Department of Neurosurgery, Gil Medical Center, Gachon University College of Medicine, Incheon, South Korea.
PLoS One. 2020 Jul 30;15(7):e0236296. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0236296. eCollection 2020.
Many studies on the clinical outcome of full endoscopic spine surgery versus open spine surgery have been published. However, only a few studies have compared the learning curves of percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar lumbar discectomy (PEILD) and open lumbar microdiscectomy (OLM) at the L5-S1 level. This study included patients with disc herniation at the L5-S1 level, who underwent PEILD or OLM performed by a single novice surgeon and compared the learning curves.
Fifty-six patients who underwent PEILD or OLM at the L5-S1 level and completed a minimum 1-year follow-up were enrolled in the study. The patients were allocated to the PEILD group (n = 27, September 2014 to August 2016) or an OLM group (n = 29, September 2012 to August 2014). The learning curves were retrospectively compared based on operation time and surgical outcomes, including complication, failure, and recurrence rates were retrospectively compared.
Significant intergroup differences were not noted with respect to the baseline characteristics, including age, sex, body mass index, preoperative symptoms, or preoperative radiological findings. The mean operation time was significantly shorter in the PEILD group than in the OLM group (63.89±17.99 min versus 78.03±19.01 min, p = 0.006). Based on the operation time according to the number of cases, the learning curve was more difficult in the PEILD group according to the cumulative analysis (case number cut-off for proficiency was 18 in the PEILD group versus 10 in the OLM group) and linear regression analysis (proportionality constant for decrease in the operation time was -0.922 in the PEILD group versus -1.738 in the OLM group) than that in the OLM group. However, the surgical outcomes, including failure, surgical efficacy based on nerve root decompression, complication, and recurrence rates did not differ between the two groups.
Although the learning curve of PEILD was more difficult than that of OLM, the mean operation time was shorter in the PEILD group than that in the OLM group. Moreover, based on the surgical outcomes, PEILD showed efficacy and safety similar to those of OLM.
已有许多关于全内镜脊柱手术与开放脊柱手术临床结果的研究发表。然而,仅有少数研究比较过经皮内镜下腰椎间孔入路椎间盘切除术(PEILD)与开放腰椎显微切除术(OLM)在 L5-S1 水平的学习曲线。本研究纳入了 L5-S1 椎间盘突出症患者,由同一位新手外科医生施行 PEILD 或 OLM,并对学习曲线进行比较。
本研究纳入了 56 例行 L5-S1 水平 PEILD 或 OLM 并完成至少 1 年随访的患者。根据手术时间和手术结果将患者分配到 PEILD 组(n = 27,2014 年 9 月至 2016 年 8 月)或 OLM 组(n = 29,2012 年 9 月至 2014 年 8 月)。回顾性比较学习曲线,包括并发症、失败和复发率。
两组患者的基线特征,包括年龄、性别、体重指数、术前症状或术前影像学发现,均无显著差异。PEILD 组的平均手术时间显著短于 OLM 组(63.89±17.99 min 比 78.03±19.01 min,p = 0.006)。根据手术例数的手术时间,累积分析结果显示 PEILD 组的学习曲线更难(PEILD 组熟练操作的病例数截止值为 18 例,而 OLM 组为 10 例),线性回归分析结果显示(PEILD 组手术时间的比例常数下降为-0.922,而 OLM 组为-1.738),均比 OLM 组更难。然而,两组的手术结果,包括失败、神经根减压的手术疗效、并发症和复发率,均无差异。
虽然 PEILD 的学习曲线比 OLM 更难,但 PEILD 组的平均手术时间短于 OLM 组。此外,根据手术结果,PEILD 显示出与 OLM 相似的疗效和安全性。