Prospective Comparison of Microsurgical, Tubular-Based Endoscopic, and Endoscopically Assisted Diskectomies: Clinical Effectiveness and Complications in Railway Workers

Objective Although endoscopic diskectomy is superior to microsurgical diskectomy in terms of incision size, postoperative pain, and cosmetic appeal, the effectiveness and indications for endoscopic versus microsurgical diskectomy remain active discussion topics. Because of the increasing incidence of diskectomies being performed in Russia, further assessment of these techniques is needed. We performed a comparative analysis of 1-year clinical results and complications of microsurgical, tubular-based interlaminar endoscopic, and endoscopically assisted microsurgical diskectomies for patients with herniated lumbar disks. Methods The patient cohort included 131 patients who were enrolled in a prospective, randomized controlled study and 617 patients for whom data were gathered retrospectively. The quality of life was assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index (version 2.1a) and pain severity was analyzed using the visual analog scale for pain preoperatively, at discharge, and at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Results Microsurgical, tubular-based endoscopic, and endoscopically assisted microsurgical diskectomies were all effective in relieving acute radicular symptoms. Recurrent disk herniation occurred more frequently after tubular-based endoscopic diskectomy than after the other approaches. Conclusions Our findings indicate that these 3 surgical techniques are highly effective and have similar clinical results at 1-year follow-up. Although this study points to differences in complications resulting from the 3 techniques, larger prospective studies are needed to more definitively assess possible surgical differences, complications, and outcomes. The endoscopically assisted diskectomy technique allows for minimally invasive surgery and offers enhanced visualization of the anatomy that is hidden from view in microscopic procedures.