Rajadurai Jeremy, Gong Houchen, Gambhir Shanu, Li Yingda
Department of Neurosurgery, Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, NSW, Australia.
Department of Neurosurgery, Westmead Public Hospital, Westmead, NSW, Australia.
J Spine Surg. 2025 Mar 24;11(1):24-32. doi: 10.21037/jss-24-116. Epub 2025 Mar 17.
Endoscopic spine surgery (ESS) has evolved as a new minimally invasive surgical (MIS) approach to the lumbar spine. ESS allows smaller incisions, less paraspinal muscle splitting and surgical trauma compared to conventional open and MIS approaches. We present the first non-inferiority comparison of ESS and open approaches to treat lumbar radiculopathy in an Australian cohort. The aim of this study is to assess if ESS is non-inferior to open approaches for the treatment of lumbar radiculopathy in post operative outcomes of pain and disability scores, in order to address the paucity in data for outcomes of ESS in Australian patients.
In this retrospective cohort study, routinely collected prospective data were collated from consecutive patients who had single level endoscopic discectomies for radiculopathy by two surgeons at a single institution between December 2020 and October 2022. Data collected included Visual Analogue Scores for Back (VAS-B) and leg (VAS-L) pain as well as Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, length of stay (LOS) and complication rates. These were compared to data from consecutive patients who underwent open discectomies from August 2020 to September 2022 by the same surgeons at other private hospitals where the endoscope was unavailable, otherwise deemed suitable for either approach, allowing direct comparison of consecutive patients operated on for comparable pathologies differentiated only by equipment availability.
Analysis included 92 endoscopic and 97 open cases. Non-inferiority was established at 6-week with median VAS-L (1.0 1.8, between group difference -0.5, P<0.001), VAS-B (1.0 1.0, between group difference -0.3, P=0.002) and ODI (18 20, between group difference -0.5, P<0.001) and 6-month for ODI (14 20, between group difference -1.6, P<0.001). Six-month median VAS-L and VAS-B was identical between groups (1.0 and 2.0), however this was not statistically significant. LOS was lower in ESS (LOS <24 h 93% 78%, P=0.005). Reoperation rates were similar (10% 7%, P=0.73). There were fewer complications in the endoscopic cohort than in the open cohort (5% 6%), however this was not statistically significant.
ESS is non-inferior to open decompression for the management of lumbar radiculopathy up to 6 months. LOS was also found to be lower in ESS. There were fewer complications with ESS however this was not statistically significant.
内镜脊柱手术(ESS)已发展成为一种用于腰椎的新型微创手术(MIS)方法。与传统的开放手术和MIS方法相比,ESS切口更小,椎旁肌分离更少,手术创伤更小。我们在澳大利亚队列中首次对ESS和开放手术治疗腰椎神经根病进行了非劣效性比较。本研究的目的是评估ESS在疼痛和残疾评分的术后结果方面治疗腰椎神经根病是否不劣于开放手术,以解决澳大利亚患者中ESS结果数据的匮乏问题。
在这项回顾性队列研究中,收集了2020年12月至2022年10月期间在单一机构由两位外科医生对因神经根病进行单节段内镜下椎间盘切除术的连续患者的常规收集的前瞻性数据。收集的数据包括背部视觉模拟评分(VAS - B)和腿部疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS - L)以及Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)评分、住院时间(LOS)和并发症发生率。将这些数据与2020年8月至2022年9月在其他没有内窥镜但被认为适合两种方法的私立医院由同一位外科医生进行开放椎间盘切除术的连续患者的数据进行比较,从而可以直接比较因类似病理接受手术的连续患者,仅因设备可用性而有所不同。
分析包括92例内镜手术和97例开放手术病例。在术后6周时确定非劣效性,VAS - L中位数(1.0 ± 1.8,组间差异 - 0.5,P < 0.001)、VAS - B(1.0 ± 1.0,组间差异 - 0.3,P = 0.002)和ODI(18 ± 20,组间差异 - 0.5,P < 0.001);在术后6个月时ODI(14 ± 20,组间差异 - 1.6,P < 0.001)确定非劣效性。两组间6个月时VAS - L和VAS - B中位数相同(分别为1.0和2.0),但这无统计学意义。ESS组的住院时间更短(住院时间<24小时:93% vs 78%,P = 0.005)。再次手术率相似(10% vs 7%,P = 0.73)。内镜手术队列中的并发症比开放手术队列少(5% vs 6%),但这无统计学意义。
在治疗腰椎神经根病方面,ESS在长达6个月的时间内不劣于开放减压术。还发现ESS的住院时间更短。ESS的并发症更少,但无统计学意义。