Contralateral Approach for Far Lateral Lumbar Disc Herniations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Brief Study Design. A retrospective analysis of 9 patients who underwent a modified surgical procedure for the treatment of far lateral lumbar disc herniations. Objectives. To illustrate a modified technique for approaching the neural foramen from the contralateral side, minimizing muscle retraction and bone/ligament resection, and to analyze clinical results. Summary of Background Data. The most commonly used surgical techniques for the removal of far lateral lumbar disc herniations are ipsilateral approaches, that require partial or complete facet resection and/or intertransverse ligament resection, which may result in vertebral instability and/or chronic back pain. Methods. Nine patients with intraforaminal or intra/extraforaminal lumbar disc herniation underwent surgery using a modified contralateral approach. There was unilateral muscle retraction and no medial facetectomy nor intertransverse/interspinous ligament resection. Preoperative and postoperative Oswestry functional status evaluation and complications were reviewed and Macnab's postoperative categories were assigned to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the surgery. Results. No serious complications were noted. The mean preoperative and postoperative Oswestry scores were 44 and 14 respectively (P < 0.01). Overall excellent-to-good results were 100%. Conclusion. This modified contralateral approach offered a wide exposure of intervertebral foramen region and allowed to remove the herniated disc material with minimal resection of osseous and ligamentous structures. Successful results were achieved in all patients treated by this technique. The most commonly used surgical techniques for the removal of far lateral lumbar disc herniations require partial or complete facet resection and/or intertransverse ligament resection. The authors present a modified technique for approaching the neural foramen from the contralateral side and analysis outcome of 9 patients who underwent the procedure.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".