Lumbar discectomy is the most common operation performed in the United States for lumbar-related symptoms.  Lumbar disc herniation accounts for only 5% of all low back pain problems but is the most common cause of radiating nerve root pain (sciatica). 
Mixter and Barr described the first surgical procedure to remove the herniated lumbar disc in 1934 through a laminectomy and durotomy, with later enhancement by Semmes, who described approaching the herniated disc through hemilaminectomy and retraction of the dural sac. This became popularized as the “classical discectomy technique.” 
During the latter half of the 19th century, more techniques were developed to remove the herniated disc with minimal invasiveness  . The first herniated disc excision using a microscope (microdiscectomy) was performed by Yasargil in 1977, which was the standard surgical procedure at the time. In 1993, Mayer and Brock and then in 1997, Smith and Foley described endoscopic discectomy techniques.  With these minimally invasive techniques, authors demonstrated decreased soft tissue manipulation, operative time, blood loss, and hospital stay, allowing early recovery. 
The natural history of lumbar disc herniation indicates that they may decrease in size or even disappear within a few weeks or months of onset. In migrated or extruded herniations, phagocytosis of the herniated disc by the macrophages occurs, while, in contained herniations, dehydration of the herniated nucleus pulposus plays a major role in the reduction of the herniated disc size.
The literature suggests that lumbar discectomy provides effective clinical benefit in carefully selected patients with sciatica. There is strong evidence in favor of microdiscectomy surgery over conservative treatment at short-term follow-up, but, at long-term follow-up, there is no significant difference among patients with subacute lumbar disc herniation with associated radiculopathy (LDHR) between the two groups.  Overall, the long-term benefits of surgery versus nonoperative treatment are still unclear.
Approximately 90% of acute sciatica attacks improve with conservative management; thus, the mainstay of treatment for a patient with symptomatic lumbar disc herniation continues to be nonoperative methods, such as treatment with anti-inflammatory medications, physical therapy, and lumbar injection, unless the patient has an acute or progressive neurological deficit.
Indications for lumbar discectomy include altered bladder and bowel function and progressive neurological deficits such as motor weakness or sensory deficit in the lower extremities. Surgery should also be considered in patients with radicular pain that persists after an adequate course of conservative management.
Lumbar discectomy has no absolute contraindications. However, below are some factors to consider before deciding on lumbar discectomy.
Clinical/radiological discrepancy: A patient with clinical findings that do not correlate with the radiological findings is unlikely to benefit from surgery. Typically, this occurs with symptoms on the opposite side or at a different level from the disc.
Primarily back pain: Patients with mostly back pain are not good surgical candidates. The patients who benefit most from surgery are those who primarily have radicular pain (sciatica).
Inadequate conservative treatment: Patient should be given a trial of adequate conservative management (at least 6 weeks of physical therapy) before surgical intervention, since 90% sciatica cases improve with conservative treatment alone.
The most common complications associated with lumbar discectomy performed in the prone position are nerve palsies and compression injuries due to inappropriate positioning, exaggerated limb stretch, and inadequate padding. Simple padding with cushions, sheets, blankets, or egg-crate padding prevent these complications. Brachial plexus injuries can result from excessive abduction of the shoulders.
Proper preoperative planning and intraoperative radiographic localization are important to prevent wrong-level surgery. It is important to compare the appearance of the lumbar and sacral vertebrae on preoperative studies with intraoperative localizing films to determine the proper level. Some patients have a transitional vertebral that could be considered either L5 or S1. As long as the nomenclature is consistent, wrong-level surgery can be avoided. Be careful that there is no movement of the localizing instrument between taking the radiograph and visual confirmation in the operative field.
The complications from lumbar discectomy can be broadly divided into 2 major groups, intraoperative and postoperative, related to the time course when they occur.
Wrong-level surgery: One comparative study reported that wrong-level surgery occurs in 3.3% of cases performed by less-experienced surgeons and 1.2% of cases performed by very experienced surgeons.  Proper preoperative planning and intraoperative vigilance is important to prevent wrong-level exploration.
