Clinical College of Orthopedics, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China; Affiliated Hospital of Inner Mongolia Medical University, Hohhot, Inner Mongolia, China.
Affiliated Hospital of Inner Mongolia Medical University, Hohhot, Inner Mongolia, China.
World Neurosurg. 2022 Oct;166:e528-e535. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2022.07.040. Epub 2022 Jul 16.
The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness and safety of local anesthesia (LA) and epidural anesthesia (EA) for percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) and provide reference data for clinical decision-making.
We searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane library, Web of Science, Medline, Science Direct, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure from inception to March 2022 to identify randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials comparing LA and EA for PTED. Studies that assessed at least 2 of the following indicators were considered eligible: surgical duration, X-ray exposure time, satisfaction rate, visual analog scale scores for pain, Oswestry Disability Index, and complications. Meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager 5.3.3 software.
Five randomized controlled trials and 5 retrospective cohort studies involving a total of 1660 patients were included. The LA and EA groups included 803 and 857 patients, respectively. Meta-analysis revealed significant intergroup differences in the intraoperative lumbar visual analog scale scores (P < 0.00001) and anesthesia satisfaction rate (P < 0.00001). There were no significant intergroup differences in the surgical duration, X-ray exposure time, postoperative Oswestry Disability Index, and complication rate.
EA is as safe as LA and produces better anesthetic effects than LA in patients undergoing PTED. Therefore, EA should be promoted as a reliable anesthetic technique for PTED.
本研究旨在比较局部麻醉(LA)和硬膜外麻醉(EA)在经皮椎间孔内窥镜椎间盘切除术(PTED)中的有效性和安全性,为临床决策提供参考数据。
我们检索了 PubMed、EMBASE、Cochrane 图书馆、Web of Science、Medline、Science Direct 和中国知网,从建库至 2022 年 3 月,以确定比较 LA 和 EA 用于 PTED 的随机和非随机对照试验。评估了至少以下 2 个指标的研究被认为符合条件:手术时间、X 射线暴露时间、满意度、疼痛视觉模拟评分、Oswestry 残疾指数和并发症。使用 Review Manager 5.3.3 软件进行荟萃分析。
纳入了 5 项随机对照试验和 5 项回顾性队列研究,共 1660 例患者。LA 和 EA 组分别包括 803 例和 857 例患者。荟萃分析显示术中腰椎视觉模拟评分(P < 0.00001)和麻醉满意度(P < 0.00001)存在显著的组间差异。手术时间、X 射线暴露时间、术后 Oswestry 残疾指数和并发症发生率在组间无显著差异。
EA 与 LA 一样安全,在接受 PTED 的患者中产生比 LA 更好的麻醉效果。因此,EA 应作为 PTED 可靠的麻醉技术推广。