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
Review
. 2023 Mar 24:14:100.
doi: 10.25259/SNI_168_2023. eCollection 2023.

Repeat discectomy for recurrent same level disc herniation: A literature review of the past 5 years

Affiliations
Review

Repeat discectomy for recurrent same level disc herniation: A literature review of the past 5 years

Gerald Musa et al. Surg Neurol Int. .

Abstract

Background: Recurrent disc herniations remain a challenge in spinal surgery. Although some authors recommend a repeat discectomy, others offer more invasive secondary fusions. Here, we reviewed the literature (2017-2022) regarding the safety/efficacy of treating recurrent disc herniations with repeated discectomy alone.

Methods: Our literature search of recurrent lumbar disc herniations included; Medline, PubMed, Google scholar, and the Cochrane database. We focused on the types of discectomy performed, perioperative morbidity, costs, length of surgery, pain scores, and incidence of secondary dural tears.

Results: We identified 769 cases that included 126 microdiscectomies, and 643 endoscopic discectomies. Rates of disc recurrence ranged from 1% to 25% with accompanying secondary durotomy varying from 2% to 15%. In addition, operative times were relatively short, ranging from 29.2 min to 125 min, with a relatively small average estimated blood loss (i.e., minimal to maximally 150 mls).

Conclusion: Repeated discectomy was the most commonly performed treatment for same-level recurrent disc herniations. Despite minimal intraoperative blood loss and short operating times, there was a significant risk of durotomy. Notably, patients must be informed that more extensive bone removal for treating recurrent disc increases the risk for instability warranting subsequent fusion.

Keywords: Degenerative disc disease; Disc herniation; Recurrent herniation; Spinal instability.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

There are no conflicts of interest.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Ahsan MK, Hossain MR, Khan MS, Zaman N, Ahmed N, Montemurro N, et al. Lumbar revision microdiscectomy in patients with recurrent lumbar disc herniation: A single-center prospective series. Surg Neurol Int. 2020;11:404. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Fujita M, Inui T, Oshima Y, Iwai H, Inanami H, Koga H. Comparison of the outcomes of microendoscopic discectomy versus full-endoscopic discectomy for the treatment of L4/5 lumbar disc herniation. Global Spine J. 2022:21925682221127997. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Goker B, Aydin S. Endoscopic surgery for recurrent disk herniation after microscopic or endoscopic lumbar diskectomy. Turk Neurosurg. 2020;30:112–8. - PubMed
    1. Kang MS, Hwang JH, Choi DJ, Chung HJ, Lee JH, Kim HN, et al. Clinical outcome of biportal endoscopic revisional lumbar diskectomy for recurrent lumbar disk herniation. J Orthop Surg Res. 2020;15:557. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lee JS, Kim HS, Pee YH, Jang JS, Jang IT. Comparison of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar diskectomy and open lumbar microdiskectomy for recurrent lumbar disk herniation. J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg. 2018;79:447–52. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources