My first spinal surgery was in 2008 when I had a microdiscectomy. I thought I recalled that the procedure was explained to me as removing a small piece of vertebra just to the side of the lamina (a hole large enough to extract the necessary ruptured disc fragments). I don't remember anything being said about removing the entire lamina. Anyway, I was just looking back at some of the x-ray images from afterwards, and noticed that they had removed the lamina completely.
Is there any effect to not having the lamina there, or does it not really make a difference? Just something that came to mind recently as I didn't think anyone ever said they were planning to (or that they had done it afterward) remove it.