Surgical Treatment of Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation: To Fuse or Not To Fuse

Read full text
Authors: Gregor Fischer, Eva Kilian, Friederike Schömig, Jacopo Vitale, Dave O’Riordan, Jani Puhakka, Raluca Reitmeir, Mario D. Ropelato, Daniel Haschtmann, Frank Kleinstück, Tamás Fülöp Fekete, Dezso Jeszenszky
+4 more François Porchet, P. Vajkoczy, Fabio Galbusera, Markus Loibl
Cited by: 1
References: 29

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Optimal surgical treatment for recurrence of lumbar disc herniation (LDH) remains controversial, with options ranging from repeat microdiscectomy (MD) to instrumented fusion (IF). This study aimed to guide surgical decision-making by analyzing reoperation rates, clinical and radiographic risk factors for treatment failure, and functional outcomes following MD versus IF. METHODS: Prospectively collected data from 450 patients in our outcomes database who underwent surgery for recurrent LDH from 2004 through 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. Clinical assessment included predominant symptoms, neurological deficits, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade. Radiographic assessment included disc height, Pfirrmann grade, facet angle, and Modic changes on magnetic resonance imaging, as well as spinopelvic parameters on standing radiographs. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) and achievement of the minimal clinically important change (MCIC) of ≥2.2 points. Propensity-score matching (PSM) was performed to control for confounding factors. Reoperation rates were analyzed with a minimum 5-year follow-up. RESULTS: Of 450 patients with recurrent LDH, 316 (70.2%) underwent MD and 134 (29.8%) underwent IF. In 192 patients after PSM, IF showed nonsignificantly higher MCIC achievement (odds ratio [OR] = 1.20, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.66 to 2.17, p = 0.65) and lower COMI scores compared with the MD group (3.34 ± 2.89 versus 4.01 ± 2.95, p = 0.059; derived Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]: 23.8 versus 28.1). IF demonstrated significantly lower reoperation risk compared with MD (15.7% [116/316] versus 36.7% [21/34], p < 0.001). The reoperations following MD were predominantly subsequent IF (73.3%) and repeat MD (23.3%), while the reoperations after IF were predominantly adjacent segment surgery (57.1%) and hardware revision (33.3%). BMI of ≥35 kg/m 2 was a significant predictor of reoperation after MD (univariate OR = 3.63, p = 0.039), while disc height of

Fields of Study & Subjects

Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology Cervical and Thoracic Myelopathy Spinal Hematomas and Complications

Publication details

Journal / source
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Volume
108
Issue
16
Pages
1280–1288
Publication date
1 April 2026
Language
EN