Jiang Qiang, Ding Yu, Lu Zhengcao, Cui Hongpeng, Zhang Jianjun, Fu Bensheng, Du Wei, Cao Shiqi
Department of TCM Orthopedics, Sixth Medical Center, PLA General Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Global Spine J. 2023 Jul;13(6):1509-1521. doi: 10.1177/21925682211039181. Epub 2021 Sep 16.
Retrospective study.
To compare the clinical efficacy of posterior lumbar laminectomy decompression under full endoscopic technique (Endo-LOVE) and percutaneous endoscopic medial foraminal decompression (PE-MFD) in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS).
Between April 2017 and April 2018, 96 patients with DLSS underwent Endo-LOVE or PE-MFD, including 58 with Endo-LOVE and 38 with PE-MFD. After propensity score matching (PSM), patient characteristics, operation time, intraoperative fluoroscopy times, postoperative bedridden time, hospital stay and postoperative complications were recorded and compared. The clinical efficacy was evaluated according to Oswestry disability index (ODI), visual analogue scale (VAS), lumbar disease JOA and modified MacNab criteria.
A total of 96 patients with DLSS were included in the study. After PSM, the 2 groups were comparable in patient demographic and baseline characteristics. The operation time and intraoperative fluoroscopy times in PE-MFD group were significantly more than those in Endo-LOVE group ( < .05). The operation time in PE-MFD group was significantly less than that in Endo-LOVE group ( < .05).The intraoperative fluoroscopy times in PE-MFD group were significantly more than that in Endo-LOVE group ( < .05). The ODI, VAS and lumbar disease JOA in the 2 groups were significantly improved comparing with those before operation ( < .05). According to the modified MacNab criteria, the excellent and good rates of the 2 groups were 93.5% in Endo-LOVE group and 87.1% in PE-MFD group ( > .05).
Endo-LOVE and PE-MFD technique can both effectively treat DLSS, and the short-term follow-up results are positive. Endo-LOVE technique has the advantages of fast puncture positioning, less radiation exposure and wider indications. However, PE-MFD needs more radiation exposure and has the possibility of incomplete decompression for complex multiplanar spinal stenosis.
回顾性研究。
比较全内镜技术下腰椎后路椎板切除术减压(Endo-LOVE)与经皮内镜椎间孔内侧减压术(PE-MFD)治疗退变性腰椎管狭窄症(DLSS)的临床疗效。
2017年4月至2018年4月,96例DLSS患者接受了Endo-LOVE或PE-MFD治疗,其中Endo-LOVE组58例,PE-MFD组38例。经过倾向评分匹配(PSM)后,记录并比较患者特征、手术时间、术中透视次数、术后卧床时间、住院时间及术后并发症。根据Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)、视觉模拟评分(VAS)、腰椎疾病JOA评分及改良MacNab标准评估临床疗效。
共纳入96例DLSS患者。PSM后,两组患者的人口统计学和基线特征具有可比性。PE-MFD组的手术时间和术中透视次数显著多于Endo-LOVE组(P<0.05)。PE-MFD组的手术时间显著少于Endo-LOVE组(P<0.05)。PE-MFD组的术中透视次数显著多于Endo-LOVE组(P<0.05)。两组的ODI、VAS及腰椎疾病JOA评分与术前相比均显著改善(P<0.05)。根据改良MacNab标准,Endo-LOVE组优良率为93.5%,PE-MFD组为87.1%(P>0.05)。
Endo-LOVE和PE-MFD技术均能有效治疗DLSS,短期随访结果良好。Endo-LOVE技术具有穿刺定位快、辐射暴露少、适应证广等优点。然而,PE-MFD需要更多的辐射暴露,对于复杂多平面椎管狭窄有减压不完全的可能。