Suppr超能文献

老年腰椎侧隐窝狭窄患者单侧双孔内镜减压与经皮椎间孔内镜减压的比较研究

A Comparative Study of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Decompression and Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Decompression for Geriatric Patients with Lumbar Lateral Recess Stenosis.

作者信息

Cheng Xiaokang, Wu Yuxuan, Chen Bin, Tang Jiagang

机构信息

Department of Orthopedics, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100730, People's Republic of China.

Department of Orthopedics, The Affiliated Hospital of Chengde Medical University, Chengde, 067000, People's Republic of China.

出版信息

J Pain Res. 2023 Jun 30;16:2241-2249. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S413502. eCollection 2023.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The purpose of this research was to compare the efficacy of unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression (UBE) and percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic decompression (PTED) in the treatment of elderly patients with single-level lumbar lateral recess stenosis (LRS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from January 2020 to March 2022 were analyzed. Thirty-eight patients in the PTED group and thirty-nine patients in the UBE group completed the minimum 12-month follow-up. The demographic data and perioperative outcomes were reviewed. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the VAS for back and leg pain, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and the modified MacNab criteria.

RESULTS

Both groups of patients completed surgery and a one-year follow-up. There was no significant difference between the two groups in demographics data. UBE has the advantage in operative duration and X-ray time; as far as incision length, blood loss, and drainage volume are concerned, PTED is advantageous. Under the modified MacNab criteria, UBE exhibited a good-to-excellent rate similar to that of PTED (84.6% vs 81.6%, P>0.05). There were no significant differences at any point in time between UBE and PTED with respect to ODI, VAS, or back pain scores (P>0.05). UBE and PTED did not differ significantly in terms of complications.

CONCLUSION

Both PTED and UBE achieved favorable outcomes in single-level LRS. For operative time and X-ray times, UBE is more advantageous, while PTED offers better estimates of blood loss, incision length, and drainage volume.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在比较单侧双通道内镜减压术(UBE)和经皮椎间孔内镜减压术(PTED)治疗老年单节段腰椎侧隐窝狭窄症(LRS)的疗效。

材料与方法

分析2020年1月至2022年3月的数据。PTED组38例患者和UBE组39例患者完成了至少12个月的随访。回顾人口统计学数据和围手术期结果。使用视觉模拟评分法(VAS)评估腰腿痛、Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)和改良MacNab标准来评价临床结果。

结果

两组患者均完成手术及1年随访。两组患者的人口统计学数据无显著差异。UBE在手术时间和X线照射时间方面具有优势;就切口长度、失血量和引流量而言,PTED更具优势。根据改良MacNab标准,UBE的优良率与PTED相似(84.6%对81.6%,P>0.05)。在任何时间点,UBE和PTED在ODI、VAS或腰背痛评分方面均无显著差异(P>0.05)。UBE和PTED在并发症方面无显著差异。

结论

PTED和UBE在单节段LRS的治疗中均取得了良好的效果。在手术时间和X线照射时间方面,UBE更具优势,而PTED在失血量、切口长度和引流量方面表现更佳。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a690/10319288/cd3c82181b39/JPR-16-2241-g0001.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