| Literature DB >> 21439083 |
Toshio Doi1, Katsumi Harimaya, Yoshihiro Matsumoto, Osamu Tono, Kiyoshi Tarukado, Yukihide Iwamoto.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcome of endoscopic decompression surgery for intraforaminal and extraforaminal nerve root compression in the lumbar spine.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21439083 PMCID: PMC3073935 DOI: 10.1186/1749-799X-6-16
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Orthop Surg Res ISSN: 1749-799X Impact factor: 2.359
Figure 1Case 6. Images from a 56-year-old male who presented with severe right leg pain. A: Para-sagittal MRI imaging (T1) showed the obliteration of the normal increased signal intensity fat (arrow). B,C: Para-sagittal and axial reconstruction CT-discograms showed an intraforaminal herniated disc (arrow) at the L5-S1 level. D: A CT-discogram obtained at L5-S1 showing partial resection in the L4 lamina (arrow). E: Postoperative 3-D reconstruction showing the oval fenestration in the L4 lamina.
Figure 2Case 13. A three-dimensional CT-discogram obtained from a 78-year-old male who presented with severe left leg pain. (A) The herniated disc (*) was located from the intraforaminal to the extraforaminal lesion. (B) A tubular retractor was set at the dotted area, and the herniated disc (*) was removed.
Criteria for the JOA scoring system
| Subjective symptoms (9 points) | |
| low-back pain | |
| none | 3 |
| occasionally mild | 2 |
| always present of sometimes sever | 1 |
| always sever | 0 |
| leg pain &/or numbness | |
| none | 3 |
| occasionally mild | 2 |
| always present or sometimes sever | 1 |
| always sever | 0 |
| walking ability | |
| normal walking | 3 |
| able to walk > 500 m, pain/numbness/weakness present | 2 |
| unable to walk 500 m due to pain/numbness/weakness | 1 |
| unable to walk 100 m due to pain/numbness/weakness | 0 |
| objective finding (6 points) | |
| straight leg raising | |
| normal | 2 |
| 30-70 degree | 1 |
| < 30 degree | 0 |
| sensory function | |
| normal | 2 |
| mild sensory disturbance | 1 |
| apparent sensory disturbance | 0 |
| motor function | |
| normal (MMT normal) | 2 |
| slight decrease muscle strength (MMT good) | 1 |
| marked weakness (Grade 3-0) | 0 |
| restriction of ADLs (14 points) † | |
| none | 2 |
| moderate | 1 |
| severe | 0 |
| bladder function (-6 points) | |
| normal | 0 |
| mild dysuria | -3 |
| severe dysuria | -6 |
| total score | 29 |
* ADL = activities of daily living; MMT = manual muscle testing.
† ADL include the following; turning over while lying down, standing, washing one's face, leaning forward, ability to sit for approximately 1 hour, ability to lift or hold heavy objects, and ambulatory ability.
Patient characteristics and outcomes
| Age, Sex | Level | Kemp Sign | SLRT | FNST | Sensory Disturb | Muscle Weakness | disc protrusion CT discogram | Preop conservative treatment | disc protrusion op-finding | Preop JOA score | Postop JOA score | Recovery Rate (%) | different outcomes | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 88, F | L5-S1 | + | - | - | L5 | - | + | 3 M | + | 3 | 11 | 30.8 | Contralateral side* |
| 2 | 69, F | L3-L4 | + | + | + | L4 | IP, QF, EHL | + | 5 M | + | 7 | 14 | 31.8 | Contralateral side |
| 3 | 70, F | L5-S1 | + | - | - | L5 | - | - | 2 M | - | 12 | 12 | 0 | no pain relief |
| 4 | 80, F | L5-S1 | + | - | - | L5 | EHL | - | 2 M | - | 12 | 19 | 41.2 | Ipsilateral side† |
| 5 | 70, F | L5-S1 | + | + | - | L5 | EHL | + | 5 M | + | 11 | 20 | 50 | |
| 6 | 56, M | L4-L5 | + | + | + | L4 | - | + | 14 M | + | 15 | 29 | 100 | |
| 7 | 76, F | L3-L4 | - | - | + | - | - | + | 6 M | + | 14 | 28 | 93.3 | Ipsilateral side |
| 8 | 75, F | L5-S1 | + | - | - | L5 | EHL | + | 8 M | + | 5 | 20 | 62.5 | |
| 9 | 67, M | L5-S1 | + | + | - | L5 | EHL | + | 9 M | + | 8 | 29 | 100 | |
| 10 | 60, M | L5-S1 | + | + | - | L5 | EHL | NA | 4 M | + | 11 | 27 | 88.9 | |
| 11 | 68, M | L5-S1 | - | - | - | L5 | - | + | 5 M | + | 11 | 21 | 55.6 | |
| 12 | 40, F | L5-S1 | - | + | - | L5, S1 | - | + | 2 M | + | 14 | 19 | 33.3 | |
| 13 | 78, M | L5-S1 | + | - | - | L5 | EHL | + | 6 M | + | 11 | 16 | 27.8 | |
| 14 | 66, M | L5-S1 | - | + | - | L5 | EHL | - | 4 M | - | 20 | 28 | 88.9 | Ipsilateral side |
| 15 | 63, F | L3-L4 | + | + | - | L3 | - | NA | 7 M | + | 13 | 20 | 43.8 | |
| 16 | 66, M | L3-L4 | + | - | + | L3 | IP, QF | + | 4 M | + | 13 | 20 | 43.8 | |
| 17 | 62, F | L4-L5 | + | - | + | - | EHL | NA | 18 M | + | 4 | 11 | 28 | |
| 10.8 ± 4.3 | 20.2 ± 6.2 | 54.1 ± 30.0 |
* contralateral side = later recurrence of the same symptom on the contralateral side of the surgery
† ipsilateral side = later appearance of symptoms on the contralateral side of the surgery
Figure 3Case 2. A three-dementional CT-discogram obtained from a 69-year-old female who presented severe left leg pain. A protruded disc (A) was recognized by comparing the plane 3-D CT scan (B).