Next Article in Journal
Oral Health Promotion in Pediatric Age Groups: Habits and Behaviors of Italian and Spanish Parents and Children
Next Article in Special Issue
Comparative Evaluation of Large Language and Multimodal Models in Detecting Spinal Stabilization Systems on X-Ray Images
Previous Article in Journal
The Role of Parental and Adolescent Psychosocial Factors in Different Aggression Profiles: A Comparative Approach
Previous Article in Special Issue
Lumbopelvic Fixation: How to Be Less Invasive When You Cannot Be Minimally Invasive—A New Subcutaneous Supra-Fascial Approach to Minimize Open Iliac Screwing
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Comparing Clinical Outcomes of Microdiscectomy, Interspinous Device Implantation, and Full-Endoscopic Discectomy for Simple Lumbar Disc Herniation

1
Department of Anesthesia, An Nan Hospital, China Medical University, Tainan 70965, Taiwan
2
Department of Medical Sciences Industry, Chang Jung Christian University, Tainan 71101, Taiwan
3
Department of Orthopedics, An Nan Hospital, China Medical University, Tainan 70101, Taiwan
4
Department of Neurosurgery, An Nan Hospital, China Medical University, Tainan 70965, Taiwan
5
Department of Neurosurgery, China Medical University Beigang Hospital, Yunlin 65152, Taiwan
6
Department of Neurosurgery, China Medical University Hospital, Taichung 40447, Taiwan
7
Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Chang Jung Christian University, Tainan 71101, Taiwan
8
Department of Biomedical Imaging and Radiological Science, China Medical University, Tainan 70965, Taiwan
9
School of Chinese Medicine, China Medical University, Tainan 70965, Taiwan
10
Biomaterials Translational Research Center, China Medical University Hospital, Taichung 40447, Taiwan
11
Department of Biomedical Informatics, Asia University, Taichung 41354, Taiwan
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors contributed equally to this work.
J. Clin. Med. 2025, 14(6), 1925; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14061925
Submission received: 28 December 2024 / Revised: 14 February 2025 / Accepted: 6 March 2025 / Published: 13 March 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Current Progress and Future Directions of Spine Surgery)

Abstract

Background/Objectives: The treatment for lumbar disc herniation (LDH) is surgical discectomy. This surgery may enhance spinal instability and exacerbate disc degeneration. The most common treatment options include microdiscectomy (MD), interspinous process device (IPD) implantation, and percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD). As few studies have compared these three procedures, this study focused on collecting data on the clinical, functional, and imaging outcomes of surgery for symptomatic LDH. Methods: This is a retrospective, transverse, and analytical study, with a total of 383 patients who received operations for symptomatic LDH between 2018 and 2022. Medical information from the charts of these patients was collected. The results were followed up on for a minimum of one year by collecting responses from several questionnaires and clinical data, including patients’ scores on the visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and symptomatic improvement score (SIS), as well as wound size, blood loss, hospital stay, postoperative disc change, and complications. Results: At the end of data collection, the VAS and ODI scores all showed significant improvement following these three procedures (p < 0.01). The SISs were all ranked as good (8.1, 8.5, and 7.9) post-surgery. PELD was a minimally invasive procedure that resulted in the smallest wound size (0.82 cm), minimal blood loss (21 mL), and a short hospital stay (4.2 days). A substantial pre-/postoperative change in disc height was noted in the MD (−17%) and PELD (−15%) groups. The complication rates were similar among the three groups (3%, 5%, and 5.6%). Conclusions: IPD implantation and PELD yielded outcomes comparable to those of conventional MD for symptomatic relief and functional recovery. Although the complication rates were similar, the postoperative complications were quite different from those of the other procedures. PELD resulted in rapid recovery and minimal invasion, and IPD implantation showed a good ability to preserve disc height and spinal stability; however, the clinical relevance of these findings in disc degeneration remains controversial.
Keywords: degenerative disc disease; discectomy endoscopic; interspinous process devices; lumbar disc herniation; microdiscectomy; percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy degenerative disc disease; discectomy endoscopic; interspinous process devices; lumbar disc herniation; microdiscectomy; percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Lee, C.-C.; Lin, R.-M.; Juan, W.-S.; Chuang, H.-Y.; Lin, H.-L.; Cheng, C.-H.; Yao, C.-H. Comparing Clinical Outcomes of Microdiscectomy, Interspinous Device Implantation, and Full-Endoscopic Discectomy for Simple Lumbar Disc Herniation. J. Clin. Med. 2025, 14, 1925. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14061925

AMA Style

Lee C-C, Lin R-M, Juan W-S, Chuang H-Y, Lin H-L, Cheng C-H, Yao C-H. Comparing Clinical Outcomes of Microdiscectomy, Interspinous Device Implantation, and Full-Endoscopic Discectomy for Simple Lumbar Disc Herniation. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2025; 14(6):1925. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14061925

Chicago/Turabian Style

Lee, Chien-Ching, Ruey-Mo Lin, Wei-Sheng Juan, Hao-Yu Chuang, Hung-Lin Lin, Cheng-Hsin Cheng, and Chun-Hsu Yao. 2025. "Comparing Clinical Outcomes of Microdiscectomy, Interspinous Device Implantation, and Full-Endoscopic Discectomy for Simple Lumbar Disc Herniation" Journal of Clinical Medicine 14, no. 6: 1925. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14061925

APA Style

Lee, C.-C., Lin, R.-M., Juan, W.-S., Chuang, H.-Y., Lin, H.-L., Cheng, C.-H., & Yao, C.-H. (2025). Comparing Clinical Outcomes of Microdiscectomy, Interspinous Device Implantation, and Full-Endoscopic Discectomy for Simple Lumbar Disc Herniation. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 14(6), 1925. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14061925

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop