LUMBAR AND/OR SACRAL NERVE ROOT INJURY DUE TO HERNIATED DISC
AND/OR DEGENERATIVE ARTHRITIS (OSTEOARTHRITIS)

PART 2: SURGICAL ALTERNATIVES

(A Patient Information Service)

The presence of the symptom of Back Pain (by itself and not accompanied by any mechanical physical signs of nerve root compression, neurological involvement of the particular nerve root[s] or structural spinal instability) is rarely a valid indication for surgery. Recognizing that no reasonable person would wish to undergo an unnecessary operation, it is, therefore, important for patients with back pain to understand this concept if those who are not going to benefit from surgery are to avoid it.

The following information reflects our philosophy and collective experience, relating to the treatment of thousands of patients with these problems over the many years of our active involvement in Neurological Surgery.

DIAGNOSTIC METHODS

MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging) has evolved as the single best Neuroimaging technique for the initial evaluation of the lumbar spine. It can be excellent for evaluating the spinal cord and some disc anatomy but does not give as detailed information about bone anatomy compared to CT. Often times when this information is placed in the context of a reliable neurological examination, the MRI derived information is sufficient for us to make an accurate assessment and to make a definitive surgical recommendation. In other words, the newer MRI technology has advanced to a point that it is frequently the sole source of "Neuroimaging" required for many patients. MRI scanning can also be of considerable help when evaluating certain post-operative conditions.

There appears to be a trend toward elucidating new "diseases" of the spine as more sophisticated and refined imaging methods become available, the result of which is that some of our very aggressive surgical colleagues have identified newer indications for surgical intervention. Most Neurological Surgeons, have a somewhat different and perhaps more conservative philosophy (and scientific understanding) about the spine and the treatment of its problems. One of these "new diseases", for example, is called the "black disc". This appearance, seen on MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging) scans, is a normal phenomenon of diminished water content (dehydration) of the disc related to the natural process of aging and use. Depending on the extent of one's life-long physical activity (at work and/or with sports activities) and as we get older, our discs are subjected to more or less "wear and tear". This process results in some internal changes. The disc, which has a "rubbery" consistency under age 20, becomes less viscous, more dehydrated and more like "crab meat" as we age. The image of these changes appears on the MRI scan as "black". We wish to caution patients against assuming that something horrible is happening to their bodies or that this necessarily requires surgical treatment. We want to point out that this is, in most people, an entirely "natural" process of living and rarely is indicative of a "disease" process. In our opinion this is not a problem that should require surgical intervention in the absence of other more significant problems such as instability of the spine or neurological signs and symptoms.

For a number of reasons neither the CT nor the MRI scans may reveal enough of the structural situation of the spine for the surgeon to make a decision about the precise pathological anatomy upon which treatment alternatives and recommendations would be made. In this case the surgeon may request that a "MYELOGRAM" be done. This x-ray examination, conducted by a Neuroradiologist, involves the placement of a needle into the spinal canal. (The skin and underlying tissues are anesthetized with locally injected anesthetic agents.) A special dye substance is injected through the needle into a particular place in the spinal canal (subarachnoid space) where it mixes with the Cerebrospinal Fluid (CSF), and the pattern of the flow of the dye is watched on a special x-ray screen (called "fluoroscopy") similar to a television. In the event that a "mass lesion" is present in the spinal canal, Myelography can frequently outline its anatomical configuration. "Mass lesions" are any abnormal conditions in the spinal canal, which take up space and therefore, displace the nerve roots from their usual position. Herniated Disc, Bone Spurs, Synovial Cysts or Spinal Tumors (which are rare and most frequently completely benign) are examples of "mass lesions." Once again, this test is subject to some technical limitations, and the quality and accuracy of the study depends on these and the technicians as well as the radiologists performing and interpreting the study. Once the dye injection has been successfully accomplished and appropriate routine x-rays have been taken, the patient will be placed in the CT scanner. This phase of the study (known as "post-myelographic CT scan") is the most helpful imaging concept currently available. IT GIVES THE MOST PRECISE ANATOMICAL DETAIL OF THE BONE ANATOMY AND THE EFFECT OF STRUCTURAL PATHOLOGICAL CONDITIONS ON THE SPINAL CORD/NERVE ROOTS.

