Department of Spine and Orthopedic Surgery, Wuzhou Red Cross Hospital.
Medical Care Department for Personnel.
Clin Spine Surg. 2024 Mar 1;37(2):56-66. doi: 10.1097/BSD.0000000000001428. Epub 2023 Jan 23.
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
To compare the results of endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Endo-TLIF) and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) for patients with lumbar degenerative diseases.
The MIS-TLIF has been widely used in lumbar degenerative diseases and achieved favorable clinical effects. The main disadvantage is the limited working space and visualization, especially in the deeper operational field, for preparing fusion bed. In recent years, with the development of surgical techniques, optical technology, and special instruments, Endo-TLIF has gradually been applied.
A systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies between Endo-TLIF and MIS-TLIF in the lumbar degenerative diseases. The following outcome measures were extracted: visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index, fusion rate, disk height, segmental lordosis, operative time, length of hospital stay and complications. Data analysis was performed by RevMan 5.3.
Eight studies comprising 687 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled result revealed there was no significant differences in the VAS of leg, Oswestry Disability Index, fusion rate, disk height, segmental lordosis, and complication rate between the 2 groups ( P >0.05). However, the VAS of back in the Endo-TLIF group was significantly less than those in the MIS-TLIF group within 2 weeks after surgery [weighted mean difference (WMD)=-1.33 (-1.98, -0.68), P <0.0001] and at 3 months postoperatively [WMD=-0.72(-0.85, -0.59), P <0.00001]. The Endo-TLIF group also seemed to fewer VAS of back at the last follow-up (≥12 mo) [WMD=-0.12 (-0.25, -0.00), P =0.05]. Compared with the MIS-TLIF group, the Endo-TLIF group was associated with longer operation time [WMD=26.74 (2.14, 51.34), P =0.03], but shorter length of hospital stay [WMD=-1.98(-2.91, -1.05), P <0.0001].
Compared with minimally invasive TLIF, endoscopic TLIF achieved comparable improvement of symptoms and intervertebral fusion, longer operation time, and smaller surgical trauma. Endoscopic TLIF, which requires a demanding learning curve, maybe a feasible and effective technique for the patients with symptomatic lumbar degenerative diseases.
系统评价和荟萃分析。
比较内镜经椎间孔腰椎体间融合术(Endo-TLIF)与微创经椎间孔腰椎体间融合术(MIS-TLIF)治疗腰椎退行性疾病的疗效。
MIS-TLIF 已广泛应用于腰椎退行性疾病,并取得了良好的临床效果。其主要缺点是在准备融合床时,操作空间和可视化有限,尤其是在更深的手术部位。近年来,随着手术技术、光学技术和特殊器械的发展,Endo-TLIF 逐渐得到应用。
对腰椎退行性疾病中 Endo-TLIF 和 MIS-TLIF 的队列研究进行系统评价和荟萃分析。提取以下观察指标:视觉模拟评分(VAS)、Oswestry 功能障碍指数、融合率、椎间盘高度、节段前凸角、手术时间、住院时间和并发症。数据分析采用 RevMan 5.3 软件进行。
共有 8 项研究(687 例患者)纳入荟萃分析。汇总结果显示,2 组间 VAS 评分(腿部、腰痛、融合率、椎间盘高度、节段前凸角)和并发症发生率差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。然而,术后 2 周内[加权均数差(WMD)=-1.33(-1.98,-0.68),P<0.0001]和术后 3 个月[WMD=-0.72(-0.85,-0.59),P<0.00001],Endo-TLIF 组的腰痛 VAS 评分显著低于 MIS-TLIF 组;在末次随访(≥12 个月)时,Endo-TLIF 组腰痛 VAS 评分似乎也更低[WMD=-0.12(-0.25,-0.00),P=0.05]。与 MIS-TLIF 组相比,Endo-TLIF 组的手术时间更长[WMD=26.74(2.14,51.34),P=0.03],但住院时间更短[WMD=-1.98(-2.91,-1.05),P<0.0001]。
与微创 TLIF 相比,内镜 TLIF 可获得相似的症状改善和椎间融合效果,但手术时间更长,手术创伤更小。对于有症状的腰椎退行性疾病患者,内镜 TLIF 可能是一种可行且有效的技术,但需要较高的学习曲线。