Wu Binbin, Zhan Gonghao, Tian Xinyi, Fan Linyu, Jiang Chenchen, Deepti Beekoo, Cao Hong, Li Jun, Lian Qingquan, Huang Xixi, Xu Feng
Department of Pain Medicine, The Second Affiliated Hospital and Yuying Children's Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, China.
China-USA Neuroimaging Research Institute, The Second Affiliated Hospital and Yuying Children's Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Pain Res Manag. 2019 Jan 2;2019:6924941. doi: 10.1155/2019/6924941. eCollection 2019.
Both transforaminal percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy with foraminoplasty (TF PELF) and transforaminal percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy without foraminoplasty (TF PELD) were developed for lumbar disc herniation (LDH) patients. However, the safety and effectiveness between the TF PELF and TF PELD have not been investigated.
Of the included 140 LDH patients, 62 patients received TF PELF (PELF group) and 78 patients received TF PELD (PELD group). The operation time, the duration of staying at the hospital, and complication incidences were recorded. All patients were followed up for 2 years, where low back and leg visual analogue scale (VAS) pain ratings and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were compared between the 2 groups before and after surgery. Modified Macnab criterion was estimated for all patients at postoperative 2 years.
There were no significant difference of the operation time, number of days staying at the hospital, and the incidence of complications between the 2 groups ( > 0.05). Two cases in the PELF group and 1 case in the PELD group received a second surgery due to unrelieved symptoms postoperatively. Low back and leg VAS and ODI scores decreased in both groups after operation ( < 0.01), respectively, but were not significant between the 2 groups over time ( > 0.05). Six patients in the PELF group and 3 patients in the PELD group did not continue the follow-up; thus, only 131 patients completed Macnab evaluation. The satisfactory rate was reported as 80.4% in the PELF group and 90.7% in the PELD group ( > 0.05).
This study suggested that the safety and effectiveness of TF PELF are comparable to TF PELD for LDH patients.
经椎间孔入路椎间孔成形术的经皮内镜下腰椎间盘切除术(TF PELF)和未行椎间孔成形术的经皮内镜下腰椎间盘切除术(TF PELD)均应用于腰椎间盘突出症(LDH)患者。然而,TF PELF和TF PELD之间的安全性和有效性尚未得到研究。
纳入的140例LDH患者中,62例接受TF PELF(PELF组),78例接受TF PELD(PELD组)。记录手术时间、住院时间和并发症发生率。所有患者均随访2年,比较两组患者手术前后的腰腿痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)和Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)。对所有患者术后2年采用改良Macnab标准进行评估。
两组患者的手术时间、住院天数和并发症发生率比较,差异均无统计学意义(>0.05)。PELF组有2例、PELD组有1例患者术后因症状未缓解接受了二次手术。两组患者术后腰腿痛VAS评分和ODI评分均降低(<0.01),但随时间推移两组间差异无统计学意义(>0.05)。PELF组有6例、PELD组有3例患者未继续随访;因此,仅131例患者完成了Macnab评估。PELF组的满意率为80.4%,PELD组为90.7%(>0.05)。
本研究表明,对于LDH患者,TF PELF的安全性和有效性与TF PELD相当。