Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Automated percutaneous lumbar discectomy with and without chymopapain pretreatment versus non-automated, discoscopy-monitored percutaneous lumbar discectomy

An experimental study in human cadaver spines

  • Original Articles
  • Published:
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Percutaneous lumbar discectomy has gained growing interest during recent years as an alternative to open surgery for protrusions and non-sequestrated subligamentous intervertebral disc herniations. As a less invasive method it competes with chemonucleolysis. At least two modifications are known to date: automated percutaneous lumbar discectomy (APLD) with a 2-mm suction probe and non-automated, discoscopy-monitored percutaneous lumbar discectomy with a suction rongeur and a motor-driven shaver (NAPLD). In this study these two methods are compared for the amount of material extracted, dependence upon the degree of degeneration of the disc and intrinsic technical problems, using 20 human cadaver lumbar specimens for experimental testing. Total nucleotomy was not possible with either method. APLD yielded significantly less material and proved to be less effective in severely degenerated intervertebral discs than the NAPLD procedure, as preexisting gaps within the degenerated nucleus pulposus allowed the tissue to shift away from the tip of the 2-mm probe and facilitated displacement of the probe within the anulus fibrosus. By contrast, the rongeur, which first cuts the material to be removed and then carries it away by suction, was much more effective. Further data to support the advantages of non-automated percutaneous nucleotomy are discussed. Pretreatment of the disc with chymopapain did not result in a higher yield of nucleus material when combined with APLD.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Aufdermaur M (1961) Orthopädische Erkrankungen der Wirbelsäule - Pathologische Anatomie. Radiol Clin 30:350–369

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bartelheimer H, Dettmer N (eds) (1966) Binde- und Stützgewebe — Morphologische und biochemische Informationen; Symposium der Rheumaheilstätte, Bad Bramstedt, 1965. Steinkopff, Darmstadt, S 52, 53, 98

  3. Braun JP, Tournade A (1989) Chemonukleolyse des lumbalen Bandscheibenvorfalles. Radiologe 29:179–189

    Google Scholar 

  4. Choy DS, Case RB (1987) Percutaneous laser nucleolysis of lumbar discs (letter). N Engl J Med 317:771–772

    Google Scholar 

  5. Doerr W, Seifert G, Uehlinger E, Aufdermaur M (1984) Bandscheibendegenerationen und ihre Folgen. In: Doerr W, Seifert G, Uehlinger E (eds) Spezielle pathologische Anatomie; Pathologic der Gelenke und Weichteiltumoren 18/II. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, S 1051–1139

    Google Scholar 

  6. Franzini M, Altana P, Annesi V, Lodini V (1987) Iatrogenic vascular injuries following lumbar disc surgery. Case report and review of the literature. J Cardiovasc Surg 28:727–733

    Google Scholar 

  7. Galante JO (1967) Tensile properties of the human lumbar annulus fibrosus. Acta Orthop Scand [Suppl] 100:30–32

    Google Scholar 

  8. Golstein TB, Minik JH, Dawson EG (1989) Early experience with automated percutaneous lumbar discectomy in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation. Clin Orthop 238:77–82

    Google Scholar 

  9. Gomes F (1988) Automated percutaneous nucleotomy — initial experience in twenty-five cases of contained lumbar disc herniation. Acta Neurochir [Suppl] 43:55–57

    Google Scholar 

  10. Happey F, Naylor A, Palframan J, Pearson CH, Render RM, Turner RL (1974) Variations in the diameter of collagen fibrils, bound hexose and associated glycoproteins in the intervertebral disc. In: Fricke R, Hartmann F (eds) Connective tissues — Biochemistry and pathophysiology. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 67–70

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hausmann B, Forst R (1984) Quantitative Untersuchungen des ausgeräumten Bandscheibenraumes nach Nucleotomien: Z Orthop 122:269–271

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hausmann B, Forst R (1986) Planimetrische Untersuchungen des lumbalen Bandscheibenzwischenraumes nach Nucleotomien durch gerade und abgewinkelte Rongeure. Z Orthop 124:119–122

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hijikata S (1989) Percutaneous nucleotomy — a new concept technique and 12 years' experience. Clin Orthop 238:9–23

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hoppenfeld S (1989) Percutaneous removal of herniated lumbar discs — 50 cases with ten-year follow-up period. Clin Orthop 238:92–97

