PLoS ONE (Jan 2015)

Comparison of discectomy versus sequestrectomy in lumbar disc herniation: a meta-analysis of comparative studies.

  • Jisheng Ran,
  • Yejun Hu,
  • Zefeng Zheng,
  • Ting Zhu,
  • Huawei Zheng,
  • Yibiao Jing,
  • Kan Xu

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0121816
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 10, no. 3
p. e0121816

Abstract

Read online

BackgroundLumbar disc removal is currently the standard treatment for lumbar disc herniation. No consensus has been achieved whether aggressive disc resection with curettage (discectomy) versus conservative removal of the offending disc fragment alone (sequestrectomy) provides better outcomes. This study aims to compare the reherniation rate and clinical outcomes between discectomy and sequestrectomy by literature review and a meta-analysis.MethodsA systematic search of PubMed, Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library was performed up to June 1, 2014. Outcomes of interest assessing the two techniques included demographic and clinical baseline characteristics, perioperative variables, complications, recurrent herniation rate and post-operative functional outcomes.ResultsTwelve eligible trials evaluating discectomy vs sequestrectomy were identified including one randomized controlled study, five prospective and six retrospective comparative studies. By contrast to discectomy, sequestrectomy was associated with significantly less operative time (pConclusionsAccording to our pooled data, sequestrectomy entails equivalent reherniation rate and complications compared with discectomy but maintains a lower incidence of recurrent low back pain and higher satisfactory rate. High-quality prospective randomized controlled trials are needed to firmly assess these two procedures.