A randomised controlled trial of transforaminal endoscopic discectomy vs microdiscectomy.

PURPOSE: Transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (TED) minimises paraspinal muscle damage. The aim of this trial was to compare clinical outcomes of TED to Microdiscectomy (Micro). METHODS: 143 patients, age 25-70 years and <115 kg, with single level lumbar prolapse and radiculopathy, were recruited and randomised. 70 received TED under conscious sedation and 70 Micro under general anaesthesia. Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analogue scores (VAS) of back and leg pain, and Short Form Health Survey indices (SF-36) were measured preoperatively and at 3, 12 and 24 months. RESULTS: All outcome measures improved significantly in both groups (p < 0.001). Affected side leg pain was lower in the TED group at 2 years (1.9 ± 2.6 vs 3.5 ± 3.1, p = 0.002). Hospital stay was shorter following TED (0.7 ± 0.7 vs 1.4 ± 1.3 days, p < 0.001). Two Micro patients and five TED patients required revision giving a relative risk of revision for TED of 2.62 (95% CI 0.49-14.0). CONCLUSIONS: Functional improvements were maintained at 2 years in both groups with less ongoing sciatica after TED. A greater revision rate after TED was offset by a more rapid recovery.

Smartphone apps for spinal surgery: is technology good or evil?

PURPOSE: The increased utilization of smartphones together with their downloadable applications (apps) provides opportunity for doctors, including spinal surgeons, to integrate such technology into clinical practice. However, the clinical reliability of the medical app sector remains questionable. We reviewed available apps themed specifically towards spinal surgery and related conditions and assessed the level of medical professional involvement in their design and content. METHOD: The most popular smartphone app stores (Android, Apple, Blackberry, Windows, Samsung, Nokia) were searched for spinal surgery-themed apps, using the disease terms Spinal Surgery, Back Surgery, Spine, Disc Prolapse, Sciatica, Radiculopathy, Spinal Stenosis, Scoliosis, Spinal Fracture and Spondylolisthesis. RESULTS: A total of 78 individual spinal surgery themed apps were identified, of which there were six duplicates (N = 72). According to app store classifications, there were 57 (79 %) medical themed apps, 11 (15 %) health and fitness themed apps, 1 (1 %) business and 3 (4 %) education themed apps. Forty-five (63 %) apps were available for download free of charge. For those that charged access, the prices ranged from £0.62 to £47.99. Only 44 % of spinal surgery apps had customer satisfaction ratings and 56 % had named medical professional involvement in their development or content. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to specifically address the characteristics of apps related to spinal surgery. We found that nearly half of spinal surgery apps had no named medical professional involvement, raising concerns over app content and evidence base for their use. We recommend increased regulation of spinal surgical apps to improve the accountability of app content.