Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Apr;14(3):922-929.
doi: 10.1177/21925682221127997. Epub 2022 Sep 22.

Comparison of the Outcomes of Microendoscopic Discectomy Versus Full-Endoscopic Discectomy for the Treatment of L4/5 Lumbar Disc Herniation

Affiliations

Comparison of the Outcomes of Microendoscopic Discectomy Versus Full-Endoscopic Discectomy for the Treatment of L4/5 Lumbar Disc Herniation

Muneyoshi Fujita et al. Global Spine J. 2024 Apr.

Abstract

Study design: Retrospective Comparative Study.

Objectives: To compare the outcomes of microendoscopic discectomy (MED) versus full-endoscopic discectomy (FED) for treating L4/5 lumbar disc herniation (LDH).

Methods: A retrospective study was performed on patients with L4/5 LDH treated using MED (n = 249) or FED (n = 124). A 16-mm tubular retractor and endoscope was used for MED, while a 4.1-mm working channel endoscope was used for FED. Patient background and operative data were collected. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) scores were recorded preoperatively and at 1 and 2 years postsurgery.

Results: The background data of the two groups were similar. The mean operation times for MED and FED were 59.3 and 47.7 min (respectively), and the mean volumes of removed nucleus pulposus were .65 and 1.03 g, respectively. These differences were significant (P < .001). Six dural tears and one postoperative hematoma were observed in the MED group; none were observed in the FED group. During the follow-up period, 16 MED and 7 FED patients required re-operation due to recurrence (P = 1.00). Although the ODI and EQ-5D scores significantly improved at 1 and 2 years postsurgery in both groups, the differences were not statistically significant.

Conclusions: Operative outcomes were almost identical in both groups. We did not observe any operative or postoperative complications in FED. We, therefore, recommend FED as the first option for the treatment of L4/5 LDH since it has a better safety profile and is minimally invasive.

Keywords: L4/5; full-endoscopic discectomy; lumbar disc herniation; microendoscopic discectomy; minimally invasive.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Flow diagram of the study design. Abbreviations: MED, microendoscope discectomy; FED, full-endoscopic discectomy.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Preoperative radiographic findings on the characteristics of the LDH (LDH type, degree of migration, and size of LDH). (A) LDH is classified into three types according to the direction of herniation on the axial MRI: shoulder/ventral, central, and axilla types. A laterally compressed nerve root of the axilla type is indicated by the white arrow. (B) Schematic representation of the four anatomical migration zones and levels of LDH according to Lee’s classification. These zones cover an area from the inferior margin of the upper pedicle to the inferior margin of lower pedicle. (C) The size of the LDH is evaluated by measuring the protrusion height (D: white arrows) against the anteroposterior diameter of the spinal canal (D: gray arrows). Abbreviations: MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; LDH, lumbar disc herniation.

References

    1. Nikaido T. Current status of spinal endoscopic surgery. J Jpn Orthop Assoc. 2022;96:63-71.
    1. Yeung AT, Tsou PM. Posterolateral endoscopic excision for lumbar disc herniation: Surgical technique, outcome, and complications in 307 consecutive cases. Spine (Phila Pa1976). 2002;27:722-731. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200204010-00009 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Oshima Y, Inanami H, Iwai H, et al. Is microendoscopic discectomy effective for patients with concomitant lumbar disc herniation and spondylolysis? Global Spine J. 2020;10:700-705. doi: 10.1177/2192568219868970 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hofstetter CP, Ahn Y, Choi G, et al. AOSpine consensus paper on nomenclature for working-channel endoscopic spinal procedures. Global Spine J. 2020;10:111S-121S. doi: 10.1177/2192568219887364 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Chen Z, Zhang L, Dong J, et al. Percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy compared with microendoscopic discectomy for lumbar disc herniation: 1-year results of an ongoing randomized controlled trial. J Neurosurg Spine. 2018;28:300-310. doi: 10.3171/2017.7.SPINE161434 - DOI - PubMed