In the majority of patients who suffer from a herniated lumbar disc, Myelography is not required. Usually the CT or MRI scan gives sufficient information. Myelography is invasive; and although the risks of adverse reactions to the patient are very low, there are definite risks. An unnecessary myelogram is not in the patient's best interest.

There are some other forms of examination that are occasionally utilized. "Discography" and "Disco-CT Scan" (injecting a dye into the disc) is a painful procedure that has very limited indications and even more limited usefulness in helping to make clinical decisions. We strongly disapprove of this test and do not use it.

Diagnostic Nerve Blocks (injecting anesthetic agents near a nerve root or a facet joint) is being done with increasing frequency by some doctors. Unfortunately these procedures offer little to nothing diagnostically or therapeutically for patients with nerve root problems that are the result of herniated discs and/or spinal canal narrowing.

Electromyography (EMG) is an electrical test that is sufficiently reliable only in the hands of very capable Neurologists or Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation specialists. Tiny needles, inserted through the skin, measure very small electrical currents from nerves and the affected muscles. The test can provide some useful neurophysiologic information if properly done. The problem with the test is the wide variation of reproducible findings, which may render poor results making the examination unreliable. The degree of training and the extreme care, which the doctor brings to the test and utilizes in interpreting the results, are critical. This test is not necessary for most patients who are candidates for surgery. For others it may provide important information concerning fairly subtle neurological involvement.

NATURAL HISTORY

Equally important is what will happen to patients who FAILED conservative treatment (patients suffering Lumbar Radiculopathy [injury to nerve roots] as a result of herniated or extruded discs with or without a component of spinal or foramenal stenosis or spinal stenosis and/or foramenal stenosis without the herniated disc) and a definitive operation is not done.

Several statements can be made about the "projected natural history." These are:

First, most Herniated Disc patients improve with a vigorous attempt at conservative therapy (initially with strict and complete bed rest) since the injury that resulted in a herniated disc is usually one where the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament and most of the Annulus Fibrosus remain intact (both are structures critical to holding a disc in place.)

Second, the degree to which patients subsequently remain free of symptoms depends on the extent of their initial injury (particularly to the capsule and ligament confining the disc) and the time that they allow, in the months following injury, for these structures to heal adequately.

Third, in the event that a nerve root is injured, the patient experiences pain and varying degrees of neurological deficit (such as tingling, numbness and muscle weakness).

Fourth, those patients who decide against surgery will continue to experience the pain for a fairly long time; however, the pain will eventually disappear once the nerve root dies. This could take weeks but more likely months to years.

Fifth, when the nerve dies the patient will be numb in the leg/and or foot region supplied by that nerve root. The muscles that receive their signals from the nerve will no longer work resulting in permanent paralysis. The degree to which this happens is variable in humans partly because of other nerve roots partially supplying similar regions and muscles. Nevertheless, it is unreasonable to expect, in these cases, to regrow a nerve supply to a paralyzed muscle.

Sixth, it is exceptionally rare for an "Extruded Disc" (one that has torn completely through the Annulus Fibrosus and the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament) to ever recede into its former "normal" position.

Seventh, when an extruded disc is not removed, more disc material could herniate through the already compromised Annulus Fibrosus and Posterior Longitudinal Ligament, placing more nerve roots at risk for serious injury.

SURGICAL PROCEDURES

As a general rule patients who undergo these operations require a general anesthetic. Fortunately, modern anesthetic techniques have reduced the associated risk to life to a tiny fraction. The anesthesiologist will discuss the matters relating to the anesthetic and will be pleased to answer any questions that you may have.

There are certain basic surgical concepts to be understood before recognizing which particular procedure is chosen for a patient. Although degenerative changes affect more than one disc, it is unusual for more than one disc to require surgical attention at any particular time. Extruded discs (discs that have either broken through the confining capsule and ligament or have so damaged the ligament and disc capsule that they are no longer capable of holding disc material in place) are only rarely found to have come from more than one level. Removal of degenerative discs that have not frankly herniated as a "prevention measure" is not appropriate except in very isolated cases. The primary purpose of these operations is to relieve the pressure on the nerve root(s).

In the case of an extruded disc, the primary surgical purpose is to remove the fragment of disc that has escaped its confining capsule and ligament and relieve pressure upon the nerve root(s) and/or spinal cord. A secondary but equally important aim of surgery is to try to reduce the risks of recurrence of the problem. In most patients with an extruded disc, an attempt is made to remove as much remaining disc as possible from the disc space itself. This is in addition to removing the extruded fragment(s). In order for a herniation to have occurred, the confining capsule and ligament must have been severely damaged. Frequently there is a fairly large hole in these structures. Other fragments of disc could subsequently herniate from this disc space since the structures that help to prevent this (the capsule and ligament) have been damaged irreparably. Although it is not possible to remove every last fragment of disc from within the disc space, no matter how vigorous an attempt is made, the remaining disc is usually tenaciously bound to the bone of the vertebral body. While many surgeons restrict their operation for lumbar disc herniation to the removal of the herniated fragment(s), the reader should understand our rationale for removing as much disc material as possible in order to prevent the significant risk of recurrent herniation. Our recurrence rate, over the years, has been exceptionally low at less than 3 percent. This compares very favorably with the generally recognized world wide experience where recurrence rates run are as high as 17 percent. In our hands, this operation is performed with Minimally Invasive technique, which also means the procedure is accomplished, in almost every case, on an out-patient basis.

In many patients compression of the nerve root results from a combination of pathological conditions of which the herniated disc is one. Where bony spinal canal and neural foramen narrowing are also factors, it is important to remove the overlying bone which, then, allows for complete "decompression" of the involved nerve root(s). This is an essential part of the definitive operative management of these clinical problems.

Once the majority of the Intervertebral Disc has been removed scar tissue will eventually fill in the space from which the disc is excised. It is never as effective as the original disc was. However the scar can be sufficiently effective in subsequent "spine mechanics" provided proper healing occurs. In a similar way, the tear in the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament (which cannot be repaired surgically) will ultimately heal through scar formation. For both structures - the disc space and the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament - it will take three (3) months for the scar formation to be "firm" and six (6) months for it to become "solid". Allowing time for proper healing and limiting some activities in the early postoperative period are important factors contributing to the long-term success of these procedures.

The most frequent operations performed for these diseases involve an avenue of approach from the back (posterior). All of these techniques involve the removal of part or the entire "roof" (the "Lamina") of the spinal canal in the affected area. Removal of the lamina from both sides is a "LAMINECTOMY." Removal of the lamina from only one side is a "HEMILAMINECTOMY."

The most common operation involves removing only a thumbnail-size piece of bone from the lamina in order to gain access to the spinal canal where the herniated disc fragment is lying against the nerve root. This procedure is called a "LAMINOTOMY" (or opening in the lamina). The bony canal through which the nerve root travels as it leaves the spinal canal is called the "neural foramen". It is almost always desirable, and frequently necessary, to remove part of the roof of this foramen in order to decompress (relieve pressure on) the nerve root. This is called a "FORAMENOTOMY."

In the event that a bone spur is the culprit causing the nerve root compression, it may be possible to remove it. This is usually the case if the spur originates from the Facet Joint lying directly behind the nerve root. However, if the bone spur comes from the front of the spinal canal, it may not be possible to safely remove all or any of the spur. The decompression of the spinal canal and the affected neural foramen is most frequently very successful in treating the symptoms and signs of this problem. While it is quite evident that not all the bone spur is removed and that it could continue to enlarge, it is actually unlikely to cause any further major difficulties provided an adequate decompression has been accomplished.

Most patients undergo these operations to relieve the pressure being exerted on the Nerve Roots. They already have some Neurological Deficit(s). The older the patient is at the time of operation, the longer they have had the Neurological Deficit and the more severe it is, the less likely they are to recover. Whatever Neurological Deficit persists one year after operation, is likely to be permanent.

MINIMALLY INVASIVE MICROENDOSCOPIC SPINE SURGERY

Permit us to repeat that our strong preference is to attempt to remove as much disc material as possible in order to reduce the risk of a recurrent herniation. The world-wide experience of recurrence is as high as 17%. Our "recurrence rate" has been less than 3% for over 25 years. This is partly due to the techniques that we have developed and to our post-operative management. Please review the information on pages 16 - 18 of this monograph as well as our post-operative patient guidelines for more specific information.

In the Minimally Invasive Microendoscopic Surgery the large back muscles, the fibres of which were spread apart by the special tubular retractor, fall back together. (In the more traditional technique these muscles would be scraped and separated from the bone and then must be re-approximated with strong suture material.) The skin incision is then closed in both types of surgery. In our cases, this is accomplished with "hidden" sutures.

Most patients who undergo these operations awaken from surgery essentially free of the severe pain that they had previously endured. Patients generally report that the pain from the incision in the back is not nearly as bothersome as that which they experienced preoperatively. The majority of patients are mobilized out of bed when they are awake and alert. It takes approximately three to four hours to completely recover from the effects of the anesthetic. It is important to get out of bed early unless you have been instructed otherwise. You will be asked to avoid taking excessive narcotic analgesic (pain reliever) in the early postoperative period in order to allow you to be mobilized. Narcotics make people sleepy which would preclude our staff from allowing you to be out of bed. The discomfort from the incision is rarely seriously painful. Actually once you are out of bed and walking, the pain is usually lessened even further. In our experience most patients leave the hospital on the same day. Rarely does anyone stay overnight with the exception of U.S. "Medicare" patients. In this unique situation, the government sponsored program REQUIRES THE PATIENT TO REMAIN IN HOSPITAL FOR ONE DAY OR ELSE THEY WILL NOT PAY THE HOSPITAL FEE. Invariably, these patients are discharged on the morning following surgery.

Patients, who undergo a "laminectomy" procedure, should recognize that this more extensive operation (compared to a "laminotomy" for a herniated disc) may result in more discomfort, more analgesic medication and a longer stay in hospital. These will be discussed on an individual basis with the patient involved.

BILATERAL LAMINENECTOMY/UNILATERAL APPROACH

In patients suffering "Cauda Equina Claudication" (pain in the legs while walking) due to "Spinal Stenosis" (narrowing of the spinal canal-usually resulting from severe degenerative arthritis with or without "Spondylolisthesis" [see pages 13 & 14]) the option of Minimally Invasive Microendoscopic techniques offers a considerable advantage compared with standard Microsurgical operations. Multi-level decompression procedures are usually accomplished using a multiple "port" technique. In our practice experience we have used up to three (3) ports in order to effectively "decompress" Lumbar Spinal Stenosis at up to four (4) levels.

Additionally, we have recognized that the majority of patients undergoing a two (2) or three (3) level Minimally Invasive Bilateral Laminectomy using a Unilateral Approach, are able to and are desirous of leaving the hospital on the same day as surgery. This means that the operations are done through our "Day Surgery" facility.

INTERSPINOUS PROCESS DECOMPRESSIVE SYSTEM

The implant is indicated for treatment of patients aged 50 or older suffering from pain or cramping in the legs (neurogenic intermittent claudication) secondary to a confirmed diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis.  The use of this device is indicated for those patients with moderately impaired physical function who experience relief in flexion from their symptoms of leg/buttock/groin pain, with or without back pain, and have undergone a regimen of at least 6 months of nonoperative treatment. The devices may be implanted at one or two lumbar levels.

This new technology also has the potential for use as "fixation" or "stabilizing" procedure when combined with other Minimally Invasive techniques such as in older patients with a mild form (Grade 1) spondylolisthesis and spinal stenosis. In this case a Minimally Invasive Decompressive Laminectomy may be combined with the insertion of the Interspinous Decompression System in order to assist in maintaining "stability" of the spine. This device should not be used in patients with:

• an allergy to titanium or titanium alloy;
• spinal anatomy or disease that would prevent implantation of the device or cause the device to be unstable in the body, such as:
  • significant instability of the lumbar spine
  • an ankylosed segment at the affected level(s)
  • acute fracture of the spinous process or pars interarticularis
  • significant scoliosis
• neural compression causing neurogenic bowel or bladder dysfunction;
• a diagnosis of severe osteoporosis
• active systemic infection or infection localized to the site of implantation.

