STUDY DESIGN Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES The treatment of giant thoracic disc herniation (gTDH)remains challenging for surgeons worldwide because of its large volume and calcified or ossified nature and the… Click to show full abstract
STUDY DESIGN Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES The treatment of giant thoracic disc herniation (gTDH)remains challenging for surgeons worldwide because of its large volume and calcified or ossified nature and the limitations of the prior small-sample-size, single-center studies reporting comparative effectiveness. We aim to compare the anterior decompression and spinal fusion (ASF) and posterior circumspinal decompression and spinal fusion (PCDF) for patients with myelopathy due to gTDH in the largest study to date by sample size. METHODS Preoperative and postoperative functional status, surgical details, and complication rates were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS A total of 186 patients were included: 63 (33.9%) ASF and 123(66.1%) PCDF. The PCDF group had significantly shorter operation duration (163.06 ± 53.49 min vs. 180.78 ± 52.06 min, P = 0.032) and a significant decrease in intraoperative blood loss(716.83 mL vs. 947.94 mL, P = 0.045), and also a shorter hospital length of stay (LOS) and postoperative LOS (6 vs. 7, P = 0.011). The perioperative complication rate (13.8% vs. 28.6%, P = 0.015) and surgery-associated complication rate(13.0% vs. 27.0%, P = 0.018) were significantly higher in the ASF group. A higher rate of complete decompression was achieved in the PCDF group. There were no observed significant differences in changes in functional status between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION PCDF for central or paracentral gTDHs is a highly effective and reliable technique. It can be performed safely with a low complication rate. If either procedure can adequately excise a central or paracentral gTDH, a PCDF approach may be a better option.
               
Click one of the above tabs to view related content.