From the publishers of The New England Journal of Medicine

Save time and stay informed. Our physician-editors offer you clinical perspectives on key research and news.

  1. Home>
  2. Specialties>
  3. Neurology>
  4. Summary and Comment

Surgery for Herniated Lumbar Disc and for Spondylolisthesis

Two studies address the benefits — or lack thereof — of surgery for degenerative lumbar spine disease.

These two studies address the use of surgery for different types of degenerative lumbar spine disease.

Peul and colleagues randomized 283 patients with lumbosacral radicular pain to either microdiskectomy or conservative treatment; incapacitating lumbosacral radicular pain had lasted 6 to 12 weeks and was due to lumbar disc herniation. In the conservative-treatment group, surgery was offered after 6 months to patients with persistent sciatica and before 6 months to patients with nonresponsive leg pain or progressive neurologic deficits.

Of the 141 patients randomized to early surgery, 16 recovered before surgery could be performed; the remainder underwent surgery with a median delay of 1.9 weeks. Of 142 patients randomized to conservative treatment, 55 crossed over and had surgery during the first year (median of 14.6 weeks to surgery). For the first 4 weeks after surgery, the conservatively treated group did better, but after 4 weeks the operative group had less pain than the conservative-treatment group. The greatest difference in pain outcome between the groups (favoring the early-surgery group) occurred between 8 and 12 weeks. In the early-surgery group, 3.2% of patients had a second operation because of recurrent sciatica, compared with a 1.8% reoperation rate among the conservative-group patients who underwent surgery. At 1 year, the groups did not differ significantly on any outcome measure. The major advantage of early surgery was faster relief of sciatica pain.

Weinstein and colleagues enrolled 304 patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis in a randomized intention-to-treat study (surgery vs. conservative treatment) and 303 patients in an observational cohort study. However, the 1-year crossover rate in the randomized group was about 40% in each direction, so the authors lumped the two study cohorts together as observational and compared all results based on treatment actually received. A total of 372 patients had surgery within the first 2 years, and 235 were treated conservatively. The complication rate of surgery was reported only as "89% of the surgical patients had no operative complications." Compared with conservatively treated patients, those who underwent surgery had statistically significantly better pain outcomes at 3 months and an even greater benefit at 1 year that diminished only slightly at 2 years.

Comment: Microdiskectomy is a valid early treatment for severe sciatica due to lumbar disk herniation, but patients must be informed that, provided no severe complications of disk herniation occur, the end result will be the same with or without surgery. The findings of Peul and colleagues confirm previous conclusions (Spine 1983; 8:131). Any decision in favor of surgery is therefore elective and patient-driven, with the motive of symptom relief.

The findings of Weinstein and colleagues favor surgery for spondylolisthesis, but the study was not really controlled. The conclusion sounds intuitively correct in that the defect is structural and bony. Although symptoms may fluctuate or even be absent, if there is functional impairment it makes sense to correct the basic pathology, which will not resolve spontaneously as disk herniations can.

— Michael Ronthal, MD

Dr. Ronthal is Professor of Neurology, Harvard Medical School and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston.

Published in Journal Watch Neurology July 17, 2007

Citation(s):

Peul WC et al. Surgery versus prolonged conservative treatment for sciatica. N Engl J Med 2007 May 31; 356:2245-56.

Weinstein JN et al. Surgical versus nonsurgical treatment for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. N Engl J Med 2007 May 31; 356:2257-70.

Reader Remarks:

Read all Reader Remarks on this article

Your Remark:

Reader Remarks are intended to encourage lively discussion of clinical topics with your peers in the medical community. Please consider this when composing your remark.

Fields marked with an * are required.

Name as you'd like it to appear:

Submitting a comment indicates you have read and agreed to the remark guidelines and declare:*

PRIVACY: We will not use your email address, submitted for a comment, for any other purpose nor sell, rent, or share your e-mail address with any third parties. Please see our Privacy Policy.

 

CLEAR erases anything you've added in any part of the form. CONTINUE allows you to check your entire post (and edit it if necessary) before submitting.

To ensure that your Reader Remark is not formatted as one long paragraph, precede new paragraphs with either a blank line or an indentation.

Search

Advanced

Article Tools

Reader Remarks

(more...)

Sign-In

Forgot your password?

New to Journal Watch?

E-mail Alerts

Delivered to your inbox.
Tailored to your interests. Free.

Sign Up Now!

Journal Watch Newsletters

Available in 13 specialties with convenient delivery and 10 free online CME exams.

Subscribe Now!

Copyright © 2007. Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.