Department of Mini-Invasive Spinal Surgery, Third Hospital of Henan Province, No. 198 Funiu Road, Zhongyuan District, Zhengzhou, 450000, Henan, People's Republic of China.
Department of Orthopaedics, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, No. 82 Cuiying Gate, Chengguan District, Lanzhou, 730030, Gansu, People's Republic of China.
Sci Rep. 2020 Jun 24;10(1):10290. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-67381-z.
To describe the rationale and surgical technique and compare the clinical effect of posterior percutaneous endoscopic cervical discectomy (PPECD) using the Delta system versus that of conventional PPECD (key-hole) surgery for the treatment of symptomatic cervical spondylotic radiculopathy (CSR). A retrospective analysis was performed on 106 single-segment CSR patients between February 2016 and February 2017, 50 of whom underwent conventional PPECD (key-hole), and 56 underwent PPECD using the Delta system. The operative time, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative complications and postoperative hospital stay were recorded, and the clinical effect was evaluated by the indicators of the Neck Disability Index (NDI), arm-visual analog scale (arm-VAS), neck-VAS, EQ-5D and MacNab classification at the last follow-up. All patients underwent the operation successfully, and 106 patients were followed up. The operative time of the Delta group was 60.47 ± 0.71 min, while the operative time of the key-hole group was 75.46 ± 0.41 min. The difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P < 0.05). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of blood loss and hospital stay (P > 0.05). The VAS, NDI and EQ-5D scores of the neck and upper limbs in the two groups were significantly better than those before surgery at 1 week after surgery and at the last follow-up (P < 0.05). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups at the last follow-up (P > 0.05). At the last follow-up, there was no significant difference between the two surgical methods when evaluated using the modified MacNab criteria. The imaging results showed that the herniated disc was removed completely and the nerve root was decompressed. The complication rate in the Delta group (3/56, 5.35%) was significantly lower than that in the conventional key-hole group (5/50, 10.0%). PPECD using the Delta system for CSR may be a feasible and promising alternative surgical plan. Compared with the traditional key-hole method, this surgical system can not only provide the surgeon with a larger surgical field of vision but also reduces the operation time and complication rates.
描述经皮内镜颈椎后路减压术(PPECD)Delta 系统与传统 PPECD(钥匙孔)手术治疗症状性颈椎病神经根病(CSR)的原理和手术技术,并比较其临床效果。回顾性分析了 2016 年 2 月至 2017 年 2 月期间 106 例单节段 CSR 患者,其中 50 例行传统 PPECD(钥匙孔)手术,56 例行 PPECD Delta 系统手术。记录手术时间、术中出血量、术中并发症及术后住院时间,末次随访时采用颈残障指数(NDI)、手臂视觉模拟评分(arm-VAS)、颈部视觉模拟评分(neck-VAS)、EQ-5D 及 MacNab 分级评价临床疗效。所有患者均顺利完成手术,106 例患者获得随访。Delta 组手术时间为 60.47±0.71min,钥匙孔组手术时间为 75.46±0.41min,两组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。但两组术中出血量及住院时间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两组患者术后 1 周及末次随访时颈、上肢 VAS、NDI 及 EQ-5D 评分均较术前明显改善(P<0.05),但两组末次随访时比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。末次随访时采用改良 MacNab 标准评价两种手术方法,差异无统计学意义。影像学结果显示,两组患者椎间盘均被彻底切除,神经根减压充分。Delta 组并发症发生率(3/56,5.35%)明显低于传统钥匙孔组(5/50,10.0%)。PPECD Delta 系统治疗 CSR 可能是一种可行且有前途的手术方案。与传统钥匙孔方法相比,该手术系统不仅能为术者提供更大的手术视野,还能减少手术时间和并发症发生率。