Minimally Invasive Lumbar Discectomy Versus Conventional Discectomy for Symptomatic Lumbar Disc Herniation

Abstract

Background: Lumbar disc herniation is a localized displacement of disc material beyond the normal margins of the intervertebral disc space and is the most common cause of sciatica. Lumbar microdiscectomy (MD) and open discectomy (OD) are commonly performed surgical procedures for patients with lumbar disc herniation.
Objective: The aim of the current work was to compare the benefits and harms of minimally invasive discectomy (MID) versus MD/OD for management of lumbar intervertebral discopathy.
Patients and Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted at Menoufia university hospitals & Al-Haram  Specialized Hospital including 36  Patients (with single or double level disc prolapse (L4-L5 or L5-S1) who underwent discectomy using microscopic/or conventional discectomy.
Results: In group (1): 75% of the patients had good pain improvement (60 – 90%) and the rest had moderate improvement (40 – 60 %). In group (1) only 30% experienced intermittent pain while the rest have no pain. While in group (2) about 50% had an intermittent pain. There is no significant difference. In group (1) the mean days of hospital stay was (6.10 + 1.6) while in Group (2) the mean days of hospital stay was (1.60 + 0.12). The group (2) has significant short hospital stay length than group (1).
Conclusion: It could be concluded that endoscopic approach was associated with similar postoperative pain improvement and frequency and lower operating time, blood loss and hospital stay in comparison to open approaches. We believe that both techniques are safe, and both can be used to lumber disk surgery, but microscopic technique is preferred for its better outcomes.