Chen Hsien-Te, Tsai Chun-Hao, Chao Shao-Ching, Kao Ting-Hsien, Chen Yen-Jen, Hsu Horng-Chaung, Shen Chiung-Chyi, Tsou Hsi-Kai
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, China Medical University Hospital, School of Chinese Medicine, China Medical University, Taichung 40447, Republic of China.
Surg Neurol Int. 2011;2:93. doi: 10.4103/2152-7806.82570. Epub 2011 Jun 30.
Open discectomy remains the standard method for treatment of lumbar disc herniation, but can traumatize spinal structure and leaves symptomatic epidural scarring in more than 10% of cases. The usual transforaminal approach may be associated with difficulty reaching the epidural space due to anatomical peculiarities at the L5-S1 level. The endoscopic interlaminar approach can provide a direct pathway for decompression of disc herniation at the L5-S1 level. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical results of endoscopic interlaminar lumbar discectomy at the L5-S1 level and compare the technique feasibility, safety, and efficacy under local and general anesthesia (LA and GA, respectively).
One hundred twenty-three patients with L5-S1 disc herniation underwent endoscopic interlaminar lumbar discectomy from October 2006 to June 2009 by two spine surgeons using different anesthesia preferences in two medical centers. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores for back pain and leg pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) sores were recorded preoperatively, and at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Results were compared to evaluate the technique feasibility, safety, and efficacy under LA and GA.
VAS scores for back pain and leg pain and ODI revealed statistically significant improvement when they were compared with preoperative values. Mean hospital stay was statistically shorter in the LA group. Complications included one case of dural tear with rootlet injury and three cases of recurrence within 1 month who subsequently required open surgery or endoscopic interlaminar lumbar discectomy. There were no medical or infectious complications in either group.
Disc herniation at the L5-S1 level can be adequately treated endoscopically with an interlaminar approach. GA and LA are both effective for this procedure. However, LA is better than GA in our opinion.
开放式椎间盘切除术仍是治疗腰椎间盘突出症的标准方法,但可能会损伤脊柱结构,并且在超过10%的病例中会留下有症状的硬膜外瘢痕形成。由于L5 - S1水平的解剖学特点,通常的经椎间孔入路可能与到达硬膜外间隙困难相关。内镜下椎板间入路可为L5 - S1水平的椎间盘突出症减压提供直接途径。本研究旨在评估L5 - S1水平内镜下椎板间腰椎间盘切除术的临床结果,并比较局部麻醉和全身麻醉(分别为LA和GA)下该技术的可行性、安全性和有效性。
2006年10月至2009年6月,123例L5 - S1椎间盘突出症患者在两个医疗中心由两位脊柱外科医生采用不同的麻醉偏好接受了内镜下椎板间腰椎间盘切除术。记录术前、术后3个月、6个月和12个月的背痛和腿痛视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分以及Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)评分。比较结果以评估LA和GA下该技术的可行性、安全性和有效性。
与术前值相比,背痛和腿痛的VAS评分以及ODI显示出统计学上的显著改善。LA组的平均住院时间在统计学上更短。并发症包括1例硬膜撕裂伴神经根损伤和3例在1个月内复发的病例,这些病例随后需要进行开放手术或内镜下椎板间腰椎间盘切除术。两组均无医疗或感染并发症。
L5 - S1水平的椎间盘突出症可通过椎板间入路在内镜下得到充分治疗。GA和LA对该手术均有效。然而,在我们看来,LA优于GA。