Conventional versus tubular microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation: A prospective randomized study

Background: Microdiscectomy is a commonly performed surgical technique used to treat lumbar disc prolapse. A minimally invasive alternative called tubular discectomy is hypothesized to cause less tissue damage and result in a faster recovery compared to conventional discectomy. Previous studies have...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Dhiraj V Sonawane, Habung Chobing, Shivaprasad S Kolur, Ajay Chandanwale, Sagar A Jawale, Naved A F A Ansari, Eknath Pawar
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications 2024-01-01
Series:Indian Spine Journal
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.isjonline.com/article.asp?issn=2589-5079;year=2024;volume=7;issue=1;spage=59;epage=65;aulast=Sonawane
_version_ 1797246386997035008
author Dhiraj V Sonawane
Habung Chobing
Shivaprasad S Kolur
Ajay Chandanwale
Sagar A Jawale
Naved A F A Ansari
Eknath Pawar
author_facet Dhiraj V Sonawane
Habung Chobing
Shivaprasad S Kolur
Ajay Chandanwale
Sagar A Jawale
Naved A F A Ansari
Eknath Pawar
author_sort Dhiraj V Sonawane
collection DOAJ
description Background: Microdiscectomy is a commonly performed surgical technique used to treat lumbar disc prolapse. A minimally invasive alternative called tubular discectomy is hypothesized to cause less tissue damage and result in a faster recovery compared to conventional discectomy. Previous studies have found similar pain resolution outcomes between two techniques, but they were underpowered and lacked data on differences in recovery time. Our study aims to compare functional outcomes, and assess differences in recovery time and perioperative complications between the two procedures. Materials and Methods: This prospective randomized study included 63 patients, divided into two groups. The preoperative evaluation was done by clinical examination and documenting Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores. Intra- and postoperative complications were also noted. Postoperative follow-up assessment was done at regular intervals up to 2 years. Results: Both groups showed a significant decrease in ODI, VAS leg and back scores following surgery, which continued to decline throughout the follow-up period. However, there was no significant difference in outcomes between the two treatment groups at each postoperative follow-up. There were also no significant differences in blood loss or intra- and postoperative complications. Patients who underwent tubular microdiscectomy had a significantly shorter hospital stay compared to conventional microdiscectomy. Conclusion: Both conventional and tubular microdiscectomy are effective means of treating disc herniation. While patients who underwent tubular microdiscectomy had a shorter hospital stay, the modest clinical benefits do not necessarily warrant the transition to a minimally invasive approach given the learning curve associated with the technique.
first_indexed 2024-04-24T19:41:59Z
format Article
id doaj.art-5b2fd1fa21c2468f8bba6ea9e209f50d
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2589-5079
2589-5087
language English
last_indexed 2024-04-24T19:41:59Z
publishDate 2024-01-01
publisher Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
record_format Article
series Indian Spine Journal
spelling doaj.art-5b2fd1fa21c2468f8bba6ea9e209f50d2024-03-25T10:58:51ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsIndian Spine Journal2589-50792589-50872024-01-0171596510.4103/isj.isj_30_23Conventional versus tubular microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation: A prospective randomized studyDhiraj V SonawaneHabung ChobingShivaprasad S KolurAjay ChandanwaleSagar A JawaleNaved A F A AnsariEknath PawarBackground: Microdiscectomy is a commonly performed surgical technique used to treat lumbar disc prolapse. A minimally invasive alternative called tubular discectomy is hypothesized to cause less tissue damage and result in a faster recovery compared to conventional discectomy. Previous studies have found similar pain resolution outcomes between two techniques, but they were underpowered and lacked data on differences in recovery time. Our study aims to compare functional outcomes, and assess differences in recovery time and perioperative complications between the two procedures. Materials and Methods: This prospective randomized study included 63 patients, divided into two groups. The preoperative evaluation was done by clinical examination and documenting Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores. Intra- and postoperative complications were also noted. Postoperative follow-up assessment was done at regular intervals up to 2 years. Results: Both groups showed a significant decrease in ODI, VAS leg and back scores following surgery, which continued to decline throughout the follow-up period. However, there was no significant difference in outcomes between the two treatment groups at each postoperative follow-up. There were also no significant differences in blood loss or intra- and postoperative complications. Patients who underwent tubular microdiscectomy had a significantly shorter hospital stay compared to conventional microdiscectomy. Conclusion: Both conventional and tubular microdiscectomy are effective means of treating disc herniation. While patients who underwent tubular microdiscectomy had a shorter hospital stay, the modest clinical benefits do not necessarily warrant the transition to a minimally invasive approach given the learning curve associated with the technique.http://www.isjonline.com/article.asp?issn=2589-5079;year=2024;volume=7;issue=1;spage=59;epage=65;aulast=Sonawaneconventional microdiscectomylumbar discectomytubular microdiscectomy
spellingShingle Dhiraj V Sonawane
Habung Chobing
Shivaprasad S Kolur
Ajay Chandanwale
Sagar A Jawale
Naved A F A Ansari
Eknath Pawar
Conventional versus tubular microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation: A prospective randomized study
Indian Spine Journal
conventional microdiscectomy
lumbar discectomy
tubular microdiscectomy
title Conventional versus tubular microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation: A prospective randomized study
title_full Conventional versus tubular microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation: A prospective randomized study
title_fullStr Conventional versus tubular microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation: A prospective randomized study
title_full_unstemmed Conventional versus tubular microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation: A prospective randomized study
title_short Conventional versus tubular microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation: A prospective randomized study
title_sort conventional versus tubular microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation a prospective randomized study
topic conventional microdiscectomy
lumbar discectomy
tubular microdiscectomy
url http://www.isjonline.com/article.asp?issn=2589-5079;year=2024;volume=7;issue=1;spage=59;epage=65;aulast=Sonawane
work_keys_str_mv AT dhirajvsonawane conventionalversustubularmicrodiscectomyforlumbardischerniationaprospectiverandomizedstudy
AT habungchobing conventionalversustubularmicrodiscectomyforlumbardischerniationaprospectiverandomizedstudy
AT shivaprasadskolur conventionalversustubularmicrodiscectomyforlumbardischerniationaprospectiverandomizedstudy
AT ajaychandanwale conventionalversustubularmicrodiscectomyforlumbardischerniationaprospectiverandomizedstudy
AT sagarajawale conventionalversustubularmicrodiscectomyforlumbardischerniationaprospectiverandomizedstudy
AT navedafaansari conventionalversustubularmicrodiscectomyforlumbardischerniationaprospectiverandomizedstudy
AT eknathpawar conventionalversustubularmicrodiscectomyforlumbardischerniationaprospectiverandomizedstudy