medigraphic.com
ISSN 2992-8036 (Electronic)
ISSN 2306-4102 (Print)
Órgano Oficial del Colegio Mexicano de Ortopedia y Traumatología

2019, Number 5

<< Back Next >>

Acta Ortop Mex 2019; 33 (5)

Results in the surgical treatment of lumbar disc hernia, report of seven years follow up

Reyes-Sánchez A, Reyes-Ayala C, García-Ramos CL, Obil-Chavarría C, Alpizar-Aguirre A, Rosales-Olivares L

Language: Spanish
References: 18
Page: 319-324
PDF size: 103.14 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: Low back pain by herniated disc is caused by abnormal intersomatic movement, considering this as an etiological factor of disc herniation and the surgical indication. Material and methods: A prospective, descriptive, observational, longitudinal study design, in a period from January 2000 to December 2006. Initial sample of 195 patients, with inclusion criteria in 20 patients at seven years follow up. Demographic, dependent and independent variables were taken into account. Descriptive statistical analysis was conducted comparing preoperative with evolution to seven years. Results: Two groups were compared: dynamic interspinous stabilization and lumbar arthroplasty, with 10 patients for each procedure. Using T and χ2 test, statistical significance was observed when comparing the results of pain and Oswestry scale with parameters of imaging according to Pfirrmann pre surgical against final follow-up in patients undergoing dynamic stabilization. And for Arthroplasty was statistically meaningful comparison of results of pain with VAS (visual analogue scale) and function with Oswestry scale, with a p ‹ 0.05. Conclusion: With this work we can see that there was statistical significance to compare clinical outcomes of both procedures, observing a minimum percentage of complications in patients who underwent dynamic stabilization compared with arthroplasty; therefore we suggest to perform the latter only in cases in all criteria, to meet adequately to be equal to the anticipated clinical and functional outcomes.


REFERENCES

  1. Froud R, Patterson S, Eldridge S, Seale C, Pincus T, Rajendran D, et al. A systematic review and meta-synthesis of the impact of low back pain on people’s lives. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2014; 15(1): 50.

  2. Ito K, Creemers L. Mechanisms of intervertebral disk degeneration/injury and pain: a review. Global Spine J. 2013; 3(3): 145-52.

  3. Bron, JL. Repair, regenerative and supportive therapies of the annulus fibrosus: achievements and challenges. Eur Spine J. 2009; 18: 301-13.

  4. Sutheerayongprasert C, Paiboonsirijit S, Kuansongtham V, Anuraklekha S, Hiranyasthiti N, Neti S. Factors predicting failure of conservative treatment in lumbar-disc herniation. J Med Assoc Thai. 2012; 95(5): 674-80.

  5. Biering-Sorensen F, Thomsen C. Medical, social and occupational history as risk indicators for lowback trouble in a general population. Spine. 1986; 11: 720-5.

  6. Saal JA, Saal JS. Nonoperative treatment of herniated lumbar intervertebral disc with radiculopathy: an outcome study. Spine. 1989; 14: 431-7.

  7. Postacchini F. Management of herniation of the lumbar disc. J Bone Joint Surg [Br]. 1999; 81-B: 567-76.

  8. Rosales-Olivares LM, Alpízar-Aguirre A, Miramontes-Martínez V, Zárate-Kalfópulus B, Reyes-Sánchez A. Estabilización dinámica interespinosa en disectomía lumbar. Seguimiento de cuatro años. Cir Cir. 2010; 78: 495-9.

  9. Porchet F. Microdiscectomy compared with standard discectomy: an old problem revisited with new outcome measures within the framework of a spine surgical registry. Eur Spine. J 2009; 18 (Suppl 3): S360-6.

  10. Koebbe C. Maroon JC, Abla A, El-Kadi H, Bost J. Lumbar microdiscectomy: a historical perspective and current technical considerations. Neurosurg Focus. 2002; 13(2): E3.

  11. Flórez-García MT, García-Pérez F, Alcántara-Bumbiedro S, Echávarri-Pérez C, Urraca Gesto A, Alañón- Caballero J, et al. Diseño y desarrollo de una aplicación informática para la escala de incapacidad por dolor lumbar de Oswestry. Patología del Aparato Locomotor. 2005; 3(2): 120-31.

  12. Postacchini F, Postacchini R. Operative management of lumbar disc herniation: the evolution of knowledge and surgical techniques in the last century. Acta Neurochir Suppl. 2011; 108: 17-21.

  13. Olcay E, Cengiz G, Mehdi S, Tunc O, Ahmet LA, Yaprak A, et al. Dynamic stabilisation in the treatment of degenerative disc disease with Modic changes. Adv Orthop. 2013; Adv Orthop. 2013; 2013: 806267. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/806267.

  14. Rosales-Olivares LM, Alpízar-Aguirre A, Miramontes-Martínez V, Zárate-Kalfópulus B, Reyes-Sánchez A. Dynamic interspinous stabilization in lumbar discectomy: 4-year follow-up. Cir Cir. 2010; 78(6): 492-6.

  15. Shin MH, Ryu KS, Hur JW, Kim JS, Park CK. Association of facet tropism and progressive facet arthrosis after lumbar total disc replacement using ProDisc-L(®). 2013; 22(8): 1717-22.

  16. Park CK, Ryu KS, Jee WH. Degenerative changes of discs and facet joints in lumbar total disc replacement using ProDisc II minimum two-year follow-up. Spine. 2008; 33(16): 1755-61.

  17. Jiangbo Wei, Yueming Song, Lin Sun, Chaoliang LV. Comparison of artificial total disc replacement versus fusion for lumbar degenerative disc disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Int Orthop. 2013; 37(7): 1315-25.

  18. Xu L, Yu X, Bi LY, Liu GZ, Li PY, Qu Y, et al. Intermediate and long-term follow-up evaluation of posterior dynamic lumbar stabilization in lumbar degenerative disease. Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2012; 50(9): 792-6.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com