Introduction: Lumbar disc herniation is commonly treated conservatively, but surgery is necessary
when symptoms persist. Open microdiscectomy and endoscopic discectomy are two widely used surgical
techniques, with the latter offering a less invasive approach. This study compares their clinical outcomes.
Objective: To compare open microdiscectomy and endoscopic discectomy in terms of pain relief, hospital
stay, opioid use, return to work, recurrence rates, and complications. Methods: A retrospective analysis
of 65 patients (30 open microdiscectomy, 35 endoscopic discectomy) who underwent surgery between
2023 and 2024. Key parameters, including pain relief (VAS scores), opioid use, complications, and return
to work, were compared. Results: Both techniques showed similar pain relief and surgery duration.
Endoscopic discectomy had a significantly higher rate of dysesthesia (34.3% vs. 3.3%, p=0.0051).
Return to work at 60 days showed no significant difference (p=0.7018). Reoperation rates were low in
both groups (3.3% vs. 5.7%). Discussion: Both approaches provided effective pain relief, but endoscopic
discectomy was associated with a higher rate of dysesthesia. Return to work was more influenced by
personal factors than the surgical technique. Both techniques showed low reoperation rates and good
long-term outcomes. Conclusion: Open microdiscectomy and endoscopic discectomy are comparable in
terms of pain relief, recovery, and reoperation rates, though endoscopic discectomy has a higher risk of
dysesthesia. The choice of technique should be based on patient and surgeon factors.
