Cargando…

Microendoscopic discectomy versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis without spondylolisthesis

Micoendoscopic discectomy (MED) and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) has become alternatives of the traditional open decompression surgery alone and decompression plus fusion surgery in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). To date, there is no study focu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yi, Weihong, Tang, Yu, Yang, Dazhi, Huang, Wenhua, Liu, Huan, Sun, Ziqi, Yao, Yuan, Zhou, Yue
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer Health 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7302583/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32541527
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000020743
_version_ 1783547877181620224
author Yi, Weihong
Tang, Yu
Yang, Dazhi
Huang, Wenhua
Liu, Huan
Sun, Ziqi
Yao, Yuan
Zhou, Yue
author_facet Yi, Weihong
Tang, Yu
Yang, Dazhi
Huang, Wenhua
Liu, Huan
Sun, Ziqi
Yao, Yuan
Zhou, Yue
author_sort Yi, Weihong
collection PubMed
description Micoendoscopic discectomy (MED) and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) has become alternatives of the traditional open decompression surgery alone and decompression plus fusion surgery in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). To date, there is no study focusing on the comparison of clinical outcomes after MED and MIS-TLIF for LSS without spondylolisthesis. Four hundred ninety-seven patients who underwent MED (236 cases) or MIS-TLIF (261 cases) for LSS without spondylolisthesis were included in this study. Perioperative outcomes (hospital stay, operation time and blood loss), cost, functional scores (Oswestry Disability Index, 12-item short form health survey) with a 24-month follow-up visit, complication and reoperation condition within 24 months after surgery were recorded and assessed. No significant difference of clinical outcomes over time was observed between these 2 surgical approaches. Compared with MIS-TLIF, MED was associated with greater satisfaction at 1-month time point postoperatively, whereas this effect was equalized at 3-month time point postoperatively. MED brought advantages in shorter hospital stay, shorter operation time, less blood loss, and less cost over MIS-TLIF. There was no significant difference in 24-month function scores over time between MED group and MIS-TLIF group. Compared with MIS-TLIF, MED could result in a better perioperative effect and less cost.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7302583
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Wolters Kluwer Health
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73025832020-06-29 Microendoscopic discectomy versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis without spondylolisthesis Yi, Weihong Tang, Yu Yang, Dazhi Huang, Wenhua Liu, Huan Sun, Ziqi Yao, Yuan Zhou, Yue Medicine (Baltimore) 7100 Micoendoscopic discectomy (MED) and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) has become alternatives of the traditional open decompression surgery alone and decompression plus fusion surgery in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). To date, there is no study focusing on the comparison of clinical outcomes after MED and MIS-TLIF for LSS without spondylolisthesis. Four hundred ninety-seven patients who underwent MED (236 cases) or MIS-TLIF (261 cases) for LSS without spondylolisthesis were included in this study. Perioperative outcomes (hospital stay, operation time and blood loss), cost, functional scores (Oswestry Disability Index, 12-item short form health survey) with a 24-month follow-up visit, complication and reoperation condition within 24 months after surgery were recorded and assessed. No significant difference of clinical outcomes over time was observed between these 2 surgical approaches. Compared with MIS-TLIF, MED was associated with greater satisfaction at 1-month time point postoperatively, whereas this effect was equalized at 3-month time point postoperatively. MED brought advantages in shorter hospital stay, shorter operation time, less blood loss, and less cost over MIS-TLIF. There was no significant difference in 24-month function scores over time between MED group and MIS-TLIF group. Compared with MIS-TLIF, MED could result in a better perioperative effect and less cost. Wolters Kluwer Health 2020-06-12 /pmc/articles/PMC7302583/ /pubmed/32541527 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000020743 Text en Copyright © 2020 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CCBY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
spellingShingle 7100
Yi, Weihong
Tang, Yu
Yang, Dazhi
Huang, Wenhua
Liu, Huan
Sun, Ziqi
Yao, Yuan
Zhou, Yue
Microendoscopic discectomy versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis without spondylolisthesis
title Microendoscopic discectomy versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis without spondylolisthesis
title_full Microendoscopic discectomy versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis without spondylolisthesis
title_fullStr Microendoscopic discectomy versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis without spondylolisthesis
title_full_unstemmed Microendoscopic discectomy versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis without spondylolisthesis
title_short Microendoscopic discectomy versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis without spondylolisthesis
title_sort microendoscopic discectomy versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis without spondylolisthesis
topic 7100
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7302583/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32541527
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000020743
work_keys_str_mv AT yiweihong microendoscopicdiscectomyversusminimallyinvasivetransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionforlumbarspinalstenosiswithoutspondylolisthesis
AT tangyu microendoscopicdiscectomyversusminimallyinvasivetransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionforlumbarspinalstenosiswithoutspondylolisthesis
AT yangdazhi microendoscopicdiscectomyversusminimallyinvasivetransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionforlumbarspinalstenosiswithoutspondylolisthesis
AT huangwenhua microendoscopicdiscectomyversusminimallyinvasivetransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionforlumbarspinalstenosiswithoutspondylolisthesis
AT liuhuan microendoscopicdiscectomyversusminimallyinvasivetransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionforlumbarspinalstenosiswithoutspondylolisthesis
AT sunziqi microendoscopicdiscectomyversusminimallyinvasivetransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionforlumbarspinalstenosiswithoutspondylolisthesis
AT yaoyuan microendoscopicdiscectomyversusminimallyinvasivetransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionforlumbarspinalstenosiswithoutspondylolisthesis
AT zhouyue microendoscopicdiscectomyversusminimallyinvasivetransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionforlumbarspinalstenosiswithoutspondylolisthesis