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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |