Suppr超能文献

全内镜技术椎间盘切除术与显微内镜椎间盘切除术治疗腰椎间盘突出症的对比研究

Full-Endoscopic Technique Discectomy Versus Microendoscopic Discectomy for the Surgical Treatment of Lumbar Disc Herniation.

作者信息

Li Mao, Yang Huilin, Yang Qun

机构信息

The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University Suzhou, Jiangsu Province China; The First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian medical University, Dalian, Liaoning Province, China.

出版信息

Pain Physician. 2015 Jul-Aug;18(4):359-63.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Full-endoscopic technique discectomy (FED) or microendoscopic discectomy (MED) are 2 widely used minimally invasive procedures for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation. However, there is insufficient literature regarding the differences between these 2 surgical procedures.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical outcomes of 2 different minimally invasive methods--full-endoscopic technique discectomy and microendoscopic discectomy--in the surgical treatment of lumbar disc herniation.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study.

SETTING

Inpatient surgery center.

METHODS

Data form 65 patients with lumbar disc herniation treated with one of 2 minimally invasive procedures were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to surgical method: the FED group (n = 35) and the MED group (n = 30). Surgery time, time kept in bed after surgery, duration of postoperative hospital stay, visual analog scale (VAS; 0-10), and Oswestry Disability index (ODI; 0-100%) were assessed and compared between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in the preoperative data between the 2 groups (P > 0.05). VAS and ODI scores improved significantly postoperatively in both groups (P < 0.05). Surgery time was longer in the FED group than in the MED group (P < 0.05). However, the FED group was superior to the MED group, with less time in bed, shorter hospital stay, and lower VAS scores one day postoperatively (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in VAS or ODI scores at one, 3, and 12 months after surgery between the 2 groups (P > 0.05).

LIMITATIONS

This is a retrospective study with a relatively short follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the clinical outcomes of the 2 surgical techniques were similar, the FED had the advantages of quicker postoperative recovery and more immediate effect.

摘要

背景

全内镜技术椎间盘切除术(FED)或显微内镜椎间盘切除术(MED)是治疗腰椎间盘突出症广泛应用的两种微创手术。然而,关于这两种手术方法之间差异的文献不足。

目的

比较两种不同的微创手术方法——全内镜技术椎间盘切除术和显微内镜椎间盘切除术——在腰椎间盘突出症手术治疗中的临床疗效。

研究设计

回顾性研究。

地点

住院手术中心。

方法

回顾性分析65例接受两种微创手术之一治疗的腰椎间盘突出症患者的数据。根据手术方法将患者分为两组:FED组(n = 35)和MED组(n = 30)。评估并比较两组的手术时间、术后卧床时间、术后住院时间、视觉模拟评分(VAS;0 - 10)和Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI;0 - 100%)。

结果

两组术前数据无显著差异(P > 0.05)。两组术后VAS和ODI评分均显著改善(P < 0.05)。FED组手术时间比MED组长(P < 0.05)。然而,FED组优于MED组,术后卧床时间更短、住院时间更短,术后1天VAS评分更低(P < 0.05)。两组术后1个月、3个月和12个月的VAS或ODI评分无显著差异(P > 0.05)。

局限性

这是一项随访期相对较短的回顾性研究。

结论

虽然两种手术技术的临床疗效相似,但FED具有术后恢复更快、即时效果更好的优点。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验