Analysis of Revision Surgery of Microsurgical Lumbar Discectomy
10.4184/asj.2018.12.1.140
- Author:
Taku INADA
1
;
Sei NISHIDA
;
Taigo KAWAOKA
;
Toshiyuki TAKAHASHI
;
Junya HANAKITA
Author Information
1. Department of Spinal Disorders Center, Fujieda Heisei Memorial Hospital, Fujieda, Shizuoka, Japan. inada@kuhp.kyoto-u.ac.jp
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Diskectomy standards;
Diskectomy adverse effects;
Reoperation;
Pathologic processes;
Dura mater, injuries
- MeSH:
Cicatrix;
Diskectomy;
Fibrosis;
Humans;
Intervertebral Disc Displacement;
Lacerations;
Operative Time;
Pathologic Processes;
Pathology;
Recurrence;
Reoperation;
Retrospective Studies;
Shoulder
- From:Asian Spine Journal
2018;12(1):140-146
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective study. PURPOSE: Our objectives were to determine the association between the pathological changes of disc herniation and the interval between primary and revision surgeries and to investigate the frequency and site of the dural laceration in the primary and revision surgeries. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Among 382 patients who underwent microsurgical lumbar discectomy, we investigated 29 who underwent revision surgery to analyze recurrent herniation pathologies and complications to determine the manner in which lumbar disc herniation can be more efficiently managed. METHODS: Of 29 patients, 22 had recurrent disc herniation at the same level and site. The pathological changes associated with compression factors were classified into the following two types depending on intraoperative findings: (1) true recurrence and (2) minor recurrence with peridural fibrosis (>4 mm thickness). The sites of dural laceration were examined using video footage and operative records. RESULTS: The pathological findings and days between the primary and revision surgeries showed no statistical difference (p=0.14). Analysis of multiple factors, revealed no significant difference between the primary and revision surgery groups with regard to hospital days (p=0.23), blood loss (p=0.99), and operative time (p=0.67). Dural lacerations obviously increased in the revision surgery group (1.3% vs. 16.7%, p < 0.01) and were mainly located near the herniated disc in the primary surgery group and near the root shoulder in the revision surgery group, where severe fibrosis and adhesion were confirmed. To avoid dural laceration during revision surgery, meticulous decompressive manipulation must be performed around the root sleeve. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend that meticulous epidural dissection around the scar formation must be performed during revision surgery to avoid complications.
