoop M, Ostelo R, et al. Surgery versus conservative management of sciatica due to a lumbar herniated disc: a systematic review. Eur Spine J. 2011;20(4):513–22.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Lequin MB, Verbaan D, Jacobs WC, Brand R, Bouma GJ, Vandertop WP, et al. Surgery versus prolonged conservative treatment for sciatica: 5-year results of a randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open. 2013;3(5).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Overdevest GM, Vleggeert-Lankamp CL, Jacobs WC, Brand R, Koes BW, Peul WC. Recovery of motor deficit accompanying sciatica-subgroup analysis of a randomized controlled trial. Spine J. 2014;14(9):1817–24.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Orde van Medisch Specialisten, Zorgonderzoek Nederland – Medische Wetenschappen. Choosing wisely Netherlands Campaign. 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  22. LUMC. Audiovisuele keuzehulp voor patiënten met een hernia in de onderrug (LRS). Audiovisual decision aids for patients with a herniated disc in the lower back 2012. www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkFIR42Rzy0.

  23. Caspar W. A new surgical procedure for lumbar disc herniation causing less damage through a microsurgical approach. In: Wullenweber R, Brocck M, Hamer J, editors. Advances in neurosurgery. Berlin: Springer; 1977. p. 74–7.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Yasargil M. Microsurgical operation of the herniated lumbar disc. In: Wullenweber R, Brocck M, Hamer J, editors. Advances in neurosurgery. Berlin: Springer; 1977. p. 81–4.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Williams RW. Microlumbar discectomy: a conservative surgical approach to the virgin herniated lumbar disc. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1978;3(2):175–82.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Foley K, Smith MM. Microendoscopic discectomy. Tech Neurosurg. 1997;3:301–7.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Greiner-Perth R, Bohm H, ElSaghir H, El Ghait A. The microscopic assisted percutaneous approach to posterior spine – a new minimally invasive procedure for treatment of spinal processes. Zentralbl Neurochir. 2002;63(1):7–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Tullberg T, Isacson J, Weidenhielm L. Does microscopic removal of lumbar disc herniation lead to better results than the standard procedure? Results of a one-year randomized study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1993;18(1):24–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Lagarrigue J, Chaynes P. Comparative study of disk surgery with or without microscopy. A prospective study of 80 cases. Neurochirurgie. 1994;40(2):116–20.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Henriksen L, Schmidt K, Eskesen V, Jantzen E. A controlled study of microsurgical versus standard lumbar discectomy. Br J Neurosurg. 1996;10(3):289–93.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Katayama Y, Matsuyama Y, Yoshihara H, Sakai Y, Nakamura H, Nakashima S, et al. Comparison of surgical outcomes between macro discectomy and micro discectomy for lumbar disc herniation: a prospective randomized study with surgery performed by the same spine surgeon. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2006;19(5):344–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Teli M, Lovi A, Brayda-Bruno M, Zagra A, Corriero A, Giudici F, et al. Higher risk of dural tears and recurrent herniation with lumbar micro-endoscopic discectomy. Eur Spine J. 2010;19(3):443–50.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Tureyen K. One-level one-sided lumbar disc surgery with and without microscopic assistance: 1-year outcome in 114 consecutive patients. J Neurosurg. 2003;99(3 Suppl):247–50.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Huang TJ, Hsu RW, Li YY, Cheng CC. Less systemic cytokine response in patients following microendoscopic versus open lumbar discectomy. J Orthop Res. 2005;23(2):406–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Hermantin FU, Peters T, Quartararo L, Kambin P. A prospective, randomized study comparing the results of open discectomy with those of video-assisted arthroscopic microdiscectomy. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1999;81(7):958–65.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Righesso O, Falavigna A, Avanzi O. Comparison of open discectomy with microendoscopic discectomy in lumbar disc herniations: results of a randomized controlled trial. Neurosurgery. 2007;61(3):545–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Shin DA, Kim KN, Shin HC, Yoon DH. The efficacy of microendoscopic discectomy in reducing iatrogenic muscle injury. J Neurosurg Spine. 2008;8(1):39–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Franke J, Greiner-Perth R, Boehm H, Mahlfeld K, Grasshoff H, Allam Y, et al. Comparison of a minimally invasive procedure versus standard microscopic discotomy: a prospective randomised controlled clinical trial. Eur Spine J. 2009;18(7):992–1000.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Ryang YM, Oertel MF, Mayfrank L, Gilsbach JM, Rohde V. Standard open microdiscectomy versus minimal access trocar microdiscectomy: results of a prospective randomized study. Neurosurgery. 2008;62(1):174–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Brock M, Kunkel P, Papavero L. Lumbar microdiscectomy: subperiosteal versus transmuscular approach and influence on the early postoperative analgesic consumption. Eur Spine J. 2008;17(4):518–22.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Arts MP, Brand R, van den Akker ME, Koes BW, Bartels RH, Peul WC. Tubular diskectomy vs conventional microdiskectomy for sciatica: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2009;302(2):149–58.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Mayer HM, Brock M. Percutaneous endoscopic discectomy: surgical technique and preliminary results compared to microsurgical discectomy. J Neurosurg. 1993;78(2):216–25.