Microlumbar Discectomy vs Minimally Invasive Tubular Microdiscectomy: A Prospective Comparative Analysis

Background and Aim: Lumbar disc prolapse is a common cause of backache and radicular symptoms in lower limbs. Different surgical options have been described to compare the functional outcome, complications, and recurrence following surgery for lumbar disc prolapse by classical microlumbar discectomy...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Raj S. Chandran, Arun Sathyababu, Sharmad Mohammed Haneefa, Rajmohan Bhanu Prabhakar
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Guilan University of Medical Sciences 2023-01-01
Series:Iranian Journal of Neurosurgery
Subjects:
Online Access:https://irjns.org/article-1-356-en.pdf
_version_ 1797733779298582528
author Raj S. Chandran
Arun Sathyababu
Sharmad Mohammed Haneefa
Rajmohan Bhanu Prabhakar
author_facet Raj S. Chandran
Arun Sathyababu
Sharmad Mohammed Haneefa
Rajmohan Bhanu Prabhakar
author_sort Raj S. Chandran
collection DOAJ
description Background and Aim: Lumbar disc prolapse is a common cause of backache and radicular symptoms in lower limbs. Different surgical options have been described to compare the functional outcome, complications, and recurrence following surgery for lumbar disc prolapse by classical microlumbar discectomy (MLD) and minimally invasive tubular microdiscectomy. The advantages of one procedure over the other were also analyzed. Methods and Materials/Patients: A prospective, observational study conducted over a period of 1 year in the Department of Neurosurgery, Government Medical College Thiruvananthapuram, among patients who underwent surgical treatment for lumbar disc herniation by either microlumbar discectomy or minimally invasive surgery using a tubular retractor system. Ninety-nine patients who satisfied the inclusion and exclusion criteria were analyzed and tabulated for the outcome. Results: The two groups did not show a statistical difference in terms of functional outcome, complications, or recurrence rate. However, the need for post-operative analgesics, blood loss, and hence hospitalization was less in the tubular discectomy group. Conclusion: Both procedures are equally effective in terms of surgical results. However, the advantages and the subtle tendency of the patients to adopt “keyhole” make the tube an attractive option.
first_indexed 2024-03-12T12:34:21Z
format Article
id doaj.art-b2e14eddeafa4cd1811a3f761c94b1cd
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2423-6497
2423-6829
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-12T12:34:21Z
publishDate 2023-01-01
publisher Guilan University of Medical Sciences
record_format Article
series Iranian Journal of Neurosurgery
spelling doaj.art-b2e14eddeafa4cd1811a3f761c94b1cd2023-08-29T06:02:09ZengGuilan University of Medical SciencesIranian Journal of Neurosurgery2423-64972423-68292023-01-019Microlumbar Discectomy vs Minimally Invasive Tubular Microdiscectomy: A Prospective Comparative AnalysisRaj S. ChandranArun SathyababuSharmad Mohammed HaneefaRajmohan Bhanu PrabhakarBackground and Aim: Lumbar disc prolapse is a common cause of backache and radicular symptoms in lower limbs. Different surgical options have been described to compare the functional outcome, complications, and recurrence following surgery for lumbar disc prolapse by classical microlumbar discectomy (MLD) and minimally invasive tubular microdiscectomy. The advantages of one procedure over the other were also analyzed. Methods and Materials/Patients: A prospective, observational study conducted over a period of 1 year in the Department of Neurosurgery, Government Medical College Thiruvananthapuram, among patients who underwent surgical treatment for lumbar disc herniation by either microlumbar discectomy or minimally invasive surgery using a tubular retractor system. Ninety-nine patients who satisfied the inclusion and exclusion criteria were analyzed and tabulated for the outcome. Results: The two groups did not show a statistical difference in terms of functional outcome, complications, or recurrence rate. However, the need for post-operative analgesics, blood loss, and hence hospitalization was less in the tubular discectomy group. Conclusion: Both procedures are equally effective in terms of surgical results. However, the advantages and the subtle tendency of the patients to adopt “keyhole” make the tube an attractive option.https://irjns.org/article-1-356-en.pdfdisectomylumbartubularminimally invasive spine surgery
spellingShingle Raj S. Chandran
Arun Sathyababu
Sharmad Mohammed Haneefa
Rajmohan Bhanu Prabhakar
Microlumbar Discectomy vs Minimally Invasive Tubular Microdiscectomy: A Prospective Comparative Analysis
Iranian Journal of Neurosurgery
disectomy
lumbar
tubular
minimally invasive spine surgery
title Microlumbar Discectomy vs Minimally Invasive Tubular Microdiscectomy: A Prospective Comparative Analysis
title_full Microlumbar Discectomy vs Minimally Invasive Tubular Microdiscectomy: A Prospective Comparative Analysis
title_fullStr Microlumbar Discectomy vs Minimally Invasive Tubular Microdiscectomy: A Prospective Comparative Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Microlumbar Discectomy vs Minimally Invasive Tubular Microdiscectomy: A Prospective Comparative Analysis
title_short Microlumbar Discectomy vs Minimally Invasive Tubular Microdiscectomy: A Prospective Comparative Analysis
title_sort microlumbar discectomy vs minimally invasive tubular microdiscectomy a prospective comparative analysis
topic disectomy
lumbar
tubular
minimally invasive spine surgery
url https://irjns.org/article-1-356-en.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT rajschandran microlumbardiscectomyvsminimallyinvasivetubularmicrodiscectomyaprospectivecomparativeanalysis
AT arunsathyababu microlumbardiscectomyvsminimallyinvasivetubularmicrodiscectomyaprospectivecomparativeanalysis
AT sharmadmohammedhaneefa microlumbardiscectomyvsminimallyinvasivetubularmicrodiscectomyaprospectivecomparativeanalysis
AT rajmohanbhanuprabhakar microlumbardiscectomyvsminimallyinvasivetubularmicrodiscectomyaprospectivecomparativeanalysis