Anesth Pain Med.  2017 Jan;12(1):72-76. 10.17085/apm.2017.12.1.72.

Percutaneous mechanical lumbar disc decompression using the enSpireâ„¢ interventional discectomy system: a preliminary study

• Nam JW
• Moon HS
• Kim YH
• Han BM

• KMID: 2369671
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.17085/apm.2017.12.1.72

Abstract

BACKGROUND
The enSpireâ„¢ interventional discectomy system is a new device for treating percutaneous disc decompression (PDD). The outcomes of using the enSpireâ„¢ for lumbar disc herniation have not been previously reported. The aim of this study was to determine the clinical effectiveness and safety of the enSpireâ„¢ interventional discectomy system for lumbar disc herniation with radiating pain.
METHODS
Twelve patients with lumbar disc herniation with radiating leg pain were enrolled in the study. All patients received PDD using enSpireâ„¢. Numeric rating scale (NRS) scores for pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were obtained initially and after 1 and 3 months. The patients were divided into 2 groups: Group 1, in which the NRS score improved by more than 50% at 3 months after procedure, and Group 2, in which the NRS score remained the same or improved by less than 50%.
RESULTS
After PDD using the enSpireâ„¢, the NRS scores decreased from 6.9 ± 1.2 to 2.8 ± 2.7; and ODI scores decreased from 25.8 ± 4.6 to 18.2 ± 5.5. No statistical differences occurred between Group 1 (n = 8) and Group 2 (n = 4) except in the duration of prior illness.
CONCLUSIONS
The enSpireâ„¢ interventional discectomy system is effective and safe over the short-term, minimally invasive, and easy to use.

Keyword

Herniated disc; Percutaneous discectomy; Treatment outcome

MeSH Terms

Decompression*
Diskectomy*
Diskectomy, Percutaneous
Humans
Intervertebral Disc Displacement
Leg
Treatment Outcome

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 C-arm images. C-arm images of percutaneous mechanical lumbar disc decompression using the enSpire™ interventional discectomy system; (A) AP view and (B) lateral view. Thick arrow: the tip of introducer cannula. T: spiral wire of device tip.

• 

  Fig. 2 enSpire™ device. S: slider, C: tissue collection chamber, R: locking ring, and T: spiral wire of device tip.

• 

  Fig. 3 Changes in the NRS over 3 months. Box plots shows the median (solid line), interquartile ranges (box), and values within 1.5 interquartile ranges from each side of the box (whiskers). *P < 0.05 compared with the initial NRS score.

Reference

1. Andersson GB, Brown MD, Dvorak J, Herzog RJ, Kambin P, Malter A, et al. Consensus summary of the diagnosis and treatment of lumbar disc herniation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1996; 21(24 Suppl):S75–8. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199612151-00009.

2. Manchikanti L, Abdi S, Atluri S, Benyamin RM, Boswell MV, Buenaventura RM, et al. An update of comprehensive evidence-based guidelines for interventional techniques in chronic spinal pain. Part II: guidance and recommendations. Pain Physician. 2013; 16(2 Suppl):S49–283. PMID: 23615883.

3. Long DM. Surgery for back and neck pain (including radiculopathy). Wall & Melzack’s textbook of pain. 6th ed. McMahon SB, Koltzenburg M, Tracey I, Turk DC, editors. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders;2013. p. 1012–27.

4. Manchikanti L, Singh V, Pampati V, Falco FJ, Hirsch JA. Comparison of the efficacy of caudal, interlaminar, and transforaminal epidural injections in managing lumbar disc herniation: is one method superior to the other? Korean J Pain. 2015; 28:11–21. DOI: 10.3344/kjp.2015.28.1.11. PMID: 25589942. PMCID: PMC4293502.

5. Kang H, Shin HY. Epidural steroid injection in spinal pain: a study on the NECA report. Anesth Pain Med. 2014; 9:9–18.

6. Lurie JD, Tosteson TD, Tosteson AN, Zhao W, Morgan TS, Abdu WA, et al. Surgical versus nonoperative treatment for lumbar disc herniation: eight-year results for the spine patient outcomes research trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2014; 39:3–16. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000088. PMID: 24153171. PMCID: PMC3921966.

7. Borenstein D. Mechanical low back pain--a rheumatologist’s view. Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2013; 9:643–53. DOI: 10.1038/nrrheum.2013.133. PMID: 24018549.

8. Bosscher HA, Heavner JE. Incidence and severity of epidural fibrosis after back surgery: an endoscopic study. Pain Pract. 2010; 10:18–24. DOI: 10.1111/j.1533-2500.2009.00311.x. PMID: 19735365.

9. Chan CW, Peng P. Failed back surgery syndrome. Pain Med. 2011; 12:577–606. DOI: 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2011.01089.x. PMID: 21463472.

10. Rohde V, Mielke D, Ryang Y, Gilsbach JM. The immediately failed lumbar disc surgery: incidence, aetiologies, imaging and management. Neurosurg Rev. 2015; 38:191–5. DOI: 10.1007/s10143-014-0573-3. PMID: 25242202.

11. Shamim MS, Parekh MA, Bari ME, Enam SA, Khursheed F. Microdiscectomy for lumbosacral disc herniation and frequency of failed disc surgery. World Neurosurg. 2010; 74:611–6. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2010.06.016. PMID: 21492628.

12. Chen Y, Derby R, Lee SH. Percutaneous disc decompression in the management of chronic low back pain. Orthop Clin North Am. 2004; 35:17–23. DOI: 10.1016/S0030-5898(03)00052-X.

13. Bartsch T, Goadsby PJ. Increased responses in trigeminocervical nociceptive neurons to cervical input after stimulation of the dura mater. Brain. 2003; 126:1801–13. DOI: 10.1093/brain/awg190. PMID: 12821523.

14. Lee SH, Derby R, Sul Dg, Hong Jw, Kim GH, Kang S, et al. Efficacy of a new navigable percutaneous disc decompression device (L’DISQ) in patients with herniated nucleus pulposus related to radicular pain. Pain Med. 2011; 12:370–6. DOI: 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2011.01064.x. PMID: 21332936.

15. Singh V, Manchikanti L, Benyamin RM, Helm S, Hirsch JA. Percutaneous lumbar laser disc decompression: a systematic review of current evidence. Pain Physician. 2009; 12:573–88. PMID: 19461824.

16. Mirzai H, Tekin I, Yaman O, Bursali A. The results of nucleoplasty in patients with lumbar herniated disc: a prospective clinical study of 52 consecutive patients. Spine J. 2007; 7:88–92. DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2006.02.033. PMID: 17197339.

17. Amoretti N, David P, Grimaud A, Flory P, Hovorka I, Roux C, et al. Clinical follow-up of 50 patients treated by percutaneous lumbar discectomy. Clin Imaging. 2006; 30:242–4. DOI: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2006.01.019. PMID: 16814138.

18. Manchikanti L, Singh V, Calodney AK, Helm S 2nd, Deer TR, Benyamin RM, et al. Percutaneous lumbar mechanical disc decompression utilizing Dekompressor^®: an update of current evidence. Pain Physician. 2013; 16(2 Suppl):SE1–24. PMID: 23615884.

19. Lemcke J, Al-Zain F, Mutze S, Meier U. Minimally invasive spinal surgery using nucleoplasty and the Dekompressor tool: a comparison of two methods in a one year follow-up. Minim Invasive Neurosurg. 2010; 53:236–42. DOI: 10.1055/s-0030-1269860. PMID: 21302191.

20. Lierz P, Alo KM, Felleiter P. Percutaneous lumbar discectomy using the Dekompressor system under CT-control. Pain Pract. 2009; 9:216–20. DOI: 10.1111/j.1533-2500.2009.00270.x. PMID: 19298365.

21. Ong D, Chua NH, Vissers K. Percutaneous disc decompression for lumbar radicular pain: a review article. Pain Pract. 2016; 16:111–26. DOI: 10.1111/papr.12250. PMID: 25354274.

22. Vorobeychik Y, Gordin V, Fuzaylov D, Kurowski M. Percutaneous mechanical disc decompression using Dekompressor device: an appraisal of the current literature. Pain Med. 2012; 13:640–6. DOI: 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2012.01367.x. PMID: 22494347.

23. Boswell MV, Trescot AM, Datta S, Schultz DM, Hansen HC, Abdi S, et al. Interventional techniques: evidence-based practice guidelines in the management of chronic spinal pain. Pain Physician. 2007; 10:7–111. PMID: 17256025.