Microlumbar Discectomy vs Minimally Invasive Tubular Microdiscectomy: A Prospective Comparative Analysis

Background and Aim: Lumbar disc prolapse is a common cause of backache and radicular symptoms in lower limbs. Different surgical options have been described to compare the functional outcome, complications, and recurrence following surgery for lumbar disc prolapse by classical microlumbar discectomy (MLD) and minimally invasive tubular microdiscectomy. The advantages of one procedure over the other were also analyzed. Methods and Materials/Patients: A prospective, observational study conducted over a period of 1 year in the Department of Neurosurgery, Government Medical College Thiruvananthapuram, among patients who underwent surgical treatment for lumbar disc herniation by either microlumbar discectomy or minimally invasive surgery using a tubular retractor system. Ninety-nine patients who satisfied the inclusion and exclusion criteria were analyzed and tabulated for the outcome. Results: The two groups did not show a statistical difference in terms of functional outcome, complications, or recurrence rate. However, the need for post-operative analgesics, blood loss, and hence hospitalization was less in the tubular discectomy group. Conclusion: Both procedures are equally effective in terms of surgical results. However, the advantages and the subtle tendency of the patients to adopt “keyhole” make the tube an attractive option.