Skip to main content
. 2024 Aug 8;18(4):550–559. doi: 10.31616/asj.2024.0042

Table 2.

Summary of findings for the eight patients with recurrent LDH (group R)

Variable Patient 1 Patient 2 Patient 3 Patient 4 Patient 5 Patient 6 Patient 7 Patient 8
Age (yr) 64 25 44 43 63 38 82 31
Sex Male Male Female Female Male Male Female Male
Body mass index (kg/m2) 23.9 20.1 19 20.3 - - - -
Previous treatments Conservative treatment Discectomy (MED) Discectomy (MED) Discectomy (MED) Discectomy (LOVE) Discectomy (LOVE) Discectomy (LOVE) Discectomy (LOVE)
Herniated disc level L5–S1 L4–5 L5–S1 L5–S1 L5–S1 L5–S1 L3–4 L5–S1
Duration of recurrence (mo) 60 132 39 4 36 15 13 168
D_uration of from onset of symptoms to treatment (mo) 9 1 1 1 4 7 21 4
NRS for low back pain
 Preoperative 1 5 0 3 7 5 3 4
 Final observation 1 1 0 0 3 1 3 6
NRS for leg pain
 Preoperative 1 10 10 10 7 5 7 5
 Final observation 0 1 0 2 5 2 7 3
Oswestry Disability Index (%)
 Preoperative 20 56 - 18 34 34 40 48
 Final observation - - 10 28 16 18 52 36
Pfirrmann grade V IV IV III III III IV III
H_igh-intensity signal change at herniation site on T2-weighted MRI - + - - - - - +
Type of disc herniation Transligamentous Subligamentous Transligamentous Transligamentous Transligamentous Subligamentous Subligamentous Subligamentous
Location disc herniation Paracentral Paracentral Paracentral Paracentral Paracentral Paracentral Paracentral Paracentral
Size of disc herniation Reduced Reduced Reduced Reduced Reduced Reduced No change Reduced

LDH, lumbar disc herniation; MED, microendoscopic discectomy; LOVE, fenestration discectomy (LOVE surgery); NRS, Numerical Rating Scale; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging.