[Treatment of upper lumbar disc herniation with percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy through two different approaches].

OBJECTIVE

To explore clinical efficacy of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy through two different approaches in treating upper lumbar disc herniation.

METHODS

From March 2015 to August 2019, 32 patients with upper lumbar disc herniation treated by percutaneous endoscopic lumbar dicecromy(PELD) were analyzed retrospectively and divided into percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy (PETD) and percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy (PEID) group according to different methods. There were 19 patients in PETD group, including 10 males and 9 females aged from 30 to 65 years old with an average of (44.70±12.08) years old;5 patients on L, 6 patients on L, 8 patients on L;6 patients were central herniation, 8 patients were paracentric herniation, and 5 patients were migration of herniation. There were 13 patients in PEID group, including 4 males and 9 females aged from 25 to 55 years old with an average of (42.23±12.09) years old;the courses of disease ranged from 1 to 7 months with an average of (2.90±3.02) months;3 patients on L, 4 patients on L, 6 patients on L;2 patients were central herniation, 4 patients were paracentric herniation, 3 patients were migration of herniation, 4 patients were prolapse free type protrusion. VAS and ODI score before operation, postoperative at 3 days, 3 and 6 months were compared between two groups, advanced MacNab standard at 1 year after operation were applied to evaluate clinical effects.

RESULTS

Operation were successful operated in 32 patients and obtained following up without nerve injury and infection of intervertebral space. One patient in PETD groups occurred dural sac tear in operation, but no adverse reaction afteroperation. PETD group was followed up from 12 to 24 months with an average of (15.80±3.48) months, while PEID group was followed up from 12 to 30 months with an average of (16.70±4.66) months, while there was no statistical difference between two groups (>0.05). VAS and ODI score at different time points after operation were higher than that of before operation (<0.05). According to advanced MacNab standard at 1 year after operation, 11 patients obtained excellent results, 6 good, 1 moderate and 1 poor in PETD group;while 7 patients got excellent results, 4 good, 2 moderate in PEID group.

CONCLUSION

Both of two surgical approach could achieve satisfactory efficacy in treating upper lumbar disc herniation, PETD is more suitable for central herniation, paracentric herniation and patients with mild displacement, PEID has advantage on prolapse free type protrusion.