Suppr超能文献

对比经椎间孔腰椎体间融合术与全内镜下椎板切除术治疗腰椎侧隐窝狭窄症所致 L5 神经根病的疗效。

Comparison of Outcomes of Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Full-endoscopic Laminectomy for L5 Radiculopathy Caused by Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis.

机构信息

Department of Neurosurgery, Iwai FESS Clinic.

Department of Orthopaedics, Iwai Orthopaedic Medical Hospital.

出版信息

Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo). 2022 Jun 15;62(6):270-277. doi: 10.2176/jns-nmc.2021-0381. Epub 2022 May 10.

Abstract

This study compared the outcomes of microendoscopy-assisted lumbar interbody fusion (ME-LIF) and uniportal full-endoscopic laminectomy (FEL) for L5 radiculopathy caused by lumbar foraminal stenosis (LFS). ME-LIF was performed using an 18- to 20-mm tubular retractor and endoscope, and FEL via the translaminar approach (TLA) was performed at the dorsal part of the foramen using a 4.1-mm working channel endoscope. Patients with LFS treated using ME-LIF (n = 39) or FEL-TLA (n = 30) were retrospectively evaluated. Patients' background and operative data were collected. The 36-item Short Form Survey (SF-36), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and European Quality of Life-5 Dimension (EQ-5D) scores were recorded preoperatively and 2 years postoperatively. The background data of the two groups (ME-LIF and FEL-TLA) were similar. The mean operation times for ME-LIF and FEL-TLA were 110.7 and 65.2 min, respectively, and the mean length of hospital stay were 10.3 and 1.5 days, respectively. Reoperation was required for surgical site infection, and percutaneous pedicle screw malposition in three patients was treated using ME-LIF. During follow-up, second FEL-TLA and LIF were performed for recurrent L5 radiculopathy in one and three patients in the FEL-TLA group, respectively. Although the SF-36, ODI, and EQ-5D scores 2 years postoperatively improved in both groups, improvement in ODI scores was lower following FEL-TLA than following ME-LIF. FEL-TLA can be performed to treat patients with L5 radiculopathy caused by LFS. Although the ODI score improvement following FEL-TLA was unremarkable, FEL-TLA might be considered because of its better safety profile and minimal invasiveness than ME-LIF.

摘要

本研究比较了微创内镜辅助腰椎体间融合术(ME-LIF)和单通道全内镜椎板切除术(FEL)治疗腰椎侧隐窝狭窄症(LFS)所致 L5 神经根病的疗效。ME-LIF 使用 18-20mm 管状牵开器和内镜进行,FEL 通过经皮入路(TLA)在椎间孔背侧使用 4.1mm 工作通道内镜进行。回顾性分析了采用 ME-LIF(n=39)或 FEL-TLA(n=30)治疗的 LFS 患者。收集患者的背景和手术资料。术前和术后 2 年记录患者的 36 项简明健康调查问卷(SF-36)、Oswestry 功能障碍指数(ODI)和欧洲生活质量 5 维量表(EQ-5D)评分。两组(ME-LIF 和 FEL-TLA)的背景资料相似。ME-LIF 和 FEL-TLA 的平均手术时间分别为 110.7 和 65.2min,平均住院时间分别为 10.3 和 1.5d。3 例患者因手术部位感染和经皮椎弓根螺钉位置不当需要再次手术,采用 ME-LIF 治疗。随访期间,FEL-TLA 组 1 例和 3 例患者因 L5 神经根病复发分别行二次 FEL-TLA 和 LIF。两组术后 2 年 SF-36、ODI 和 EQ-5D 评分均改善,但 FEL-TLA 组 ODI 评分改善低于 ME-LIF 组。FEL-TLA 可用于治疗 LFS 引起的 L5 神经根病。虽然 FEL-TLA 后 ODI 评分改善不明显,但与 ME-LIF 相比,FEL-TLA 具有更好的安全性和微创性,因此可以考虑采用 FEL-TLA。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0d48/9259084/ae478fbfb334/1349-8029-62-0270-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验