Minimally invasive compared to open microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation

Darryl Lau, Seunggu J. Han, Jasmine G. Lee, Daniel C. Lu, Dean Chou

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

24 Scopus citations


Before the advent of minimally invasive surgery for microdiscectomy, an open microdiscectomy had been the standard surgical intervention. Minimally invasive techniques have recently become more popular based upon the premise that smaller, less traumatic incisions should afford better recovery times and outcomes. From 2005 to 2008 we analyzed the outcomes of 25 patients who received an open microdiscectomy compared to 20 patients who received a minimally invasive microdiscectomy by the senior author (DC) in the lumbar region for disc herniation. A retrospective analysis was performed by carefully reviewing medical records for perioperative and immediate postoperative outcomes, and clinical follow-up was obtained either in the clinic or by telephone. There were no statistically significant differences between the minimally invasive and open groups in terms of operative time, length of stay, neurological outcome, complication rate, or change in pain score (pain improvement).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)81-84
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Clinical Neuroscience
Issue number1
StatePublished - Jan 1 2011


  • Disc herniation
  • Discectomy
  • Lumbar
  • Microdiscectomy
  • Minimally invasive
  • Open microdiscectomy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Neurology
  • Clinical Neurology
  • Physiology (medical)


Dive into the research topics of 'Minimally invasive compared to open microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this