Cargando…

Percutaneous Endoscopic Transforaminal Discectomy versus Conventional Open Lumbar Discectomy for Upper Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Comparative Cohort Study

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy (PETD) is regarded as a viable alternative option for upper lumbar disc herniation (LDH). However, few studies have evaluated PETD for upper LDH, and no study has compared the advantages of endoscopic procedures versus conventional surger...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Ziquan, Zhang, Cong, Chen, Weisheng, Li, Shugang, Yu, Bin, Zhao, Hong, Shen, Jianxiong, Zhang, Jianguo, Wang, Yipeng, Yu, Keyi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7072112/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32190653
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/1852070
_version_ 1783506329777733632
author Li, Ziquan
Zhang, Cong
Chen, Weisheng
Li, Shugang
Yu, Bin
Zhao, Hong
Shen, Jianxiong
Zhang, Jianguo
Wang, Yipeng
Yu, Keyi
author_facet Li, Ziquan
Zhang, Cong
Chen, Weisheng
Li, Shugang
Yu, Bin
Zhao, Hong
Shen, Jianxiong
Zhang, Jianguo
Wang, Yipeng
Yu, Keyi
author_sort Li, Ziquan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy (PETD) is regarded as a viable alternative option for upper lumbar disc herniation (LDH). However, few studies have evaluated PETD for upper LDH, and no study has compared the advantages of endoscopic procedures versus conventional surgery. The present study was aimed at comparing the surgical outcome and safety of PETD versus conventional open lumbar discectomy in the treatment of upper LDH. METHODS: Data from 42 patients treated for upper LDH from July 2015 to July 2018 were retrospectively analyzed, including 21 patients treated with PETD (PETD group) and 21 patients treated with conventional posterior lumbar discectomy (open group). The two groups were compared regarding demographic information, physical examination, radiological evaluations, and perioperative indicators. The clinical outcomes were assessed in accordance with the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS), and modified MacNab criteria. RESULTS: The postoperative ODI and VAS scores were significantly improved in both groups compared with the preoperative baseline values (P < 0.001), and the satisfactory rate was 90.5% in both groups in accordance with the modified MacNab criteria. There were no significant differences between the two groups in the clinical outcomes and complication rate (P < 0.001), and the satisfactory rate was 90.5% in both groups in accordance with the modified MacNab criteria. There were no significant differences between the two groups in the clinical outcomes and complication rate (P < 0.001), and the satisfactory rate was 90.5% in both groups in accordance with the modified MacNab criteria. There were no significant differences between the two groups in the clinical outcomes and complication rate ( CONCLUSIONS: PETD has a similar outcome to the conventional surgical method for the treatment of upper LDH but provides the typical advantages of minimally invasive procedures such as reduced iatrogenic injury, minimal activity restrictions, and accelerated ambulation recovery postoperatively.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7072112
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Hindawi
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70721122020-03-18 Percutaneous Endoscopic Transforaminal Discectomy versus Conventional Open Lumbar Discectomy for Upper Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Comparative Cohort Study Li, Ziquan Zhang, Cong Chen, Weisheng Li, Shugang Yu, Bin Zhao, Hong Shen, Jianxiong Zhang, Jianguo Wang, Yipeng Yu, Keyi Biomed Res Int Research Article BACKGROUND: Percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy (PETD) is regarded as a viable alternative option for upper lumbar disc herniation (LDH). However, few studies have evaluated PETD for upper LDH, and no study has compared the advantages of endoscopic procedures versus conventional surgery. The present study was aimed at comparing the surgical outcome and safety of PETD versus conventional open lumbar discectomy in the treatment of upper LDH. METHODS: Data from 42 patients treated for upper LDH from July 2015 to July 2018 were retrospectively analyzed, including 21 patients treated with PETD (PETD group) and 21 patients treated with conventional posterior lumbar discectomy (open group). The two groups were compared regarding demographic information, physical examination, radiological evaluations, and perioperative indicators. The clinical outcomes were assessed in accordance with the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS), and modified MacNab criteria. RESULTS: The postoperative ODI and VAS scores were significantly improved in both groups compared with the preoperative baseline values (P < 0.001), and the satisfactory rate was 90.5% in both groups in accordance with the modified MacNab criteria. There were no significant differences between the two groups in the clinical outcomes and complication rate (P < 0.001), and the satisfactory rate was 90.5% in both groups in accordance with the modified MacNab criteria. There were no significant differences between the two groups in the clinical outcomes and complication rate (P < 0.001), and the satisfactory rate was 90.5% in both groups in accordance with the modified MacNab criteria. There were no significant differences between the two groups in the clinical outcomes and complication rate ( CONCLUSIONS: PETD has a similar outcome to the conventional surgical method for the treatment of upper LDH but provides the typical advantages of minimally invasive procedures such as reduced iatrogenic injury, minimal activity restrictions, and accelerated ambulation recovery postoperatively. Hindawi 2020-03-02 /pmc/articles/PMC7072112/ /pubmed/32190653 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/1852070 Text en Copyright © 2020 Ziquan Li et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Li, Ziquan
Zhang, Cong
Chen, Weisheng
Li, Shugang
Yu, Bin
Zhao, Hong
Shen, Jianxiong
Zhang, Jianguo
Wang, Yipeng
Yu, Keyi
Percutaneous Endoscopic Transforaminal Discectomy versus Conventional Open Lumbar Discectomy for Upper Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Comparative Cohort Study
title Percutaneous Endoscopic Transforaminal Discectomy versus Conventional Open Lumbar Discectomy for Upper Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Comparative Cohort Study
title_full Percutaneous Endoscopic Transforaminal Discectomy versus Conventional Open Lumbar Discectomy for Upper Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Comparative Cohort Study
title_fullStr Percutaneous Endoscopic Transforaminal Discectomy versus Conventional Open Lumbar Discectomy for Upper Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Comparative Cohort Study
title_full_unstemmed Percutaneous Endoscopic Transforaminal Discectomy versus Conventional Open Lumbar Discectomy for Upper Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Comparative Cohort Study
title_short Percutaneous Endoscopic Transforaminal Discectomy versus Conventional Open Lumbar Discectomy for Upper Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Comparative Cohort Study
title_sort percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy versus conventional open lumbar discectomy for upper lumbar disc herniation: a comparative cohort study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7072112/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32190653
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/1852070
work_keys_str_mv AT liziquan percutaneousendoscopictransforaminaldiscectomyversusconventionalopenlumbardiscectomyforupperlumbardischerniationacomparativecohortstudy
AT zhangcong percutaneousendoscopictransforaminaldiscectomyversusconventionalopenlumbardiscectomyforupperlumbardischerniationacomparativecohortstudy
AT chenweisheng percutaneousendoscopictransforaminaldiscectomyversusconventionalopenlumbardiscectomyforupperlumbardischerniationacomparativecohortstudy
AT lishugang percutaneousendoscopictransforaminaldiscectomyversusconventionalopenlumbardiscectomyforupperlumbardischerniationacomparativecohortstudy
AT yubin percutaneousendoscopictransforaminaldiscectomyversusconventionalopenlumbardiscectomyforupperlumbardischerniationacomparativecohortstudy
AT zhaohong percutaneousendoscopictransforaminaldiscectomyversusconventionalopenlumbardiscectomyforupperlumbardischerniationacomparativecohortstudy
AT shenjianxiong percutaneousendoscopictransforaminaldiscectomyversusconventionalopenlumbardiscectomyforupperlumbardischerniationacomparativecohortstudy
AT zhangjianguo percutaneousendoscopictransforaminaldiscectomyversusconventionalopenlumbardiscectomyforupperlumbardischerniationacomparativecohortstudy
AT wangyipeng percutaneousendoscopictransforaminaldiscectomyversusconventionalopenlumbardiscectomyforupperlumbardischerniationacomparativecohortstudy
AT yukeyi percutaneousendoscopictransforaminaldiscectomyversusconventionalopenlumbardiscectomyforupperlumbardischerniationacomparativecohortstudy