English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Background: Neurosurgeons and orthopedists, who have received specific training, should be the ones performing spinal surgery. Here, we present a case in which spinal surgeons secondarily (e.g., 6 months later) found that a patient’s first lumbar discectomy, performed by an interventional specialist, had been a “sham” procedure. Case Description: A 30-year-old male presented with sciatica attributed to a magnetic resonance imaging documented large, extruded disc at the L4-5 level. An interventional pain management specialist (IPMS) performed two epidural steroid injections; these resulted in an exacerbation of his pain. The IPMS then advised the patient that he was a surgeon and performed an “interventional” microdiscectomy. Secondarily, 6 months later, when the patient presented to a spinal neurosurgeon with a progressive cauda equina syndrome, the patient underwent a bilateral laminoforaminotomy and L4-L5 microdiscectomy. Of interest, at surgery, there was no evidence of scarring from the IPMS’ prior “microdiscectomy;” it had been a “sham” operation. Following the second surgery, the patient’s cauda equina syndrome resolved. Conclusion: IMPS, who are not trained as spinal surgeons should not be performing spinal surgery/ microdiscectomy.

Interventionist performs a “sham” lumbar microdiscectomy: Should interventionalists be performing spinal surgery?