ALTERNATIVE PROCEDURES

1. "Chemonucleolysis" involves injecting an "enzyme" (digestive substance not unlike a meat tenderizer) into the disc space. Although popularized in past years, it has progressively fallen into disfavor. The object of this effort is to "dissolve" the herniated portion of the disc. This procedure has become very controversial for several reasons. The Federal Drug Administration (FDA) took a strong hand in controlling the use and abuse of this agent and technique resulting from the serious risk to life from an uncontrollable fatal allergic reaction to the injected substance. In cases where the disc is extruded or the patient has serious neurological deficit this procedure is not appropriate. Some doctors have, in the past, or currently use this (and/or the other "Alternative" procedures listed in this section) as an alternative to surgery where the disc is not extruded but rather herniated beneath an intact but severely stretched and damaged capsule and ligament. The procedure requires the placement of a long needle into the disc space in order to inject the medication. This may not be possible at the lower lumbar level (L5-S1) in many patients for anatomical and technical reasons.

   In addition to the recognized risk of injury to the nerve root(s) due to the insertion of the needle, the enzyme can digest the disc material as well as nervous system tissue (nerve roots) if it is placed on the root(s). This complication results in a possible permanent paralysis of the lower extremities, bowel and bladder. Chemonucleolysis may be more expensive if hospitalization is longer and can only be used once in a patient's life because of the risk of death from an allergic reaction.

2. "Percutaneous Discectomy" (removal of the disc through a skin puncture) is another procedure aimed at disc disease and largely replaced Chemonucleolysis as a primary procedure by some few practitioners. In a manner similar to chemonucleolysis, a long probe (instead of a narrow needle) is pushed through the skin into the disc space. The anatomical and technical limitations to the needle placement for chemonucleolysis are similar for this operation. The probe is a pneumatically driven device that literally sucks in and bites off tiny pieces of disc in a repetitive fashion. The procedure is not to be used for disc fragments that have escaped through the confining capsule and ligament (extruded disc) since the risk of biting a nerve root is too high. This operation seems to have the same indications for use as has chemonucleolysis — namely a bulging, centrally located disc that is herniated under but not through the capsule and ligament at the L4-5 or L3-4 levels. The results of the procedure are highly touted by the surgeons who promote its use. These seem to include many of the surgeons who formerly promoted, and later abandoned, chemonucleolysis. The comparative results of this procedure relative to the best of micro-neurosurgical results have not been scientifically evaluated or presented despite the fact that the procedure has been available for quite a long time. One cannot help but ask the question: "If this procedure was worthwhile, why is it not being generally adopted?" There has not been a sustained vigorous debate in our scientific literature or at national scientific meetings regarding this procedure. The fact is that Percutaneous Discectomy cannot really compare except in an isolated category since it is not used for extruded discs. Additional information about this procedure is available if you wish to have it.

3. Another procedure ("IDET"- Intradiscal Electrothermal Annuloplasty) involves the use of heat in an attempt to "shrink" the disc that is "herniated" beneath the ligament. This concept involves the placement of a "needle/probe" in a manner similar to the "chemonucleolysis" procedure. Patients subjected to this procedure usually endure considerable low back pain for an extended period of time.

4. "Coblation" (Radiofrequency Discal Nucleoplasty) is another procedure that is similar to IDET, in that a needle is inserted into the disc. Instead of a heating wire, a special radiofrequency probe is inserted through the needle into the disc. This probe generates a highly focused "plasma field" with enough energy to break up the molecular bonds of the gel in the nucleus, essentially vaporizing some of the nucleus. The expected result is that 10-20% of the nucleus is removed to "decompresses" the disc and reduces the pressure on the "bulging" disc and, hopefully, on the surrounding nerve roots. This technique is touted by proponents to be more beneficial for "sciatic" pain than the IDET, since "nucleoplasty" can actually reduce the disc bulge, which is pressing on a nerve root. The high-energy plasma field is actually generated at relatively low temperatures, so danger to surrounding tissues is minimized.