Dural tear: Injuries to the dura with consequent CSF leak can generally be recognized intraoperatively. Weinstein et al reported in a review article that this occurs in 3% of cases.  If detected intraoperatively, it can be primarily repaired with 6-0 Prolene. After a good dural closure has been obtained, patients can be mobilized the same day, although some surgeons prefer to keep their patients on bedrest for 48 hours or longer after dural repair.
Nerve root injury: Iatrogenic nerve injuries occur more commonly in reoperations because of scarring but can also occur in primary operations, resulting from vigorous retraction, unidentified conjoined nerve roots, and large disc herniations. Nerve root injury after lumbar spine surgery has been reported to occur in about 0.2% cases.  The most vulnerable region for a nerve root injury is the axilla of the nerve root, so it is recommended to stay as lateral to the nerve root as possible. Identifying the nerve root and thecal sac before removing the disc fragments can also decrease the risk of injury.
Anterior vessel or visceral injuries: The vessels that lie anterior to the anterior longitudinal ligament can be inadvertently damaged with aggressive removal of disc from the anterior interspace. The most frequently reported injury is that of the left common iliac artery caused by maneuvers in the L4/5 disc space. Fortunately, anterior vessel injury is rare, with an overall reported complication rate of 0.045%. The mortality rate reported with this complication, even with prompt reaction, is around 50%.  In about half of cases, the anterior vessel injury can be diagnosed during surgery, with the rest of the cases identified later, usually upon resulting hypotension and painful abdominal swelling.
Infection: The disc space infection rate after lumbar discectomy ranges from 0.13%-0.9%. [11, 12] Infections after lumbar discectomy can be classified as superficial or deep wound. The superficial infection rate after lumbar discectomy is around 2%-3%, which is similar to other surgeries. Deep infections typically present as epidural abscess or discitis, which can involve the surrounding vertebral bodies, resulting in spondylodiscitis. Postoperative spondylodiscitis can be treated with systemic antibiotics; however, if the patient develops an abscess, it may need surgical or percutaneous drainage under CT guidance.
Recurrent disc herniation: The incidence of recurrent lumbar disc herniation resulting in reoperation ranges from 3%-18% in patients undergoing first-time disc surgery.  Often, patients have a pain-free interval before they present with recurrent pain in the original pain distribution. Lebow et al showed that 23.1% patients demonstrated radiographic evidence of recurrent disc herniation at the level of prior discectomy on serial imaging, occurring about a year after surgery. The recurrent disc herniation was asymptomatic in 13% of patients and symptomatic in 10.2%. The symptomatic patients underwent revision discectomy. 
Thromboembolic complications: Patients are at risk of thromboembolic complications during the perioperative period. The reported rate of embolic complications range from 0.1%-1%, and the rate of lower-extremity thrombosis is likely higher than this.  Sequential compression devices (SCDs) should be used during the surgery to decrease the risk of thromboembolism. If a patient requires prolonged bedrest following surgery, subcutaneous heparin or the equivalent should be used.
Nerve palsies related to positioning: Brachial plexus stretch due to hyperabduction of the arm and ulnar and radial nerve palsies can result from inappropriate positioning of the arm during surgery. The shoulder should not be abducted more than 45°, and bony prominences such as elbows and wrists should be properly padded.
Persistent symptoms  : Persistent symptoms typically result from inadequate removal of the herniated disc, wrong-level surgery, or nerve injury from retraction. Careful preoperative planning and accurate radiographic localization during surgery can minimize these complications.
Weinstein JN, Lurie JD, Tosteson TD, Skinner JS, Hanscom B, Tosteson AN, et al. Surgical vs nonoperative treatment for lumbar disk herniation: the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT) observational cohort. JAMA. 2006 Nov 22. 296(20):2451-9. [Medline]. [Full Text].
Gibson JN, Grant IC, Waddell G. Surgery for lumbar disc prolapse. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000. CD001350. [Medline].
Gotfryd A, Avanzi O. A systematic review of randomised clinical trials using posterior discectomy to treat lumbar disc herniations. Int Orthop. 2009 Feb. 33(1):11-7. [Medline].
Evaniew N, Khan M, Drew B, Kwok D, Bhandari M, Ghert M. Minimally invasive versus open surgery for cervical and lumbar discectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. CMAJ Open. 2014 Oct. 2 (4):E295-305. [Medline].
