Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Techniques for the Treatment of Cervical Disc Herniation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Magdalena Rybaczek, Zenon Mariak, Paweł Grabala, Tomasz Łysoń
Abstract
Background: In recent decades, the adoption of minimally invasive (non-endoscopic) cervical techniques has grown significantly. Advancements in surgical instrumentation have broadened the spectrum of available percutaneous interventions, thus providing viable alternative treatment options for patients with prolonged, conservative treatment-resistant ailments due to contained cervical disc herniation. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis in order to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of minimally invasive percutaneous (non-endoscopic) cervical techniques. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted using the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and SCOPUS databases up to July 2024, in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Outcomes measured included Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores, the Neck Disability Index (NDI), and MacNab scores, assessing pain relief and functional recovery. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool (RoB 2) and the risk of bias in nonrandomized studies of interventions (ROBINS-I) tool, with statistical analyses conducted in R software (version 4.3.1). Results: Out of 847 records, 21 studies (covering 1580 patients) were included in the final analysis. Five different percutaneous minimally invasive cervical procedures were incorporated into this review: nucleoplasty (n = 973), discectomy (n = 311), a combination of nucleoplasty and discectomy (n = 98), annuloplasty (n = 33), and pulsed radiofrequency (n = 17). The mean patient age was 49.5, with a gender distribution of 47.7% male and 52.3% female. A meta-analysis of six studies on cervical nucleoplasty (400 patients) demonstrated a significant reduction in pain scores, with a standardized mean difference (SMD) of −4.68 (95% CI: −8.77; −0.59, p = 0.032). However, a high heterogeneity (I2 = 98.8%, Q = 407.31, p < 0.001) was observed, indicating significant variability across studies. The reoperation rate among patients was 3.4%, with discitis and device-related complications being the most frequently reported adverse events. Conclusions: Minimally invasive percutaneous cervical interventions provide effective pain relief and functional improvement for patients with cervical disc herniation, as evidenced by reductions in VAS scores and positive MacNab outcomes. The choice of the most appropriate technique should be based on individual clinical scenarios, surgeon expertise, and patient preferences, as no single method demonstrates clear superiority according to clinical outcomes or complication rates.