   These last four procedures (Chemonucleolysis, Percutaneous Discectomy, IDET and Coblation) are incapable of managing a case with an extruded disc (one where the disc has actually escaped the confines of the encircling disc capsule and the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament) or those patients with bone spurs (osteophytes) that are compressing the nerve root(s) either from anteriorly or posteriorly. WE DO NOT PERFORM ANY OF THESE FOUR PROCEDURES.

   While the indications for all four of these "alternative treatments" are similar, the long-term follow-up on a large number of patients does not reflect favorably on any of the procedures. In our opinion, most of the patients who are being chosen for these "alternatives" (by the procedures' advocates) would do better by receiving appropriate "conservative" or non-operative care. In those patients who have failed a serious trail of appropriate physical therapy, Minimally Invasive microsurgical techniques are more likely to offer a higher level of long-term relief.

"ANTERIOR LUMBAR INTERBODY FUSION"

"ARTIFICIAL DISC REPLACEMENT"

One such device, the Charité disc, has been the subject of a large number of medical malpractice claims relating to their structural failure and the adverse consequences suffered by patients. The issue surrounding the variety of results seen after surgery coupled with the very limited scientific studies upon which the FDA approved this device, has caused some considerable concern. The disk was first approved in Europe, largely based on a highly limited study conducted there on 53 back pain patients. That study came to the conclusion that, "Proof that long-term results with the disk are at least as good as fusion results is still missing." This study offered the longest perspective of any to date, with a follow-up of 17 years.

A second European study of 107 back pain patients, with minimum follow-up of 10 years, concluded that the outcomes seen with the disc compared favorably with those typically seen with spinal fusion surgery. In the USA, the FDA based its approval on results from a study that found that back pain patients who received the disk did no worse than those who underwent spinal fusion. Follow-up in that study lasted for only 2 years.

We strongly urge anyone who has been advised to undergo this operation to do more research into the subject and obtain additional consultation.

SPINAL MANIPULATION

SPINAL FUSION

Spinal fusion as a primary treatment for "back pain" and "degenerative arthritis" is commonly performed in the USA. This author strongly disapproves of this overuse of "fusion" procedures in the absence of demonstrated spinal "instability" and/or multiple recurrent herniated discs at that single level. We, again, urge anyone who has been advised to consider this operation to seek additional consultation.

SPONDYLOLISTHESIS

In patients with a "Congenital" form of Spondylolisthesis, the condition usually becomes apparent in the late teenage years to the 30's. The "congenital" problem responsible for this is a defect (failure to form) a small bridging vertebral bone element called the "pars interarticularis". This means that one or both facet joints of one of the vertebra have failed to connect to the remainder of its vertebra resulting in instability.

Most cases of Spondylolisthesis due to "Degenerative Arthritis" become apparent in the patient's life during or after the late 50's. In these cases the facet joints have suffered advanced deterioration and now are incapable of holding the patient's vertebrae in normal alignment. This Degenerative Arthritis (Osteoarthritis) "deterioration" is due to "trauma" occurring over the lifetime of that particular patient and usually results from a combination of factors such as obesity, activity in sports, weight lifting, heavy work activities, etc.

"Traumatic" Spondylolisthesis is the least common form of this entity. Fractures of one or both facet joints of a lumbar vertebra may result in this slippage.

These anatomical "misalignments" frequently cause compression of the neural elements (nerve roots either within the spinal canal and/or as they exit the spinal canal through the neural foramena.) This may injure those roots to produce a neurological injury (weakness and/or sensory impairment in the lower extremities) which is usually mild in the beginning. In unusually advanced case, patients may suffer impairment of bowel and/or bladder function in addition to weakness of the muscles of the legs and loss of sensory function in the lower extremities and perineum.

Pain and/or neurological deficit(s) frequently bring this condition to the patient's awareness. The degree of pain varies from one person to the next. Some, with advanced degrees of slippage (Stage 2), may not have had pain in previous years despite the fact that there was instability for many years when their condition was only a Stage 1 variety. Others have minor degrees of slippage and suffer considerable pain.