Jiang W, Sun B, Sheng Q, Song X, Zheng Y, Wang L. Feasibility and efficacy of percutaneous lateral lumbar discectomy in the treatment of patients with lumbar disc herniation: a preliminary experience. Biomed Res Int. 2015. 2015:378612. [Medline].
Hahne AJ, Ford JJ, McMeeken JM. Conservative management of lumbar disc herniation with associated radiculopathy: a systematic review. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010 May 15. 35(11):E488-504. [Medline].
Bernsmann K, Kraemer SA. Clinical results and complication rate in lumbar microdisc surgery depending on surgeon’s experience. A comparative study. ISSLS Abstracts. 1998. 197:
Weinstein JN, Lurie JD, Tosteson TD, Tosteson AN, Blood EA, Abdu WA, et al. Surgical versus nonoperative treatment for lumbar disc herniation: four-year results for the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT). Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008 Dec 1. 33(25):2789-800. [Medline]. [Full Text].
Bell G. Complications of lumbar spine surgery. Wiesel S, Weinstein J. The Lumbar Spine. 2nd. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 1996.
McCulloch J. Essentials of Spine Microsurgery. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven; 1998.
Haaker RG, Senkal M, Kielich T, Krämer J. Percutaneous lumbar discectomy in the treatment of lumbar discitis. Eur Spine J. 1997. 6(2):98-101. [Medline].
Hermantin FU, Peters T, Quartararo L, Kambin P. A prospective, randomized study comparing the results of open discectomy with those of video-assisted arthroscopic microdiscectomy. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1999 Jul. 81(7):958-65. [Medline].
McGirt MJ, Ambrossi GL, Datoo G, Sciubba DM, Witham TF, Wolinsky JP, et al. Recurrent disc herniation and long-term back pain after primary lumbar discectomy: review of outcomes reported for limited versus aggressive disc removal. Neurosurgery. 2009 Feb. 64(2):338-44; discussion 344-5. [Medline].
Lebow RL, Adogwa O, Parker SL, Sharma A, Cheng J, McGirt MJ. Asymptomatic same-site recurrent disc herniation after lumbar discectomy: Results of a prospective longitudinal study with two-year serial imaging. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011 Feb 18. [Medline].
Ramirez LF, Thisted R. Complications and demographic characteristics of patients undergoing lumbar discectomy in community hospitals. Neurosurgery. 1989 Aug. 25(2):226-30; discussion 230-1. [Medline].
Cook CE, Arnold PM, Passias PG, Frempong-Boadu AK, Radcliff K, Isaacs R, et al. Predictors of pain and disability outcomes in one thousand, one hundred and eight patients who underwent lumbar discectomy surgery. Int Orthop. 2015 Apr 1. [Medline].
Ostelo RW, Costa LO, Maher CG, de Vet HC, van Tulder MW. Rehabilitation after lumbar disc surgery: an update Cochrane review. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009 Aug 1. 34(17):1839-48. [Medline].
Jayarao M, Chin LS. Results after lumbar decompression with and without discectomy: comparison of the transspinous and conventional approaches. Neurosurgery. 2010 Mar. 66(3 Suppl Operative):152-60. [Medline].
Lawrence S Chin, MD, FACS, FAANS Robert B and Molly G King Endowed Professor and Chair, Department of Neurosurgery, State University of New York Upstate Medical University
Lawrence S Chin, MD, FACS, FAANS is a member of the following medical societies: Alpha Omega Alpha, American Association for the Advancement of Science, American Association for Cancer Research, Children’s Oncology Group, Society for Neuro-Oncology, Congress of Neurological Surgeons, American Association of Neurological Surgeons, American College of Surgeons, Phi Beta Kappa
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.
Amit Singla, MBBS, MS Resident Physician, Department of Neurosurgery, State University of New York Upstate Medical University
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.
Jorge E Alvernia, MD Associate Faculty, Department of Neurosurgery, University of Mississippi Medical Center; Neurosurgeon, Brain and Spine Associates
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.
Research & References of Lumbar Discectomy|A&C Accounting And Tax Services