Surgical Treatment of Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation: To Fuse or Not To Fuse

BACKGROUND: Optimal surgical treatment for recurrence of lumbar disc herniation (LDH) remains controversial, with options ranging from repeat microdiscectomy (MD) to instrumented fusion (IF). This study aimed to guide surgical decision-making by analyzing reoperation rates, clinical and radiographic risk factors for treatment failure, and functional outcomes following MD versus IF. METHODS: Prospectively collected data from 450 patients in our outcomes database who underwent surgery for recurrent LDH from 2004 through 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. Clinical assessment included predominant symptoms, neurological deficits, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade. Radiographic assessment included disc height, Pfirrmann grade, facet angle, and Modic changes on magnetic resonance imaging, as well as spinopelvic parameters on standing radiographs. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) and achievement of the minimal clinically important change (MCIC) of ≥2.2 points. Propensity-score matching (PSM) was performed to control for confounding factors. Reoperation rates were analyzed with a minimum 5-year follow-up. RESULTS: Of 450 patients with recurrent LDH, 316 (70.2%) underwent MD and 134 (29.8%) underwent IF. In 192 patients after PSM, IF showed nonsignificantly higher MCIC achievement (odds ratio [OR] = 1.20, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.66 to 2.17, p = 0.65) and lower COMI scores compared with the MD group (3.34 ± 2.89 versus 4.01 ± 2.95, p = 0.059; derived Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]: 23.8 versus 28.1). IF demonstrated significantly lower reoperation risk compared with MD (15.7% [116/316] versus 36.7% [21/34], p < 0.001). The reoperations following MD were predominantly subsequent IF (73.3%) and repeat MD (23.3%), while the reoperations after IF were predominantly adjacent segment surgery (57.1%) and hardware revision (33.3%). BMI of ≥35 kg/m2 was a significant predictor of reoperation after MD (univariate OR = 3.63, p = 0.039), while disc height of <6 mm (OR = 1.97) and Modic type-1 changes (OR = 1.78) showed trends toward increased reoperation risk (both p < 0.10). CONCLUSIONS: Although both procedures achieved clinical improvement, IF demonstrated superior long-term durability as shown by significantly lower reoperation rates over extended follow-up. Our findings support a risk-stratified surgical selection: IF should be strongly considered in patients with BMI of ≥35 kg/m2 and those with progressive disc degeneration, whereas MD remains appropriate for patients without these risk factors. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery
Published
2026-04-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.25.01113
Primary Topic
Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Surgical Treatment of Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation: To Fuse or Not To Fuse

Raluca Reitmeir, P. Vajkoczy, T. Fekete, Jani Puhakka et al.
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery
Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
article

Surgical Treatment of Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation: To Fuse or Not To Fuse

Raluca Reitmeir, P. Vajkoczy, T. Fekete, Jani Puhakka, Daniel Haschtmann, Friederike Schömig, Gregor Fischer, Mario Ropelato, François Porchet, Dezso Jeszenszky, Eva Kilian, Jacopo Vitale, Markus Loibl, Fabio Galbusera, Frank Kleinstück, Dave Oriordan
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Optimal surgical treatment for recurrence of lumbar disc herniation (LDH) remains controversial, with options ranging from repeat microdiscectomy (MD) to instrumented fusion (IF). This study aimed to guide surgical decision-making by analyzing reoperation rates, clinical and radiographic risk factors for treatment failure, and functional outcomes following MD versus IF. METHODS: Prospectively collected data from 450 patients in our outcomes database who underwent surgery for recurrent LDH from 2004 through 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. Clinical assessment included predominant symptoms, neurological deficits, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade. Radiographic assessment included disc height, Pfirrmann grade, facet angle, and Modic changes on magnetic resonance imaging, as well as spinopelvic parameters on standing radiographs. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) and achievement of the minimal clinically important change (MCIC) of ≥2.2 points. Propensity-score matching (PSM) was performed to control for confounding factors. Reoperation rates were analyzed with a minimum 5-year follow-up. RESULTS: Of 450 patients with recurrent LDH, 316 (70.2%) underwent MD and 134 (29.8%) underwent IF. In 192 patients after PSM, IF showed nonsignificantly higher MCIC achievement (odds ratio [OR] = 1.20, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.66 to 2.17, p = 0.65) and lower COMI scores compared with the MD group (3.34 ± 2.89 versus 4.01 ± 2.95, p = 0.059; derived Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]: 23.8 versus 28.1). IF demonstrated significantly lower reoperation risk compared with MD (15.7% [116/316] versus 36.7% [21/34], p < 0.001). The reoperations following MD were predominantly subsequent IF (73.3%) and repeat MD (23.3%), while the reoperations after IF were predominantly adjacent segment surgery (57.1%) and hardware revision (33.3%). BMI of ≥35 kg/m2 was a significant predictor of reoperation after MD (univariate OR = 3.63, p = 0.039), while disc height of <6 mm (OR = 1.97) and Modic type-1 changes (OR = 1.78) showed trends toward increased reoperation risk (both p < 0.10). CONCLUSIONS: Although both procedures achieved clinical improvement, IF demonstrated superior long-term durability as shown by significantly lower reoperation rates over extended follow-up. Our findings support a risk-stratified surgical selection: IF should be strongly considered in patients with BMI of ≥35 kg/m2 and those with progressive disc degeneration, whereas MD remains appropriate for patients without these risk factors. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery
Cracow University of Technology (PL), Schulthess-Klinik (CH), Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin (DE)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 28%
Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.