The fundamental concepts of the surgical treatment for Spondylolisthesis involves establishing and maintaining structural stability while relieving pressure on the affected nerves of the spinal column. In many cases we are able to re-establish the precise anatomical integrity of spinal vertebral alignment. For most cases with this condition, the surgeon can reduce the degree of slippage without restoring "perfect" alignment and still obtain a very satisfactory long term clinical result. The degree of the patient's original slippage and certain anatomical features peculiar to that patient may reduce the probability to achieve a complete anatomical reduction of the slippage.

In most of these cases some form of "fusion" operation is required. This usually means placing a device between the vertebral bodies that were previously in misalignment. The goal will be for bone to grow from one vertebral body to the adjacent one in order to maintain long-term stability. Additional structural stability is established with the incorporation of some other form of "fixation" device(s) such as pedicle screws and rods, interspinous fixation device and/or posterior (or postero-lateral) bone fusion. All of this is meant to demonstrate that there are several modern stabilization/fusion methods available. These alternatives will be discussed on an individual basis as indicated.

Of particular interest now is the introduction of Minimally Invasive Spinal Fusion techniques. This has some significant advantages with operations done through very small incisions since there is less "surgical trauma" to local tissues compared to more traditional (or "open") techniques. Patients undergoing Minimally Invasive Lumbar Spine Fusion are usually walking around the hospital ward within 4 hours of surgery and are generally discharged from hospital the morning following surgery.

SURGICAL RISKS

The risk of injury to structures in the area of operation is present in any operation. Modern Micro-Neurosurgical and Minimally Invasive Microendoscopic techniques have helped to reduce these risks to very small fractions. The likelihood of paralysis of bowel and/or bladder function, paralysis of one or both lower extremities or impotence in males is remote. Likewise the risk to hemorrhage, infection, failure to relieve pain and/or the worsening or recurrence of the pain is small provided the patient adheres to the advice about postoperative care. It is possible that the neurological deficit, already present at the time of operation, will either worsen or fail to improve. In most cases it does improve quite quickly. As a general rule, whatever neurological deficit (sensory and/or motor function impairment) is still present one year after surgery, is probably permanent. The more advanced the neurological deficit is at the time of surgery, the longer it will take to improve and the less likely it is to completely recover. This does not mean that a patient with advanced neurological deficit cannot hope to improve; however, it is possible that some degree of neurological injury and disability will persist (sometimes it is only a small patch of numbness while in others a slight amount of weakness in the muscles that lift the top of the foot while walking.) Alternatively the numbness and weakness could be quite bothersome and limit many activities.

Although all operations are carried out with considerable caution, the sharp edge of bone or an instrument could inadvertently cut the Dura Mater (the tissue covering the nerve roots within the spinal canal.) This is an uncommon occurrence which, when recognized, usually only requires one small suture to close it. However, in the event where the small tear is not recognized or occurs at a later date, a postoperative leakage of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) can occur requiring another operation to close the leak. The surgical incidence of this complication is reported to be 2%. Our experience is lower. It is important to understand that straining in the early post-operative weeks could also result in a tear of the dura mater (since straining could force the dura mater to bulge through the Decompressive bone opening in the spine which then tears as it rubs against the bone) and subsequent CSF leak One post-operative rule to follow is

DON’T STRAIN!

Another potential serious complication is the postoperative occurrence of Arachnoiditis. The arachnoid is a thin filamentous membrane that lies inside the dura mater adjacent to the nerve roots. On rare occasion the arachnoid may react to injury (which may be from the trauma of the ruptured disc itself and/or Myelography as well as operation) by developing scar tissue inside the dura mater around the nerve roots. It is a very painful and potentially disabling condition. (Please see our "Arachnoiditis" Monograph, available in this website relating to our treatment experience with this difficult problem.)

For patients undergoing Lumbar Fusion Operations there are some additional risks such as the dislocation of the fusion device that was placed within the disc space. This unfortunate event could result in compression and injury to the nerve root(s) lying behind this dislocated device. This must be an uncommon experience and fortunately one which we have not ever had in any of our patients. It would, most likely, require another operation to correct the situation. Pedicle screws (that are used as part of some "fusion" operations) may injure nerve roots, become "loose" or require removal and replacement if suboptimally positioned. Rarely do the rods (that are placed as part of the "pedicle screw" implantation system) ever break. In the unlikely circumstance where this occurs, re-operation to remove or re-position the hardware may be required.

