• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

[单侧双通道内镜减压与扩大椎板间开窗治疗腰椎侧隐窝狭窄症的疗效比较]

[Efficacy comparison of unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression and extended interlaminar fenestration for lumbar lateral recess stenosis].

作者信息

Liu J J, Zhu B, Chen L, Jing J H, Tian D S

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedics, the Second Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei 230601, China.

出版信息

Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2022 Mar 22;102(11):801-807. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112137-20210929-02192.

DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn112137-20210929-02192
PMID:35325960
Abstract

To analyze and compare the clinical efficacy of unilateral biportal endoscopic(UBE) decompression and extended interlaminar fenestration for lumbar lateral recess stenosis. A retrospective analysis of 103 patients treated with UBE decompression or extended interlaminar fenestration for lumbar lateral recess stenosis from July 2017 to June 2020 in the Second Hospital of Anhui Medical University was performed. Eighty patients aged 40 to 86 (63.2±9.8) years were included in this study, including 42 males and 38 females. Forty patients received UBE decompression (UBE group) and 40 patients received extended interlaminar fenestration (fenestration group). Operative time, length of incision, hospital stay and complications were recorded. The visual analogue scale (VAS) scores of low back pain and leg pain and Oswestry dysfunction index (ODI) scores were recorded preoperatively and at 1, 3 and 6 months after the operation and at the final follow-up, and the modified Macnab scale was used to evaluate the clinical efficacy at the final follow-up. Patients in both groups successfully received lumbar lateral recess decompression and were followed up for (12.9±5.4) months in the UBE group and (14.9±3.5) months in the fenestration group, respectively. The operation time in the UBE group was (63.9±11.6) min, it was higher than that in the fenestration group ((54.1±9.2) min, <0.001). The average incision length in the UBE group was (18.2±1.7) mm, it was lower than that in the fenestration group ((73.5±11.6) mm, <0.001). Postoperative hospital stay in the UBE group was (4.1±2.2) d, it was lower than that in the fenestration group ((7.6±3.1) d, <0.001). VAS scores of low back pain were improved after operation in both groups. Low back pain VAS scores of UBE group were lower than those in fenestration group at 1 and 3 months post operation (both <0.05). The VAS scores of lower limb pain were improved after operation in both groups and there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups at postoperative 1, 3, 6 months after the operation and at the last follow-up (all >0.05). ODI scores were improved after operation in both groups. ODI scores of UBE group were lower than those in fenestration group at postoperative 1 month and 3 months(both <0.05). Intraoperative dural tear occurred in 2 cases(5.0%) in the UBE group and 1 case(2.5%) in the fenestration group, with no statistically significant difference between the two groups (=0.556). According to the modified Macnab scale at the last follow-up, 35 cases were excellent, 3 cases were good, and 2 cases were fair in the UBE group, and 37 cases were excellent, 2 cases were good, and 1 case was fair in the open group. The difference was not statistically significant between the two groups (=0.745). Compared with the extended interlaminar fenestration, UBE technique can not only reduce the early postoperative low back pain, shorten hospital stay, but also achieve the same long-term clinical efficacy with less trauma.

摘要

分析和比较单侧双通道内镜(UBE)减压与扩大椎板间开窗术治疗腰椎侧隐窝狭窄的临床疗效。对2017年7月至2020年6月在安徽医科大学第二附属医院接受UBE减压或扩大椎板间开窗术治疗腰椎侧隐窝狭窄的103例患者进行回顾性分析。本研究纳入80例年龄40至86(63.2±9.8)岁的患者,其中男性42例,女性38例。40例患者接受UBE减压(UBE组),40例患者接受扩大椎板间开窗术(开窗组)。记录手术时间、切口长度、住院时间及并发症。记录术前、术后1个月、3个月、6个月及末次随访时的腰痛和腿痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)以及Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)评分,并在末次随访时采用改良Macnab标准评估临床疗效。两组患者均成功接受腰椎侧隐窝减压,UBE组随访(12.9±5.4)个月,开窗组随访(14.9±3.5)个月。UBE组手术时间为(63.9±11.6)分钟,高于开窗组((54.1±9.2)分钟,P<0.001)。UBE组平均切口长度为(18.2±1.7)毫米,低于开窗组((73.5±11.6)毫米,P<0.001)。UBE组术后住院时间为(4.1±2.2)天,低于开窗组((7.6±3.1)天,P<0.001)。两组术后腰痛VAS评分均改善。UBE组术后1个月和3个月的腰痛VAS评分低于开窗组(均P<0.05)。两组术后下肢疼痛VAS评分均改善,术后1个月、3个月、6个月及末次随访时两组间差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。两组术后ODI评分均改善。UBE组术后1个月和3个月的ODI评分低于开窗组(均P<0.05)。UBE组术中硬脊膜撕裂2例(5.0%),开窗组1例(2.5%),两组间差异无统计学意义(P=0.556)。末次随访时,根据改良Macnab标准,UBE组优35例,良3例,可2例;开放组优37例,良2例,可1例。两组间差异无统计学意义(P=0.745)。与扩大椎板间开窗术相比,UBE技术不仅能减轻术后早期腰痛,缩短住院时间,还能以较小的创伤达到相同的长期临床疗效。

相似文献

1
[Efficacy comparison of unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression and extended interlaminar fenestration for lumbar lateral recess stenosis].[单侧双通道内镜减压与扩大椎板间开窗治疗腰椎侧隐窝狭窄症的疗效比较]
Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2022 Mar 22;102(11):801-807. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112137-20210929-02192.
2
[Two kinds of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression in the treatment of single level lumbar lateral recess stenosis].两种经皮内镜下腰椎减压术治疗单节段腰椎侧隐窝狭窄症
Zhongguo Gu Shang. 2024 Apr 25;37(4):338-44. doi: 10.12200/j.issn.1003-0034.20221359.
3
[Clinical outcomes and bone resection analysis of unilateral double-channel endoscopic technique in treating lumbar disc herniation].[单侧双通道内镜技术治疗腰椎间盘突出症的临床疗效及骨质切除分析]
Zhongguo Gu Shang. 2024 Mar 25;37(3):222-7. doi: 10.12200/j.issn.1003-0034.20221038.
4
[Early-effectiveness of unilateral biportal endoscopic laminectomy in treatment of two-level lumbar spinal stenosis].[单侧双通道内镜下椎板切除术治疗双节段腰椎管狭窄症的早期疗效]
Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2023 Jun 15;37(6):706-712. doi: 10.7507/1002-1892.202302014.
5
[Comparison of effectiveness between unilateral biportal endoscopic and uniportal interlaminar endoscopic decompression in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis].单侧双通道内镜与单通道椎间孔内镜减压治疗腰椎管狭窄症的疗效比较
Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2024 Mar 15;38(3):324-330. doi: 10.7507/1002-1892.202312029.
6
[Comparative study of decompression of unilateral biportal endoscopic compared to laminectomy with fusion and internal fixation in the treatment of severe lumbar spinal stenosis].[单侧双门内镜减压术与椎板切除融合内固定术治疗重度腰椎管狭窄症的对比研究]
Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2022 Nov 8;102(41):3281-3287. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112137-20220720-01583.
7
[Comparison of effectiveness of unilateral biportal endoscopy technique and the interlaminar uniportal endoscop technique for treatment of L , S lumbar disc herniation].[单侧双通道内镜技术与椎板间单通道内镜技术治疗L₅、S₁腰椎间盘突出症的疗效比较]
Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2022 Oct 15;36(10):1192-1199. doi: 10.7507/1002-1892.202205038.
8
[Effect and complication among different kinds of spinal endoscopic surgery for lumbar disc herniation].[不同类型腰椎间盘突出症脊柱内镜手术的疗效与并发症]
Zhongguo Gu Shang. 2024 Mar 25;37(3):228-34. doi: 10.12200/j.issn.1003-0034.20220860.
9
[Treatment of senile lumbar spinal stenosis by unilateral approach and bilateral decompression with large channel endoscopy].[单通道内镜下单侧入路双侧减压治疗老年腰椎管狭窄症]
Zhongguo Gu Shang. 2021 Jan 25;34(1):8-14. doi: 10.12200/j.issn.1003-0034.2021.01.003.
10
[Short-term effectiveness of unilateral biportal endoscopy technique in treatment of lumbar lateral saphenous fossa combined with intervertebral foramina stenosis via contralateral sublaminar approach].[单侧双通道内镜技术经对侧椎板下入路治疗腰椎外侧隐窝合并椎间孔狭窄的短期疗效]
Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2024 Jul 15;38(7):874-879. doi: 10.7507/1002-1892.202404009.

引用本文的文献

1
Comprehensive Analysis of UBE-Related Complications: Prevention and Management Strategies from 4685 Patients.UBE 相关并发症的全面分析:4685 例患者的预防和管理策略。
Med Sci Monit. 2024 Oct 10;30:e944018. doi: 10.12659/MSM.944018.
2
Short-term lumbar disc and lumbar stability changes of one-hole split endoscope technique treatment of spinal stenosis.单孔分体式内镜技术治疗腰椎管狭窄症的短期腰椎间盘及腰椎稳定性变化
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2024 Apr 24;25(1):325. doi: 10.1186/s12891-024-07443-9.