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. MacKay MA, Fischgrund JS, Herkowitz HN, Kurz LT, Hecht B, Schwartz M. The effect of interposition membrane on the outcome of lumbar laminectomy and discectomy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1995;20(16):1793–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Jensen TT, Asmussen K, Berg-Hansen EM, Lauritsen B, Manniche C, Vinterberg H, et al. First-time operation for lumbar disc herniation with or without free fat transplantation. Prospective triple-blind randomized study with reference to clinical factors and enhanced computed tomographic scan 1 year after operation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1996;21(9):1072–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Bernsmann K, Kramer J, Ziozios I, Wehmeier J, Wiese M. Lumbar micro disc surgery with and without autologous fat graft. A prospective randomized trial evaluated with reference to clinical and social factors. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2001;121(8):476–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Gambardella G, Gervasio O, Zaccone C, Puglisi E. Prevention of recurrent radicular pain after lumbar disc surgery: a prospective study. Acta Neurochir Suppl. 2005;92:151–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Richter HP, Kast E, Tomczak R, Besenfelder W, Gaus W. Results of applying ADCON-L gel after lumbar discectomy: the German ADCON-L study. J Neurosurg. 2001;95(2 Suppl):179–89.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. de Tribolet N, Porchet F, Lutz TW, Gratzl O, Brotchi J, van Alphen HA, et al. Clinical assessment of a novel antiadhesion barrier gel: prospective, randomized, multicenter, clinical trial of ADCON-L to inhibit postoperative peridural fibrosis and related symptoms after lumbar discectomy. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 1998;27(2):111–20.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Ronnberg K, Lind B, Zoega B, Gadeholt-Gothlin G, Halldin K, Gellerstedt M, et al. Peridural scar and its relation to clinical outcome: a randomised study on surgically treated lumbar disc herniation patients. Eur Spine J. 2008;17(12):1714–20.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Kim KD, Wang JC, Robertson DP, Brodke DS, BenDebba M, Block KM, et al. Reduction of leg pain and lower-extremity weakness for 1 year with Oxiplex/SP gel following laminectomy, laminotomy, and discectomy. Neurosurg Focus. 2004;17(1):ECP1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Fransen P. Reduction of postoperative pain after lumbar microdiscectomy with DuraSeal Xact Adhesion Barrier and Sealant System. Spine J: Off J N Am Spine Soc. 2010;10(9):751–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Ivanic GM, Pink PT, Schneider F, Stuecker M, Homann NC, Preidler KW. Prevention of epidural scarring after microdiscectomy: a randomized clinical trial comparing gel and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene membrane. Eur Spine J. 2006;15(9):1360–6.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Celik SE, Altan T, Celik S, Goksu K, Ince I, Kapran Z. Mitomycin protection of peridural fibrosis in lumbar disc surgery. J Neurosurg Spine. 2008;9(3):243–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Ozer AF, Oktenoglu T, Sasani M, Bozkus H, Canbulat N, Karaarslan E, et al. Preserving the ligamentum flavum in lumbar discectomy: a new technique that prevents scar tissue formation in the first 6 months postsurgery. Neurosurgery. 2006;59(1 Suppl 1):ONS126–33.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Mirzai H, Eminoglu M, Orguc S. Are drains useful for lumbar disc surgery? A prospective, randomized clinical study. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2006;19(3):171–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Thome C, Barth M, Scharf J, Schmiedek P. Outcome after lumbar sequestrectomy compared with microdiscectomy: a prospective randomized study. J Neurosurg Spine. 2005;2(3):271–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Barth M, Weiss C, Thome C. Two-year outcome after lumbar microdiscectomy versus microscopic sequestrectomy: part 1: evaluation of clinical outcome. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008;33(3):265–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Stadhouder A, Oner FC, Wilson KW, Vaccaro AR, Williamson OD, Verbout AJ, et al. Surgeon equipoise as an inclusion criterion for the evaluation of nonoperative versus operative treatment of thoracolumbar spinal injuries. Spine J. 2008;8(6):975–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Low Back Pain Working Group, ICHOM. The ICHOM standard set for low back pain. 2014.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Neurosurgery, Leiden University Medical Center, 9600, 2300, RC, Leiden, The Netherlands

    Wilco C. H. Jacobs PhD & Wilco C. Peul MD, PhD

  2. Medical Center Haaglanden, The Hague, The Netherlands

    Wilco C. Peul MD, PhD

Authors
  1. Wilco C. H. Jacobs PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wilco C. Peul MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wilco C. H. Jacobs PhD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Neurological and Spine Surgery, Hospital Samaritano, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil

    João Luiz Pinheiro-Franco

  2. Rothman Institute, Thomas Jefferson University Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA

    Alexander R. Vaccaro

  3. Cleveland Clinic Neurological Surgery, Cleveland, Ohio, USA

    Edward C. Benzel

  4. Schön Klinik München Harlaching FG Wirbelsäulenchirurgie, München, Germany

    H. Michael Mayer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Jacobs, W.C.H., Peul, W.C. (2016). Advanced Scientific Considerations for Surgery in Patients with Lumbar Disk Herniation. In: Pinheiro-Franco, J., Vaccaro, A., Benzel, E., Mayer, H. (eds) Advanced Concepts in Lumbar Degenerative Disk Disease. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-47756-4_17

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-47756-4_17

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-47755-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-47756-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation