Welcome, Friend!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Veritas-Health LLC has recently released patient forums to our Arthritis-Health web site.

Please visit http://www.arthritis-health.com/forum

There are several patient story videos on Spine-Health that talk about Arthritis. Search on Patient stories
Protect anonymity
We strongly suggest that members do not include their email addresses. Once that is published , your email address is available to anyone on the internet , including hackers.

All discussions and comments that contain an external URL will be automatically moved to the spam queue. No external URL pointing to a medical web site is permitted. Forum rules also indicate that you need prior moderator approval. If you are going to post an external URL, contact one of the moderators to get their approval.
Attention New Members
Your initial discussion or comment automatically is sent to a moderator's approval queue before it can be published.
There are no medical professionals on this forum side of the site. Therefore, no one is capable or permitted to provide any type of medical advice.
This includes any analysis, interpretation, or advice based on any diagnostic test

Is performing a laminectomy a typical part of a microdiscectomy?

BrihtwulfBBrihtwulf Posts: 69
edited 06/11/2012 - 8:43 AM in Back Surgery and Neck Surgery
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.



  • The lamina is what helps to maintain structural integrity of the spinal column. It is one reason why surgeons usually cannot perform a series of discectomies in adjoining discs without some sort of fusing technique. Often just a piece of the lamina (a little window) is removed so that the surgeon can access the disc. If the surgeon can get at the disc, then this is not necessary. I would imagine it is less common in a micro-discectomy than in an open one. At least, this is how I understand it!

    I don't know the percentage of discectomies where part of the lamina is removed. It is done more frequently to decompress the nerve.
  • My paperwork says I had a microdiscectomny, laminectomy and foramenextomy. I assumed that meant they removed what they needed to decompress the nerves.
  • Pretty much all but one technique I found involved removing a small amount of lamina to have direct access and vision of the herniation.
    It appears it weakens the structure. Scar tissue fills the void.

    The micro-d version I chose does not use this technique. They go in thru the foramins. The trade-off is there is no direct vision of the herniation.
    On the sunny and mild Central Coast of California

    L4-L5 endoscopic transforaminal microdiscectomy June, 2007
    L5-S1 endoscopic transforaminal microdiscectomy May, 2008
Sign In or Register to comment.