    Google Scholar 

  15. Maroon J, Onik G (1987) Percutaneous automated discectomay — a new method for lumbar disc removaL (technical note). J Neurosurg 66:143–146

    Google Scholar 

  16. Maroon JC, Onik G (1987) A new technique for lumbar disc removal. Hosp Phys 23:95–100

    Google Scholar 

  17. Maroon JC, Onik G (1989) Chirurgisches Protokoll Nukleotome System. Company leaftlet, G Hug GmbH, pp 1–5

  18. Maroon JC, Onik G, Sternau L (1989) Percutaneous automated discectomy — a new approach to lumbar surgery. Clin Orthop 238:64–70

    Google Scholar 

  19. Monteiro A, Lefèvre R, Pieters G (1989) Lateral decompression of a pathological disc in the treatment of lumbar pain and sciatica. Clin Orthop 238:56–63

    Google Scholar 

  20. Onik G, Helms C (1985) Percutaneous lumbar discectomy using a new aspiration probe: porcine and cadaver model. Radiology 155:251–252

    Google Scholar 

  21. Onik G, Helms C, Ginsburg L (1985) Percutaneous lumbar discectomy using a new aspiration probe. AJR 144:1137–1140

    Google Scholar 

  22. Onik G, Maroon J (1987) Percutaneous discectomy challenges chymopapain. Diagn Imag 9:142–145

    Google Scholar 

  23. Onik G, Maroon J, Helms C (1987) Automated percutaneous discectomy: initial patient experience. Radiology 162:129–132

    Google Scholar 

  24. Onik G, Davis GW, (1989) Clinical experience with automated percutaneous lumbar discectomy. Clin Orthop 238:98–103

    Google Scholar 

  25. Onik G, Maroon J, Davis GW (1989) Automated percutaneous discectomy at the L5-S1 level — use of a curved cannula. Clin Orthop 238:71–76

    Google Scholar 

  26. Postacchini F, Lami R, Massobrio M (1987) Chemonucleolysis versus surgery in lumbar disc herniations. Spine 12:87

    Google Scholar 

  27. Scheuner, Hutschenreiter (1963) Polarisationsmikroskopie in der Histophysik. Thieme, Leipzig

    Google Scholar 

  28. Schreiber A, Suezawa Y, Leu H (1988) Therapie des Bandscheibenprolaps — Chemonukleolyse versus perkutane Nukleotomie. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 133:1482–1485

    Google Scholar 

  29. Schreiber A, Suezawa Y (1989) Does percutaneous nucleotomy with discoscopy replace conventional discectomy? Eight years of experience of herniated lumbar disc. Clin Orthop 238:35–42

    Google Scholar 

  30. Schuler P, Clemens D, Rossak K (1983) Retroperitoneale Gefäßverletzungen nach lumbalen Bandscheibenoperationen. Z Orthop 121:203

    Google Scholar 

  31. Skuginna A, Hirtz D (1988) Behandlungsergebnisse und Abgrenzung der Indikationsstellung zur Chemonukleolyse bei lumbalen Bandscheibenvorfällen. In: Jahrbuch der Orthopädie. Regensberg und Biermann, Münster, S 105–112

    Google Scholar 

  32. Steffen R, Hedtmann A, Krämer J (1988) Aktuelle Bedeutung der Chemonukleolyse. In: Jahrbuch der Orthopädie. Regensberg und Biermann, Münster, S 91–104

    Google Scholar 

  33. Stern MB (1989) Early experience with percutaneous lateral discectomy. Clin Orthop 238:50–55

    Google Scholar 

  34. Suezawa Y, Schreiber A (1988) Percutane Nucleotomie mit Diskoskopie. 7-jährige Erfahrung und Ergebnisse. Z Orthop 126:1–7

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Klinikum Lahnberge, University of Marburg, Lahn, Germany

    M. Pfeiffer, T. Schäfer, P. Griss & K. Henkel

  2. Department of Neuropathology, Klinikum Lahnberge, University of Marburg, Lahn, Germany

    H.- D.- Mennel & D. Arndt

Authors
  1. M. Pfeiffer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. T. Schäfer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. P. Griss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. H.- D.- Mennel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. D. Arndt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. K. Henkel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pfeiffer, M., Schäfer, T., Griss, P. et al. Automated percutaneous lumbar discectomy with and without chymopapain pretreatment versus non-automated, discoscopy-monitored percutaneous lumbar discectomy. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 109, 211–216 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00453143

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00453143

Keywords

Search

Navigation