Okumura Eitaro, Maegawa Tatsuya, Nakayama Yosuke, Hayase Hitoshi, Kubota Motoo
Spinal Surgery, Kameda Medical Center, Chiba, JPN.
Cureus. 2025 Aug 8;17(8):e89648. doi: 10.7759/cureus.89648. eCollection 2025 Aug.
For lumbar spinal canal stenosis, endoscopic spine surgery typically employs a unilateral approach. While this approach has the advantage of early access to the lamina, it risks damage to the facet joint on the entry side. Additionally, decompression of the ipsilateral lateral recess can be challenging, sometimes resulting in inadequate decompression laterally, leading to incomplete symptom relief. To address these issues, a midline approach after midline splitting of the spinous process has been developed. However, this technique often uses a relatively large 16mm cylindrical retractor, resulting in skin incisions of approximately 20-25mm according to various reports. In our case, we performed a full-endoscopic spinal canal decompression underwater using a 7mm diameter through a 12mm skin incision, after directly splitting the spinous process along the midline. This technique achieved sufficient decompression with favorable outcomes. We report the details of this less invasive surgical procedure. The patient was a 62-year-old male who was independent in activities of daily living with a history of degenerative spondylolisthesis. This patient underwent posterior lumbar interbody fusion for L4/5 degenerative spondylolisthesis eight years ago. He had experienced pain in the left groin and perineal area (Numerical Rating Scale 6) for five months without improvement, which led him to our outpatient clinic. At the time of his visit, there was no apparent muscle weakness in either lower limb, only sensory disturbance. Lumbar MRI examination led to a diagnosis of lumbar spinal canal stenosis (L1/2) and conus medullaris syndrome. He requested endoscopic treatment, and we decided to perform an underwater full-endoscopic spinal canal decompression. The surgery involved a 12mm midline skin incision and direct splitting of the spinous process (L1) by approximately 10mm using a chisel and hammer. After placing a straight sheath, trumpet-shaped laminectomy was performed under endoscopic visualization. Trumpet-shaped refers to a laminectomy technique where the surgical field gradually widens as bone removal progresses deeper into the lamina. The yellow ligaments on both sides were removed as much as possible, resulting in sufficient decompression. Both facet joints were preserved, and extensive decompression was achieved. Postoperatively, although the patient still had some perineal pressure sensation, the sensory disturbance in the groin area improved, and he was discharged home on the second postoperative day with a modified Rankin Scale of 1. We report a case of successful spinal canal decompression using an endoscopic approach after midline splitting of the spinous process for lumbar spinal canal stenosis. We consider this surgical method to be valuable as it is less invasive, provides a good symmetrical view, and allows sufficient decompression on both sides.
对于腰椎管狭窄症,内镜脊柱手术通常采用单侧入路。虽然这种入路具有早期进入椎板的优势,但有损伤进入侧小关节的风险。此外,同侧侧隐窝的减压可能具有挑战性,有时会导致外侧减压不充分,从而导致症状缓解不完全。为了解决这些问题,已经开发出一种在棘突中线劈开后采用中线入路的方法。然而,这种技术通常使用相对较大的16mm圆柱形牵开器,根据各种报告,会导致约20 - 25mm的皮肤切口。在我们的病例中,我们在沿中线直接劈开棘突后,通过一个12mm的皮肤切口,使用直径7mm的器械进行了水下全内镜椎管减压。该技术实现了充分减压并取得了良好的效果。我们报告了这种微创外科手术的详细情况。患者为一名62岁男性,日常生活自理,有退行性椎体滑脱病史。该患者八年前因L4/5退行性椎体滑脱接受了后路腰椎椎间融合术。他左侧腹股沟和会阴区疼痛(数字评分量表评分为6分)五个月,无改善,遂到我们门诊就诊。就诊时,双下肢无明显肌肉无力,仅有感觉障碍。腰椎MRI检查诊断为腰椎管狭窄症(L1/2)和圆锥综合征。他要求进行内镜治疗,我们决定进行水下全内镜椎管减压。手术包括一个12mm的中线皮肤切口,并用凿子和锤子将棘突(L1)直接劈开约10mm。放置直鞘后,在内镜直视下进行喇叭形椎板切除术。喇叭形是指一种椎板切除技术,随着骨切除向椎板深部推进,手术视野逐渐变宽。尽可能多地切除两侧的黄韧带,实现了充分减压。保留了双侧小关节,实现了广泛减压。术后,尽管患者仍有一些会阴区压迫感,但腹股沟区的感觉障碍有所改善,术后第二天出院,改良Rankin量表评分为1分。我们报告了一例在棘突中线劈开后采用内镜入路成功进行椎管减压治疗腰椎管狭窄症的病例。我们认为这种手术方法很有价值,因为它创伤小、视野对称良好,并且能在两侧实现充分减压。