• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

关于复发性腰椎间盘突出症最理想治疗技术的争论:简要综述

The debate on most ideal technique for managing recurrent lumbar disc herniation: a short review.

作者信息

Onyia Chiazor U, Menon Sajesh K

机构信息

a Neurosurgery Division, Department of Surgery , Obafemi Awolowo University Teaching Hospitals Complex , Ile-Ife , Nigeria.

b Department of Neurosurgery , Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences, Amrita University , Kochi , Kerala , India.

出版信息

Br J Neurosurg. 2017 Dec;31(6):701-708. doi: 10.1080/02688697.2017.1368451. Epub 2017 Aug 22.

DOI:10.1080/02688697.2017.1368451
PMID:28830249
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Though different techniques have been successfully employed in the treatment of recurrent lumbar disc herniation, the one which should be considered most ideal has remained a controversy, particularly since there are currently no generally accepted guidelines for surgical care.

OBJECTIVE

To review previous publications comparing the available operative options, with the aim of determining if any of the available interventions gives better outcomes compared to others.

METHODS

A systematic literature review of previous publications comparing various techniques employed in the surgical treatment of recurrent disc herniation.

RESULTS

All publications investigated in this review clearly demonstrated quite comparable outcomes, with no superiority of one method over the other.

CONCLUSION

In view of the currently available data and evidence, minimally invasive techniques for revision of recurrent disc herniation do not really appear to be superior to the conventional open surgical approaches and vice-versa. We suggest the management strategy for surgical treatment of each case of recurrence to be simply based on the experience of the surgeon, the available facilities and equipment. Fusion should not be undertaken in all recurrences but should only be considered as an option for revision when spinal instability, spinal deformity or associated radiculopathy is present.

摘要

背景

尽管不同技术已成功应用于复发性腰椎间盘突出症的治疗,但哪种技术应被视为最理想的技术仍存在争议,特别是因为目前尚无普遍接受的手术治疗指南。

目的

回顾以往比较现有手术选择的出版物,以确定与其他干预措施相比,是否有任何现有干预措施能带来更好的结果。

方法

对以往比较复发性椎间盘突出症手术治疗中使用的各种技术的出版物进行系统的文献综述。

结果

本综述中调查的所有出版物均清楚显示结果相当,没有一种方法优于另一种方法。

结论

鉴于目前可得的数据和证据,复发性椎间盘突出症翻修的微创技术似乎并不真的优于传统开放手术方法,反之亦然。我们建议,每例复发病例的手术治疗管理策略应仅基于外科医生的经验、可用的设施和设备。并非所有复发病例都应进行融合,只有在存在脊柱不稳、脊柱畸形或相关神经根病时,才应将融合视为翻修的一种选择。

相似文献

1
The debate on most ideal technique for managing recurrent lumbar disc herniation: a short review.关于复发性腰椎间盘突出症最理想治疗技术的争论:简要综述
Br J Neurosurg. 2017 Dec;31(6):701-708. doi: 10.1080/02688697.2017.1368451. Epub 2017 Aug 22.
2
Surgical interventions for lumbar disc prolapse.腰椎间盘突出症的外科干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Jan 24(1):CD001350. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001350.pub3.
3
Surgical interventions for lumbar disc prolapse.腰椎间盘突出症的外科干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Apr 18;2007(2):CD001350. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001350.pub4.
4
Operative Approaches for Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Systematic Review and Multiple Treatment Meta-Analysis of Conventional and Minimally Invasive Surgeries.腰椎间盘突出症的手术方法:传统手术与微创手术的系统评价和多治疗方法荟萃分析
World Neurosurg. 2018 Jun;114:391-407.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2018.02.156. Epub 2018 Mar 14.
5
Surgery for lumbar disc prolapse.腰椎间盘突出症的手术治疗。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000(3):CD001350. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001350.
6
A systematic review of mechanical lumbar disc decompression with nucleoplasty.经皮髓核成形术治疗腰椎间盘突出症的系统评价
Pain Physician. 2009 May-Jun;12(3):561-72.
7
An evidence-based review of the literature on the consequences of conservative versus aggressive discectomy for the treatment of primary disc herniation with radiculopathy.关于保守性椎间盘切除术与积极椎间盘切除术治疗原发性神经根型椎间盘突出症后果的文献循证综述。
Spine J. 2009 Mar;9(3):240-57. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2008.08.005. Epub 2008 Sep 21.
8
Percutaneous lumbar laser disc decompression: a systematic review of current evidence.经皮腰椎激光椎间盘减压术:当前证据的系统评价
Pain Physician. 2009 May-Jun;12(3):573-88.
9
Antidepressants for pain management in adults with chronic pain: a network meta-analysis.抗抑郁药治疗成人慢性疼痛的疼痛管理:一项网络荟萃分析。
Health Technol Assess. 2024 Oct;28(62):1-155. doi: 10.3310/MKRT2948.
10
Automated percutaneous lumbar discectomy for the contained herniated lumbar disc: a systematic assessment of evidence.自动经皮腰椎间盘切除术治疗包容性腰椎间盘突出症:证据的系统评估
Pain Physician. 2009 May-Jun;12(3):601-20.

引用本文的文献

1
When can lumbar fusion be considered appropriate in the treatment of recurrent lumbar disc herniation? A systematic review and meta-analysis.在复发性腰椎间盘突出症的治疗中,何时可认为腰椎融合术是合适的?一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
Brain Spine. 2025 May 30;5:104285. doi: 10.1016/j.bas.2025.104285. eCollection 2025.
2
Repeat Discectomy or Instrumented Surgery for Recurrent Lumbar Disk Herniation: An Overview of French Spine Surgeons' Practice.复发性腰椎间盘突出症的翻修椎间盘切除术或器械辅助手术:法国脊柱外科医生的实践概述
Global Spine J. 2025 Apr;15(3):1533-1543. doi: 10.1177/21925682241249102. Epub 2024 Apr 23.
3
Lumbar disc herniation: Prevention and treatment of recurrence: WFNS spine committee recommendations.
腰椎间盘突出症:复发的预防与治疗:世界神经外科联合会脊柱委员会建议
World Neurosurg X. 2024 Feb 9;22:100275. doi: 10.1016/j.wnsx.2024.100275. eCollection 2024 Apr.
4
Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation: Does Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Lead to Better Clinical and Radiological Outcomes than Redo-Discectomy?复发性腰椎间盘突出症:与再次椎间盘切除术相比,经椎间孔腰椎椎体间融合术是否能带来更好的临床和影像学结果?
Asian Spine J. 2023 Oct;17(5):862-869. doi: 10.31616/asj.2022.0210. Epub 2023 Aug 14.
5
Revision after failed discectomy.翻修失败的椎间盘切除术。
Eur Spine J. 2020 Feb;29(Suppl 1):14-21. doi: 10.1007/s00586-019-06194-9. Epub 2019 Oct 29.
6
Recurrent lumbar disc herniation recurrence after percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy: A case report.经皮内镜下腰椎间盘摘除术后复发性腰椎间盘突出症复发:一例报告。
Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Aug;97(34):e11909. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000011909.