Literature DB >> 14752624

Failed back surgery syndrome: the role of symptomatic segmental single-level instability after lumbar microdiscectomy.

B Schaller1.   

Abstract

Segmental instability represents one of several different factors that may cause or contribute to the failed back surgery syndrome after lumbar microdiscectomy. As segmental lumbar instability poses diagnostic problems by lack of clear radiological and clinical criteria, only little is known about the occurrence of this phenomenon following primary microdiscectomy. Retrospectively, the records of 2,353 patients were reviewed according to postoperative symptomatic segmental single-level instability after lumbar microdiscectomy between 1989 and 1997. Progressive neurological deficits increased (mean of 24 months; SD: 12, range 1-70) after the initial surgical procedure in 12 patients. The mean age of the four men and eight women was 43 years (SD: 6, range 40-77). The main symptoms and signs of secondary neurological deterioration were radicular pain in 9 of 12 patients, increased motor weakness in 6 of 12 patients and sensory deficits in 4 of 12 patients. All 12 symptomatic patients had radiological evidence of segmental changes correlating with the clinical symptoms and signs. All but one patient showed a decrease in the disc height greater than 30% at the time of posterior spondylodesis compared with the preoperative images before lumbar microdiscectomy. All patients underwent secondary laminectomy and posterior lumbar sponylodesis. Postoperatively, pain improved in 8 of 9 patients, motor weakness in 3 of 6 patients, and sensory deficits in 2 of 4 patients. During the follow-up period of 72+/-7 months, one patient required a third operation to alleviate spinal stenosis at the upper end of the laminectomy. Patients with secondary segmental instability following microdiscectomy were mainly in their 40s. Postoperative narrowing of the intervertebral space following lumbar microdiscectomy is correlated to the degree of intervertebral disc resection. It can therefore be concluded that (1) patients in their 40s are prone to postoperative narrowing of the intervertebral disc space and hence subsequent intervertebral instability and (2) that a small extent of intervertebral disc resection and preservation of the "segmental frame" may be beneficial in those patients. The present study demonstrated for the first time that the degree of extensive operative techniques in microdiscectomy increased the risk of subsequent segmental instability. In addition, narrowing of the intervertebral space of more than 30% represents a clear radiological sign of segmental instability.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14752624      PMCID: PMC3468142          DOI: 10.1007/s00586-003-0632-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  25 in total

1.  Ten- to 15-year outcome of surgery for lumbar disc herniation: radiographic instability and clinical findings.

Authors:  R Padua; S Padua; E Romanini; L Padua; E de Santis
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Treatment of syringomyelia after posttraumatic paraparesis or tetraparesis.

Authors:  B Schaller; T Mindermann; O Gratzl
Journal:  J Spinal Disord       Date:  1999-12

3.  Intraoperative measurement of lumbar spinal instability.

Authors:  S Ebara; T Harada; N Hosono; M Inoue; M Tanaka; Y Morimoto; K Ono
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  The importance of preserving disc structure in surgical approaches to lumbar disc herniation.

Authors:  J Mochida; K Nishimura; T Nomura; E Toh; M Chiba
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1996-07-01       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Posterior lumbar interbody fusion. A biomechanical comparison, including a new threaded cage.

Authors:  D S Brodke; J C Dick; D N Kunz; R McCabe; T A Zdeblick
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1997-01-01       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Experimental instability in the lumbar spine.

Authors:  A M Kaigle; S H Holm; T H Hansson
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1995-02-15       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  A biomechanical definition of spinal segmental instability taking personal and disc level differences into account.

Authors:  M Ito; S Tadano; K Kaneda
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  Microsurgical anatomy of the lateral approach to extraforaminal lumbar disc herniations.

Authors:  H J Reulen; A Müller; U Ebeling
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 4.654

9.  Clinical instability of the lumbar spine after microdiscectomy.

Authors:  E Kotilainen; S Valtonen
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 2.216

10.  Clinical validation of functional flexion-extension roentgenograms of the lumbar spine.

Authors:  J Dvorák; M M Panjabi; J E Novotny; D G Chang; D Grob
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1991-08       Impact factor: 3.468

View more
  21 in total

Review 1.  Role of lumbar interspinous distraction on the neural elements.

Authors:  Alex Alfieri; Roberto Gazzeri; Julian Prell; Christian Scheller; Jens Rachinger; Christian Strauss; Andreas Schwarz
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2012-05-02       Impact factor: 3.042

2.  Controversies in failed back surgery syndrome.

Authors:  B Schaller
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-10-25       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 3.  The Michel Benoist and Robert Mulholland yearly European Spine Journal Review. A survey of the "surgical and research" articles in the European Spine Journal, 2004.

Authors:  Robert C Mulholland
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-01-28       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Results of instrumented posterolateral fusion in failed back surgery.

Authors:  Walid Salah Badawy; M A El Masry; Y A Radwan; T T El Haddidi
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2006-04-25       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Radiographic changes in the lumbar spine in former professional football players: a comparative and matched controlled study.

Authors:  Alpaslan Oztürk; Yüksel Ozkan; Recai M Ozdemir; Nazan Yalçin; Semra Akgöz; Vedat Saraç; Serkan Aykut
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2007-11-01       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Increase or decrease in stability after nucleotomy? Conflicting in vitro and in vivo results in the sheep model.

Authors:  Sandra Reitmaier; David Volkheimer; Nikolaus Berger-Roscher; Hans-Joachim Wilke; Anita Ignatius
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2014-11-06       Impact factor: 4.118

Review 7.  Mechanical concepts for disc regeneration.

Authors:  Klaus John Schnake; Michael Putzier; Norbert P Haas; Frank Kandziora
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2006-07-12       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  [Symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis: diagnostic evaluation and therapeutic strategies].

Authors:  C Ewald; R Kalff
Journal:  Nervenarzt       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 1.214

9.  Long-term outcome after implantation of prosthetic disc nucleus device (PDN) in lumbar disc disease.

Authors:  P Selviaridis; N Foroglou; A Tsitlakidis; A Hatzisotiriou; I Magras; I Patsalas
Journal:  Hippokratia       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 0.471

10.  Comparison of clinical and radiological outcomes after automated open lumbar discectomy and conventional microdiscectomy: a prospective randomized trial.

Authors:  Sang-Ho Lee; Jun Seok Bae
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-08-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.