经椎间孔内镜脊柱系统(TESSYS)技术治疗腰椎间盘突出症的疗效
Efficacy of Transforaminal Endoscopic Spine System (TESSYS) Technique in Treating Lumbar Disc Herniation.
作者信息
Pan Zhimin, Ha Yoon, Yi Seong, Cao Kai
机构信息
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi, China (mainland).
Department of Neurosurgery, Spine and Spinal Cord Research Institute, College of Medicine, Yonsei University, Seoul, South Korea.
出版信息
Med Sci Monit. 2016 Feb 18;22:530-9. doi: 10.12659/msm.894870.
BACKGROUND To compare efficacy and safety of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic spine system (TESSYS) and traditional fenestration discectomy (FD) in treatment of lumbar disc herniation (LDH). MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 106 LDH patients were divided into TESSYS group (n=48) and FD group (n=58). Visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA), and modified MacNab criteria were used for efficacy evaluation. Post-operative responses were compared by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) based on detection of serum IL-6, CRP, and CPK levels. RESULTS In the TESSYS group, compared with the FD group, we observed, shorter incision length, less blood loss, shorter hospital stay, lower hospitalization cost, shorter recovery time, lower complication rate (all P<0.001), and lower VAS scores of lumbago and skelalgia at 3 days and 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively (all P<0.05). At 24 and 48 h postoperatively, CRP level was remarkably higher in the FD group compared to the TESSYS group (P<0.001). Further, comparison of IL-6 levels at 6, 12, 24, and 48 h postoperatively revealed significantly higher levels in the FD group than in the FESSYS group (all P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS TESSYS had clinical advantages over FD and entails less trauma and quicker postoperative recovery, suggesting that TESSYS is well tolerated by patients and is a better approach than FD in surgical treatment of LDH.
背景
比较经皮椎间孔镜脊柱系统(TESSYS)与传统开窗髓核摘除术(FD)治疗腰椎间盘突出症(LDH)的疗效和安全性。
材料与方法
将106例LDH患者分为TESSYS组(n = 48)和FD组(n = 58)。采用视觉模拟评分法(VAS)、Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)、日本矫形外科学会(JOA)评分及改良MacNab标准进行疗效评估。通过酶联免疫吸附测定(ELISA)检测血清白细胞介素-6(IL-6)、C反应蛋白(CRP)和肌酸磷酸激酶(CPK)水平,比较术后反应。
结果
与FD组相比,TESSYS组切口长度更短、失血量更少、住院时间更短、住院费用更低、恢复时间更短、并发症发生率更低(均P < 0.001),术后3天及1、3、6个月时腰痛和腿痛的VAS评分更低(均P < 0.05)。术后24小时和48小时,FD组CRP水平显著高于TESSYS组(P < 0.001)。此外,术后6、12、24和48小时IL-6水平比较显示,FD组显著高于TESSYS组(均P < 0.001)。
结论
TESSYS在治疗LDH方面比FD具有临床优势,创伤更小,术后恢复更快,表明患者对TESSYS耐受性良好,是比FD更好的手术治疗方法。