Skip to main content
Log in

Learning curve of full-endoscopic lumbar discectomy

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To report the learning curve of full-endoscopic lumbar discectomy for a surgeon naive to endoscopic surgery but trained in open microdiscectomy.

Methods

From July 2006 to July 2009, 57 patients underwent full-endoscopic lumbar discectomy and 66 underwent open microdiscectomy. The clinical results were evaluated with a visual analog scale (VAS) and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Spearman’s coefficient of rank correlation (rho) was used to assess the learning curves for the transforaminal and interlaminar procedures of full-endoscopic lumbar discectomy.

Results

After full-endoscopic lumbar discectomy, the VAS and ODI results of the patients followed up were comparable with those of open microdiscectomy. A steep learning curve was observed for the transforaminal procedure, but not the interlaminar procedure.

Conclusions

The learning curve of the transforaminal approach was steep and easy to learn, while the learning curve of the interlaminar approach was flat and hard to master.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Andrews DW, Lavyne MH (1990) Retrospective analysis of microsurgical and standard lumbar discectomy. Spine 15:329–335

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Fritsch EW, Heisel J, Rupp S (1996) The failed back surgery syndrome: reasons, intraoperative findings, and long-term results: a report of 182 operative treatments. Spine 21:626–633

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Kambin P, Gellman H (1983) Percutaneous lateral discectomy of the lumbar spine: a preliminary report. Clin Orthop 174:127–132

    Google Scholar 

  4. Ruetten S, Komp M, Godolias G (2005) An extreme lateral access for the surgery of lumbar disc herniations inside the spinal canal using the full-endoscopic uniportal transforaminal approach-Technique and prospective results of 463 patients. Spine 30:2570–2578

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ruetten S (2005) The full-endoscopic interlaminar approach for lumbar disc herniations. In: Mayer HM (ed) Minimally invasive spine surgery. Springer, Berlin, pp 346–355

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ruetten S, Komp M, Merk H, Godalias S (2007) Use of newly developed instruments and endoscopes: full-endoscopic resection of lumbar disc herniations via the interlaminar and lateral transforaminal approach. J Neurosurg Spine 6:521–530

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kafadar A, Kahraman S, Akbörü M (2006) Percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal lumbar discectomy: a critical appraisal. Minim Invasive Neursurg 49:74–79

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Williams RW (1978) Microlumbar discectomy: a conservative surgical approach to the virgin herniated lumbar disc. Spine 3:175–182

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Oldenkott P (1979) Microsurgical treatment of lumbar radicular compression syndromes. Med Welt 30:1687–1691 (in German)

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Yeung AT, Tsou PM (2002) Posterolateral endoscopic excision for lumbar disc herniation: surgical technique, outcome, and complications in 307 consecutive cases. Spine 27:722–731

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Wilson DH, Harbaugh R (1982) Lumbar discectomy: a comparative study of microsurgical and standard technique. In: Hardy RW (ed) Lumbar disc disease. Springer, New York, pp 147–156

    Google Scholar 

  12. Goald HJ (1980) Microlumbar discectomy: follow-up of 477 patients. J Microsurg 2:95–100

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Schaffer JL, Kambin P (1991) Percutaneous posterolateral lumbar discectomy and decompression with a 6.9-millimeter cannula. Analysis of operative failures and complications. J Bone Joint Surg Am 73:822–831

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Sengupta DK, Kirollos R, Findlay GF, Smith ET, Pearson JC, Pigott T (1999) The value of MR imaging in differentiating between hard and soft cervical disc disease: a comparison with intraoperative findings. Eur Spine J 8:199–204

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Major MN, Helms CA, Genant HK (1993) Calcification demonstrated as high signal intensity on T1-weighted MR images of the discs of the lumbar spine. Radiology 189:494–496

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Barrios C, Ahmed M, Arrotegui JI, Björnsson A (1990) Clinical factors predicting outcome after surgery for herniated lumbar disc: an epidemiological multivariate analysis. J Spinal Disord 3:205–209

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Junge A, Dvorak J, Ahrens S (1995) Predictors of bad and good outcomes of lumbar disc surgery. A prospective clinical study with recommendations for screening to avoid bad outcomes. Spine 20:460–468

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Kahanovitz N, Viola K, Muculloch J (1989) Limited surgical discectomy and microdiscectomy. A clinical comparison. Spine 14:79–81

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Carragee EJ, Han MY, Yang B, Kim DH, Kraemer H, Billys J (1999) Activity restrictions after posterior lumbar discectomy. A prospective study of outcomes in 152 cases with no postoperative restrictions. Spine 24:2346–2351

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Lee DY, Lee SH (2008) Learning curve for percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy. Neuro Med Chir (Tokyo) 48:383–389

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Benzel EC, Orr RD (2011) A steep learning curve is a good thing. Spine J 11:131–132

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Choi G, Lee SH, Raiturker PP (2006) Percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy for intracanalicular disc herniations at L5-S1 using a rigid working channel endoscope. Neurosurgery 58(1 Suppl):ONS59–ONS68

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Joh JY, Choi G, Kong BJ, Park HS, Lee SH, Chang SH (2009) Comparative study of neck pain in relation to increase of cervical epidural pressure during percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy. Spine 34:2033–2038

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Cervellini P, Curri D, Volpin L, Bernardi L, Pinna V, Benedetti A (1988) Computed tomography of epidural fibrosis after discectomy: a comparison between symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. Neurosurgery 23:710–713

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Aydin Y, Ziyal IM, Duman H, Türkmen CS, Başak M, Sahin Y (2002) Clinical and radiological results of lumbar microdiscectomy technique with preserving of ligamentum flavum comparing to the standard microdiscectomy technique. Surg Neurol 57:5–13

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

No funds were received in support of this work. No benefits in any form have been or will be received from a commercial party related directly or indirectly to the subject of this manuscript.

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephen S. Yang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hsu, HT., Chang, SJ., Yang, S.S. et al. Learning curve of full-endoscopic lumbar discectomy. Eur Spine J 22, 727–733 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-012-2540-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-012-2540-4

Keywords

Navigation