Lumbar disc herniation surgery in adolescents and young adults

Abstract

AimsThe purpose of this study was to investigate the risk of additional surgery in the lumbar spine and to describe long-term changes in patient-reported outcomes after surgery for lumbar disc herniation in adolescents and young adults.Patients and MethodsWe conducted a retrospective study design on prospectively collected data from a national quality register. The 4537 patients were divided into two groups: adolescents (≤ 18 years old, n = 151) and young adults (19 to 39 years old, n = 4386). The risk of additional lumbar spine surgery was surveyed for a mean of 11.4 years (6.0 to 19.3) in all 4537 patients. Long-term patient-reported outcomes were available at a mean of 7.2 years (5.0 to 10.0) in up to 2716 patients and included satisfaction, global assessment for leg and back pain, Oswestry Disability Index, visual analogue scale for leg and back pain, EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D), and 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) Mental Component Summary and Physical Component Summary scores. Statistical analyses were performed with Cox proportional hazard regression, chi-squared test, McNemar’s test, Welch–Satterthwaite t-test, and Wilcoxon’s signed-rank test.ResultsAny type of additional lumbar spine surgery was seen in 796 patients (18%). Surgery for lumbar disc herniation accounted for more than half of the additional surgeries. The risk of any additional surgery was 0.9 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.6 to 1.4) and the risk of additional lumbar disc herniation surgery was 1.0 (0.6 to 1.7) in adolescents compared with the young adult group. Both age groups improved their patient-reported outcome data after surgery (all p < 0.001). Changes between short- (mean 1.9 years (1.0 to 2.0)) and long-term follow-up (mean 7.2 years (5.0 to 10.0)) were small.ConclusionThe risk of any additional lumbar spine surgery and additional lumbar disc herniation surgery was similar in adolescents and young adults. All patient-reported outcomes improved from preoperative to the short-term follow-up, while no likely clinically important differences between the short- and long-term follow-up were seen within both groups. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1534–1541

1,25(OH)2D3 Mitigates Oxidative Stress-Induced Damage to Nucleus Pulposus-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells through PI3K/Akt Pathway

“…As a result, the treatment cost places a substantial burden on the family and society [ 2 , 3 ]. Much effort has been expended in the development of medicines and surgical treatments for IVDD, but they mainly relieve symptoms and cannot effectively alleviate or reverse the process of IVDD [ 34 , 35 ]. In recent years, MSC-based biological treatment has gradually exhibited advantages [ 6 – 9 , 25 ].…”

A comparative study of single and double incision for L4/5 and L5/S1 double-level percutaneous interlaminar lumbar discectomy

“…It was mainly presented with the clinical symptom of lumbar and leg pain, seriously affecting patients' daily life ( 1 , 2 ). In the clinic, we find that it is not rare for young patients to develop double-level LDH, while patients who fail to receive stepwise conservative treatment always need further surgical interventions ( 3 , 4 ). Lumbar discectomy is the traditional treatment for LDH, but it has some disadvantages, such as difficulty in operation skills and resection of normal structures, including skeletal tissue ( 5 , 6 ).…”

Percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy ameliorates postoperative reactive pain in patients with lumbar disc herniation

“…Lumbosacral radiculopathy caused by LDH always carries a series of signs and symptoms and often leads to surgical intervention when conservative management fails [2][3][4]. Traditional open discectomy through unilateral interlaminar approach has obtained satisfactory results [5,6]. However, approximately one-third patients who accepted traditional discectomy presented with reactive pain few days after operation [7].…”