Cargando…
Biportal endoscopic decompression vs. microscopic decompression for lumbar canal stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Lumbar decompressive surgery is the gold standard treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis. Minimally invasive surgical techniques have been introduced with the aim of reducing the morbidity associated with open surgery. The purpose of the present study was to systematically search the literature and pe...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
D.A. Spandidos
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7401848/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32765769 http://dx.doi.org/10.3892/etm.2020.9001 |
_version_ | 1783566643307216896 |
---|---|
author | Chen, Tiewu Zhou, Guoqing Chen, Zhineng Yao, Xinmiao Liu, Dan |
author_facet | Chen, Tiewu Zhou, Guoqing Chen, Zhineng Yao, Xinmiao Liu, Dan |
author_sort | Chen, Tiewu |
collection | PubMed |
description | Lumbar decompressive surgery is the gold standard treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis. Minimally invasive surgical techniques have been introduced with the aim of reducing the morbidity associated with open surgery. The purpose of the present study was to systematically search the literature and perform a meta-analysis of studies comparing the outcomes between biportal endoscopic technique and microscopic technique for lumbar canal stenosis decompression. A comprehensive search of the PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science, Embase and the Cochrane Library databases was performed to identify relevant articles up to 15th of December 2019. Eligible studies were retrieved, data were extracted by two authors independently and risks of bias were assessed. A total of six studies involving 438 patients were selected for review. The results of the pooled analysis indicated similar operative times [mean difference (MD), -3.41; 95% CI, -10.78-3.96; P<0.36], similar complications (MD, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.33-1.46; P=0.34), similar visual analogue scale scores for back and leg pain at the time of the final follow-up and similar Oswestry disability indexes (MD, -0.28; 95% CI, -1.25-0.69; P=0.58) for the two procedures. In conclusion, biportal endoscopic technique is a viable alternative to microscopic technique for lumbar canal stenosis decompression with similar operative time, clinical outcomes and complications. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7401848 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | D.A. Spandidos |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-74018482020-08-05 Biportal endoscopic decompression vs. microscopic decompression for lumbar canal stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis Chen, Tiewu Zhou, Guoqing Chen, Zhineng Yao, Xinmiao Liu, Dan Exp Ther Med Articles Lumbar decompressive surgery is the gold standard treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis. Minimally invasive surgical techniques have been introduced with the aim of reducing the morbidity associated with open surgery. The purpose of the present study was to systematically search the literature and perform a meta-analysis of studies comparing the outcomes between biportal endoscopic technique and microscopic technique for lumbar canal stenosis decompression. A comprehensive search of the PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science, Embase and the Cochrane Library databases was performed to identify relevant articles up to 15th of December 2019. Eligible studies were retrieved, data were extracted by two authors independently and risks of bias were assessed. A total of six studies involving 438 patients were selected for review. The results of the pooled analysis indicated similar operative times [mean difference (MD), -3.41; 95% CI, -10.78-3.96; P<0.36], similar complications (MD, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.33-1.46; P=0.34), similar visual analogue scale scores for back and leg pain at the time of the final follow-up and similar Oswestry disability indexes (MD, -0.28; 95% CI, -1.25-0.69; P=0.58) for the two procedures. In conclusion, biportal endoscopic technique is a viable alternative to microscopic technique for lumbar canal stenosis decompression with similar operative time, clinical outcomes and complications. D.A. Spandidos 2020-09 2020-07-13 /pmc/articles/PMC7401848/ /pubmed/32765769 http://dx.doi.org/10.3892/etm.2020.9001 Text en Copyright: © Chen et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Articles Chen, Tiewu Zhou, Guoqing Chen, Zhineng Yao, Xinmiao Liu, Dan Biportal endoscopic decompression vs. microscopic decompression for lumbar canal stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title | Biportal endoscopic decompression vs. microscopic decompression for lumbar canal stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full | Biportal endoscopic decompression vs. microscopic decompression for lumbar canal stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Biportal endoscopic decompression vs. microscopic decompression for lumbar canal stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Biportal endoscopic decompression vs. microscopic decompression for lumbar canal stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_short | Biportal endoscopic decompression vs. microscopic decompression for lumbar canal stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort | biportal endoscopic decompression vs. microscopic decompression for lumbar canal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7401848/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32765769 http://dx.doi.org/10.3892/etm.2020.9001 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chentiewu biportalendoscopicdecompressionvsmicroscopicdecompressionforlumbarcanalstenosisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT zhouguoqing biportalendoscopicdecompressionvsmicroscopicdecompressionforlumbarcanalstenosisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT chenzhineng biportalendoscopicdecompressionvsmicroscopicdecompressionforlumbarcanalstenosisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT yaoxinmiao biportalendoscopicdecompressionvsmicroscopicdecompressionforlumbarcanalstenosisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT liudan biportalendoscopicdecompressionvsmicroscopicdecompressionforlumbarcanalstenosisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |