Posterior epidural intervertebral disc migration and sequestration: A systematic review

Palmisciano, Paolo; Balasubramanian, Kishore; Scalia, Gianluca; Sagoo, Navraj S.; Haider, Ali S; Bin-Alamer, Othman; Chavda, Vishal; Chaurasia, Bipin; Deora, Harsh; Passanisi, Maurizio; Ros, Valerio Da; Giammalva, Giuseppe Roberto; Maugeri, Rosario; Iacopino, Domenico Gerardo; Cicero, Salvatore; Aoun, Salah G.; Umana, Giuseppe Emmanuele

doi:10.1016/j.jocn.2022.01.039

Cited by 10 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 88 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One of the participants advocated for the application of robotics in LMICs. In summary, the successful adoption of ED in LMICs can be achieved using a “6Ts” framework as follows:[ 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 ] Target identification, i.e. accurate diagnosis of patients’ conditions to determine the indication of ED; Technology, referring to wider access to technology to establish and update the endoscopy system; updating Techniques to parallel the evolution of novel and modified techniques; Training, both during and postresidency, using artificial models and cadavers; Testing, which means continuous outcome evaluation; and Talent comprising of innate and acquired surgical skills which can be evaluated using essential metrics, as Melcher et al .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Endoscopic versus microscopic discectomy for pathologies of lumbar spine: A nationwide cross-sectional study from a lower-middle-income country

Pahwa,

Tayal,

Chowdhury

et al. 2023

Journal of Craniovertebral Junction and Spine

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: We conducted a cross-sectional study to assess the preference of spine surgeons between MD for microdiscectomy and endoscopic discectomy (ED) surgery for the management of lumbar pathologies in a lower-middle-income country (LMIC). Methodology: An online survey assessing the preference of spine surgeons for various lumbar pathologies was developed and disseminated in “Neurosurgery Cocktail” a social media platform. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS software with a level of significance <0.05. Results: We received responses from 160 spine surgeons having a median experience of 6.75 years (range 0–42 years) after residency. Most of the spine surgeons preferred MD over ED, preference being homogeneous across all lumbar pathologies. In ED, the interlaminar approach was preferred more frequently than the transforaminal approach. The most commonly chosen contraindication for the interlaminar approach and transforaminal approach was ≥ 3 levels lumbar disc herniation (LDH) (n = 117, 73.1%) and calcified LDH (n = 102, 63.8%), respectively. There was no significant association between the type of approach preferred (MD vs. ED; and interlaminar vs. translaminar endoscopic approach) with the type of workplace and the level of experience. Conclusion: Spine surgeons were inclined toward MD over ED, due to various reasons, such as a steep learning curve, lack of training opportunities, and upfront expenses. There is a pressing need for the upliftment of ED in LMICs which requires global action.

show abstract