Abstract
Studies comparing the relative merits of microdiscectomy and standard discectomy report conflicting results, depending on the outcome measure of interest. Most trials are small, and few have employed validated, multidimensional patient-orientated outcome measures, considered essential in outcomes research. In the present study, data were collected prospectively from six surgeons participating in a surgical registry. Inclusion criteria were: lumbar/lumbosacral degenerative disease; discectomy/sequestrectomy without additional fusion/stabilisation; German or English-speaking. Before and 3 and 12 months after surgery, patients completed the Core Outcome Measures Index comprising questions on leg/buttock pain, back pain, back-related function, symptom-specific well-being, general quality-of-life, and social and work disability. At follow-up, they rated overall satisfaction, global outcome, and perceived complications. Compliance with the registry documentation was excellent: 87% for surgeons (surgery forms), 91% for patients (for 12 months follow-up). 261 patients satisfied the inclusion criteria (225 microdiscectomy, 36 standard discectomy). The standard discectomy group had significantly greater blood-loss than the microdiscectomy (P < 0.05). There were no group differences in the proportion of surgical complications or duration of hospital stay (P > 0.05). The groups did not differ in relation to any of the patient-orientated outcomes or individual outcome domains (P > 0.05). Though not equivalent to an RCT, the study included every single eligible patient in our Spine Center and allowed surgeons to use their regular procedure; it hence had extremely high external validity (relevance/generalisability). There was no clinically relevant difference in outcome after lumbar disc excision dependent on the use of the microscope. The decision to use the microscope should rest with the surgeon.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Andrew DW, Lavyne MH (1990) Retrospective analysis of microsurgical and standard lumbar discectomy. Spine 15:329–335. doi:10.1097/00007632-199004000-00015
Barrios C, Ahmed M, Arrotegui J, Bjornsson A, Gillstrom P (1990) Microsurgery versus standard removal of the herniated lumbar disc. A 3-year comparison in 150 cases. Acta Orthop Scand 61:399–403
Black N (1996) Why we need observational studies to evaluate the effectiveness of health care. BMJ 312:1215–1218
Caspar W (1977) A new surgical procedure for lumbar disc herniation causing less tissue damage through a microsurgical approach. Adv Neurosurg 4:74–80
Caspar W, Campbell B, Barbier DD, Kretschmmer R, Gotfried Y (1991) The Caspar microsurgical discectomy and comparison with a conventional standard lumbar disc procedure. Neurosurgery 28:78–86. doi:10.1097/00006123-199101000-00013 discussion 86-77
Deyo RA (2007) Back surgery–who needs it? N Engl J Med 356:2239–2243. doi:10.1056/NEJMp078052
Deyo RA, Battie M, Beurskens AJHM, Bombardier C, Croft P, Koes B, Malmivaara A, Roland M, Von Korff M, Waddell G (1998) Outcome measures for low back pain research. A proposal for standardized use. Spine 23:2003–2013. doi:10.1097/00007632-199809150-00018
Gibson JN, Waddell G (2007) Surgical interventions for lumbar disc prolapse: updated Cochrane Review. Spine 32:1735–1747. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e3180bc2431
Grob D, Bartanusz V, Jeszenszky D, Kleinstuck F, Lattig F, Porchet F, Mannion AF (2008) The patient’s perspective on complications after spine surgery. Eur Spine J (this issue)
Hagg O, Fritzell P, Nordwall A, Group SLSS (2003) The clinical importance of changes in outcome scores after treatment for chronic low back pain. Eur Spine J 12:12–20
Henriksen L, Schmidt K, Eskesen V, Jantzen E (1996) A controlled study of microsurgical versus standard lumbar discectomy. Br J Neurosurg 10:289–293. doi:10.1080/02688699650040160
Katayama Y, Matsuyama Y, Yoshihara H, Sakai Y, Nakamura H, Nakashima S, Ito Z, Ishiguro N (2006) 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 19:344–347. doi:10.1097/01.bsd.0000211201.93125.1c
Lagarrigue J, Chaynes P (1994) Comparative study of disk surgery with or without microscopy. A prospective study of 80 cases. Neurochirurgie 40:116–120
Landewe R, van der Heijde D (2007) Primer: challenges in randomized and observational studies. Nat Clin Pract Rheumatol 3:661–666. doi:10.1038/ncprheum0626
Mannion AF, Elfering A, Staerkle R, Junge A, Grob D, Semmer NK, Jacobshagen N, Dvorak J, Boos N (2005) Outcome assessment in low back pain: how low can you go? Eur Spine J 14:1014–1026. doi:10.1007/s00586-005-0911-9
McCulloch JA (1996) Focus issue on lumbar disc herniation: macro- and microdiscectomy. Spine 21:45S–56S. doi:10.1097/00007632-199601010-00010
Mixter WJ, Barr JS (1934) Rupture of the intervertebral disc with involvement of the spinal canal. N Engl J Med 211:210–225
Nystrom B (1987) Experience of microsurgical compared with conventional technique in lumbar disc operations. Acta Neurol Scand 76:129–141
Peul WC, van Houwelingen HC, van den Hout WB, Brand R, Eekhof JA, Tans JT, Thomeer RT, Koes BW (2007) Surgery versus prolonged conservative treatment for sciatica. N Engl J Med 356:2245–2256. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa064039
Sachdev VP (1991) Lumbar diskectomy under the operating microscope. Mt Sinai J Med 58:147–149
Tullberg T, Isacson J, Weidenhielm L (1993) Does microscopic removal of lumbar disc herniation lead to better results than the standard procedure? Results of a one-year randomized study. Spine 18:24–27. doi:10.1097/00007632-199301000-00005
Tureyen K (2003) One-level one-sided lumbar disc surgery with and without microscopic assistance: 1-year outcome in 114 consecutive patients. J Neurosurg 99:247–250
Williams RW (1978) Microlumbar discectomy: a conservative surgical approach to the virgin herniated lumbar disc. Spine 3:175–182. doi:10.1097/00007632-197806000-00015
Yasargil MG (1977) Microsurgical operation for herniated disc. Adv Neurosurg 4:81
Conflict of interest statement
None of the authors has any potential conflict of interest.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Porchet, F., Bartanusz, V., Kleinstueck, F.S. et al. Microdiscectomy compared with standard discectomy: an old problem revisited with new outcome measures within the framework of a spine surgical registry. Eur Spine J 18 (Suppl 3), 360–366 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-009-0917-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-009-0917-9