Download PDF
J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg 2018; 79(06): 518-523
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1639505
Surgical Technique
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Percutaneous Endoscopic Interlaminar Unilateral Ventral Dural Approach for Symptomatic Bilateral L5–S1 Herniated Nucleus Pulposus: Technical Note

Sung Ho Choi
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Nanoori Hospital (Suwon), Suwon, Republic of Korea
,
Nitin Maruti Adsul
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Nanoori Hospital (Suwon), Suwon, Republic of Korea
,
Hyeun Sung Kim
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Nanoori Hospital (Suwon), Suwon, Republic of Korea
,
Ki Joon Kim
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Nanoori Hospital (Suwon), Suwon, Republic of Korea
,
Jeong Hoon Kim
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Nanoori Hospital (Suwon), Suwon, Republic of Korea
,
Sung Kyun Chung
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Nanoori Hospital (Suwon), Suwon, Republic of Korea
,
Jeong Hoon Choi
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Nanoori Hospital (Suwon), Suwon, Republic of Korea
,
Jee Soo Jang
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Nanoori Hospital (Suwon), Suwon, Republic of Korea
,
Il Tae Jang
2   Department of Neurosurgery, Nanoori Hospital Seoul, Seoul, Republic of Korea
,
Seong Hoon Oh
3   Department of Neurosurgery, Nanoori Hospital Incheon, Incheon, Republic of Korea
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

30 October 2017

19 January 2018

Publication Date:
23 April 2018 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar diskectomy is a good treatment modality for lumbar disk herniation. However, when a patient complains of bilateral lower limb radicular pain with severe disk protrusion at the L5–S1 level, the transforaminal approach is often unable to resolve both lesions owing to anatomical limitations. It is also very difficult to resolve both lesions in an ipsilateral direction using the percutaneous interlaminar approach. We report our surgical technique and clinical results using a ventral dural approach of percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar lumbar diskectomy for L5–S1 herniated nucleus pulposus (HNP) in patients with bilateral radiculopathy due to a severe disk protrusion.

Methods Twenty-seven patients with severe L5–S1 HNP complaining of back pain and bilateral lower limb pain were included in the study. The unilateral ventral dural approach of percutaneous full endoscopic interlaminar lumbar diskectomy technique was used. The visual analog scale (VAS) and Macnab criteria were used for clinical evaluation. All assessments were completed 1 day before surgery, 1 week after surgery, 6 months after surgery, and at final follow-up after surgery.

Results The mean preoperative back and leg pain VAS scores decreased from 5.67 ± 0.78 and 7.81 ± 0.83 to 2.44 ± 0.58 and 2.26 ± 0.53 at 1 week, 1.78 ± 0.51 and 1.52 ± 0.58 at 6 months, and 1.56 ± 0.70 and 1.67 ± 0.96, respectively, at the final follow-up after surgery. With respect to the Macnab criteria, 51.85% of the results were excellent, 44.44% were good, and 3.70% were fair. Four cases recurred: three patients underwent conservative treatment and one patient operated with percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar lumbar diskectomy.

Conclusion According to the results of this study, the ventral dural approach of percutaneous full endoscopic interlaminar lumbar diskectomy in patients with L5–S1 HNP associated with bilateral lower limb pain due to a severely protruded HNP is a good option for a minimally invasive surgical approach.

Keywords

bilateral radiculopathy - endoscopic interlaminar approach - PEILD - ventral dural approach
 

  • References

  • 1 Chen HT, Tsai CH, Chao SC. , et al. Endoscopic discectomy of L5-S1 disc herniation via an interlaminar approach: prospective controlled study under local and general anesthesia. Surg Neurol Int 2011; 2: 93
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Deen HG. Posterolateral endoscopic excision for lumbar disc herniation: surgical technique, outcome, and complications in 307 consecutive cases. Spine 2002; 27 (18) 2081-2082 ; author reply 2081–2082
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Jang JS, An SH, Lee SH. Transforaminal percutaneous endoscopic discectomy in the treatment of foraminal and extraforaminal lumbar disc herniations. J Spinal Disord Tech 2006; 19 (05) 338-343
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Lee DY, Shim CS, Ahn Y, Choi YG, Kim HJ, Lee SH. Comparison of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy and open lumbar microdiscectomy for recurrent disc herniation. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 2009; 46 (06) 515-521
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Lew SM, Mehalic TF, Fagone KL. Transforaminal percutaneous endoscopic discectomy in the treatment of far-lateral and foraminal lumbar disc herniations. J Neurosurg 2001; 94 (2, Suppl): 216-220
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Yoshimoto M, Iesato N, Terashima Y, Tanimoto K, Takebayashi T, Yamashita T. Long-term outcome of microendoscopic discectomy for lumbar disk herniation. A clinical study of consecutive 112 cases with more than 5-year follow-up. J Neurol Surg A 2017; 78: 446-452
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Moliterno JA, Knopman J, Parikh K. , et al. Results and risk factors for recurrence following single-level tubular lumbar microdiscectomy. J Neurosurg Spine 2010; 12 (06) 680-686
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Chumnanvej S, Kesornsak W, Sarnvivad P, Paiboonsirijit S, Kuansongthum V. Full endoscopic lumbar discectomy via interlaminar approach: 2-year results in Ramathibodi Hospital. J Med Assoc Thai 2011; 94 (12) 1465-1470
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Mirkovic SR, Schwartz DG, Glazier KD. Anatomic considerations in lumbar posterolateral percutaneous procedures. Spine 1995; 20 (18) 1965-1971
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Choi KC, Kim JS, Ryu KS, Kang BU, Ahn Y, Lee SH. Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy for L5-S1 disc herniation: transforaminal versus interlaminar approach. Pain Physician 2013; 16 (06) 547-556
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Ruetten S, Komp M, Merk H, Godolias G. Full-endoscopic interlaminar and transforaminal lumbar discectomy versus conventional microsurgical technique: a prospective, randomized, controlled study. Spine 2008; 33 (09) 931-939
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Choi G, Kim JS, Lokhande P, Lee SH. Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy by transiliac approach: a case report. Spine 2009; 34 (12) E443-E446
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Ruetten S, Komp M, Godolias G. A new full-endoscopic technique for the interlaminar operation of lumbar disc herniations using 6-mm endoscopes: prospective 2-year results of 331 patients. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 2006; 49 (02) 80-87
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Lee JS, Kim HS, Jang JS, Jang IT. Structural preservation percutaneous endoscopic lumbar interlaminar discectomy for L5-S1 herniated nucleus pulposus. BioMed Res Int 2016; 2016: 6250247
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Benoist M. The natural history of lumbar disc herniation and radiculopathy. Joint Bone Spine 2002; 69 (02) 155-160
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Seidenwurm D, Litt AW. The natural history of lumbar spine disease. Radiology 1995; 195 (02) 323-324
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Goald HJ. Microlumbar discectomy: follow-up of 477 patients. J Microsurg 1980; 2 (02) 95-100
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Kambin P, Sampson S. Posterolateral percutaneous suction-excision of herniated lumbar intervertebral discs. Report of interim results. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1986; (207) 37-43
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Yeung AT, Tsou PM. Posterolateral endoscopic excision for lumbar disc herniation: surgical technique, outcome, and complications in 307 consecutive cases. Spine 2002; 27 (07) 722-731
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Hijikata S. Percutaneous nucleotomy. A new concept technique and 12 years' experience. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1989; (238) 9-23
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Kim HS, Park JY. Comparative assessment of different percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar lumbar discectomy (PEID) techniques. Pain Physician 2013; 16 (04) 359-367
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Kambin P, O'Brien E, Zhou L, Schaffer JL. Arthroscopic microdiscectomy and selective fragmentectomy. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1998; (347) 150-167
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Hirsch JA, Singh V, Falco FJ, Benyamin RM, Manchikanti L. Automated percutaneous lumbar discectomy for the contained herniated lumbar disc: a systematic assessment of evidence. Pain Physician 2009; 12 (03) 601-620
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Singh V, Manchikanti L, Benyamin RM, Helm S, Hirsch JA. Percutaneous lumbar laser disc decompression: a systematic review of current evidence. Pain Physician 2009; 12 (03) 573-588
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Ebraheim NA, Xu R, Huntoon M, Yeasting RA. Location of the extraforaminal lumbar nerve roots. An anatomic study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1997; (340) 230-235
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Reulen HJ, Müller A, Ebeling U. Microsurgical anatomy of the lateral approach to extraforaminal lumbar disc herniations. Neurosurgery 1996; 39 (02) 345-350 ; discussion 350–351
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Wang B, Lü G, Patel AA, Ren P, Cheng I. An evaluation of the learning curve for a complex surgical technique: the full endoscopic interlaminar approach for lumbar disc herniations. Spine J 2011; 11 (02) 122-130
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Hirano Y, Mizuno J, Takeda M, Itoh Y, Matsuoka H, Watanabe K. Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy—early clinical experience. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo) 2012; 52 (09) 625-630
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Ahn SS, Kim SH, Kim DW. Learning curve of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy based on the period (early vs. late) and technique (in-and-out vs. in-and-out-and-in): a retrospective comparative study. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 2015; 58 (06) 539-546
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Thomé C, Barth M, Scharf J, Schmiedek P. Outcome after lumbar sequestrectomy compared with microdiscectomy: a prospective randomized study. J Neurosurg Spine 2005; 2 (03) 271-278
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Schick U, Elhabony R. Prospective comparative study of lumbar sequestrectomy and microdiscectomy. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 2009; 52 (04) 180-185
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Barth M, Weiss C, Thomé C. Two-year outcome after lumbar microdiscectomy versus microscopic sequestrectomy: part 1: evaluation of clinical outcome. Spine 2008; 33 (03) 265-272
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 McGirt MJ, Ambrossi GL, Datoo G. , et al. Recurrent disc herniation and long-term back pain after primary lumbar discectomy: review of outcomes reported for limited versus aggressive disc removal. Neurosurgery 2009; 64 (02) 338-344 ; discussion 344–345
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Fakouri B, Patel V, Bayley E, Srinivas S. Lumbar microdiscectomy versus sequesterectomy/free fragmentectomy: a long-term (>2 y) retrospective study of the clinical outcome. J Spinal Disord Tech 2011; 24 (01) 6-10
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Ikuta K, Tarukado K, Masuda K. Characterization and risk factor analysis for recurrence following microendoscopic discectomy for lumbar disk herniation. J Neurol Surg A 2017; 78: 154-160
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Shin KH, Chang HG, Rhee NK, Lim KS. Revisional percutaneous full endoscopic disc surgery for recurrent herniation of previous open lumbar discectomy. Asian Spine J 2011; 5 (01) 1-9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar