Wei Wen-Bo, Dang Sha-Jie, Duan Da-Peng, Zhao Wei, Wei Ling
Department of Orthopedics, Shaanxi Provincial People's Hospital, Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.
Shaanxi Province Key Laboratory of Basic and Clinical Translation for Bone and Joint Diseases, Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2025 Mar 25;26(1):296. doi: 10.1186/s12891-025-08406-4.
This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy and surgeon's neck flexion time between unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar fusion (UBE-LIF) versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar fusion (MIS-TLIF) in the treatment of single-level lumbar degenerative diseases (LDD).
This study retrospectively enrolled patients with single-level LDD received UBE-LIF or MIS-TLIF between June 2018 to May 2022. The patients were separated into two groups based on the surgical method used: the UBE-LIF group (n = 38) and the MIS-TLIF group (n = 42). Various parameters, including operative time, fluoroscopy frequency, blood loss, length of hospital stay, total expenses, visual analogue scale (VAS), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), modified MacNab criteria, fusion rate, and complications were evaluated and compared between the two groups. And time for neck flexion during surgery by the surgeon were recorded. After the surgery, surgeons completed a questionnaire based on a visual analog scale to assess their discomfort symptoms of the neck, shoulders, and back.
There were no significant differences in VAS or ODI scores at 12 months after surgery among two groups. However, the UBE-LIF group had significantly better VAS scores for low back pain on the first day after surgery than the MIS-TLIF group(2.00 ± 0.70) (2.55 ± 0.94) (P < 0.05). Additionally, the UBE-LIF group had shorter intraoperative bleeding (78.42 ± 51.440) ml (169.29 ± 52.656) ml (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in fluoroscopy frequency and incidence of complications among two groups. But total expenses in the UBE-LIF group (73246 ± 4354) yuan were significantly higher than those in the MIS-TLIF group (60577 ± 4160) yuan (P < 0.05). In the UBE-LIF group, the surgeon's neck flexion time was significantly reduced(52.00 ± 18.233) min (102.83 ± 11.77) min (P < 0.05), and there was a statistically significant reduction in the visual analog scale discomfort scores for the neck, back, and shoulders (P < 0.05).
Both UBE-LIF and MIS-TLIF can achieve good postoperative results. UBE has less intraoperative bleeding, less postoperative drainage flow, lower postoperative patient low back pain score, and slightly higher cost than MIS-TLIF. However, the surgeon has a shorter time to lower their head during surgery and higher comfort during surgery.
本回顾性研究旨在评估单侧双孔道内镜下腰椎融合术(UBE-LIF)与微创经椎间孔腰椎融合术(MIS-TLIF)治疗单节段腰椎退行性疾病(LDD)的临床疗效及术者颈部屈曲时间。
本研究回顾性纳入了2018年6月至2022年5月期间接受UBE-LIF或MIS-TLIF治疗的单节段LDD患者。根据所采用的手术方法将患者分为两组:UBE-LIF组(n = 38)和MIS-TLIF组(n = 42)。评估并比较两组的各项参数,包括手术时间、透视次数、失血量、住院时间、总费用、视觉模拟评分(VAS)、Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)、改良MacNab标准、融合率及并发症。记录术者手术过程中的颈部屈曲时间。术后,术者根据视觉模拟量表完成一份问卷,以评估其颈部、肩部和背部的不适症状。
两组术后12个月时的VAS或ODI评分无显著差异。然而,UBE-LIF组术后第1天的下腰痛VAS评分显著优于MIS-TLIF组(2.00±0.70)(2.55±0.94)(P < 0.05)。此外,UBE-LIF组术中出血量更少(78.42±51.440)ml(169.29±52.656)ml(P < 0.05)。两组的透视次数和并发症发生率无显著差异。但UBE-LIF组的总费用(73246±4354)元显著高于MIS-TLIF组(60577±4160)元(P < 0.05)。在UBE-LIF组中,术者的颈部屈曲时间显著缩短(52.00±18.233)min(102.83±11.77)min(P < 0.05),颈部、背部和肩部的视觉模拟量表不适评分有统计学意义的降低(P < 0.05)。
UBE-LIF和MIS-TLIF均能取得良好的术后效果。与MIS-TLIF相比,UBE-LIF术中出血更少、术后引流量更少、术后患者下腰痛评分更低,但费用略高。然而,术者在手术过程中低头时间更短,手术舒适度更高。