POST-OPERATIVE CARE

For those patients who undergo operation for the removal of a herniated intervertebral disc, it is important to LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF TIME for sitting (except for necessary bathroom functions) in the first couple of post-operative days. In the very early post-operative period, the preferred body positions are standing or lying down. When you leave the hospital it is preferred that you walk out. When being driven home (or to your hotel), try to do so in a reclining position (such as in the back seat of a large car or in a reclining passenger seat).

For those patients who undergo a Minimally Invasive "decompressive" laminectomy procedure (without removal of a herniated disc) and/or implantation of a Minimally Invasive Interspinous Decompression Device and those who undergo Minimally Invasive Lumbar Fusion procedures, you may begin sitting as soon as you find it comfortable to do so. In these situations we advise the patient to sit only in a straight-back chair, such as a kitchen or dining room chair. Please avoid recliners, sofas or "soft-back" chairs. Post-operatively you will, initially, want to sit for short periods of time and then increase it a little each day. For example, begin sitting for short meals. Then progressively increase the length of time that you sit and the frequency of sitting during the day. In unusual cases you will receive further instruction either at the time of discharge or at the time of your first office visit with the surgeon.

For patients undergoing a more extensive operation, such as a multiple-level laminectomy for decompression of a narrowed (stenotic) spinal canal, they must anticipate more postoperative discomfort and, perhaps, a longer postoperative hospital stay compared to those undergoing a more limited procedure for a single-level herniated disc. Nevertheless, early mobilization is just as important, if not more important. There are some other significant differences in postoperative care, including wound care that will be discussed with you as needed.

Please try to be aware of any activities or body positions, which produce pain since pain is your body's attempt to warn you of potentially harmful circumstances. Where you experience increasing pain, stop the activity and/or alter your body position. It is best to lie down for a while.

Walking will be your major form of exercise for several months. After the first day at home you may begin to walk out of doors (provided the weather is reasonable and there are no hills to negotiate). Set a reasonable schedule for pace and distance recognizing that as a general rule: "IF IT HURTS - DON'T DO IT!" A reasonable walking schedule should be developed and adhered to. Generally we find that most patients can walk at least one (1) mile per day at four (4) weeks postoperative and up to two (2) to four (4) miles per day after 6-8 weeks postoperative.

Avoid bending, stooping, lifting, pushing and pulling activities particularly in the first 2-3 postoperative months. Only lift that which can be easily accomplished with one arm. Do not lift anything with an outstretched arm. It takes time for tissues to heal. You can only cause delay in healing or interfere with the process with these activities.

Avoid aspirin and aspirin-containing compounds as well as ibuprofen containing drugs (Motrin, Medipren, Nuprin, Advil) since all of these interfere with the blood's clotting mechanism. Take as little pain medicine as possible. Tylenol (acetaminophen) or similar non-aspirin containing drugs should be all that are necessary. It is better to lie down when you have some pain than to take pain medicine to blunt the pain that is occurring from an activity that you are continuing to pursue. In the event that you need more potent analgesic medication, your physician will make the appropriate recommendations before you leave the hospital.

A general and well-balanced diet will provide the necessary nutrition to promote healing. We suggest that there be an added amount of protein intake to your diet during the post-operative months since protein is a primary source for the building blocks of repair of tissue.

You will have a list of other activities and personal hygiene given to you at the time of discharge from the hospital. Please make sure you understand what is expected and ask for clarifications. Your cooperation and strict adherence will help us to help you. It is very important to allow your body to heal itself to the maximum extent possible before stressing the operative site. Once you return to the office for follow-up visits you will receive further instructions as your recovery progresses and your condition warrants.

For those patients who come to us from other countries (or cities that are at some distance from Dallas), we will make special arrangements to contact you by telephone to discuss the progress of your care. In some instances, we will work with your local physician as required. In all cases, we will provide your local physician with the information that is relevant to your treatment. At a minimum, this will include the Operative Report and the Discharge Summary, both of which provide the technical details of the care that was provided to you.

Supplementary information, including diagrams, neuroimaging studies and examples of operations for these conditions can be found on our website as well as other venues.

Return to Top of Page

This page last edited on 2/20