Cargando…

A comparison study of percutaneous endoscopic decompression and posterior decompressive laminectomy in the treatment of thoracic spinal stenosis

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous endoscopic decompression (PED) is considered a minimally invasive and safe procedure in lumbar degenerative disease. Few authors report the success of PED for thoracic spinal stenosis (TSS) with thoracic myelopathy. The objective of this study was to compare the outcome of P...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cheng, Xiao-Kang, Bian, Fu-Cheng, Liu, Zhao-Yu, Yang, Feng-Kai, Chen, Bin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7641830/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33143667
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-03739-8
_version_ 1783606005287878656
author Cheng, Xiao-Kang
Bian, Fu-Cheng
Liu, Zhao-Yu
Yang, Feng-Kai
Chen, Bin
author_facet Cheng, Xiao-Kang
Bian, Fu-Cheng
Liu, Zhao-Yu
Yang, Feng-Kai
Chen, Bin
author_sort Cheng, Xiao-Kang
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Percutaneous endoscopic decompression (PED) is considered a minimally invasive and safe procedure in lumbar degenerative disease. Few authors report the success of PED for thoracic spinal stenosis (TSS) with thoracic myelopathy. The objective of this study was to compare the outcome of PED versus posterior decompressive laminectomy (PDL) for TSS. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 30 consecutive patients who underwent surgery for single-level TSS from January 1, 2015 to May 1, 2019.These patients were divided into PED (n = 16) and PDL(n = 14) group. Preoperative demographic characteristics and perioperative outcomes were reviewed. Pre- and postoperative neurological status was evaluated using the modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) score and the recovery rate (RR). RESULTS: The patients’ mean age was 57.3 years (27–76) in PED group and 58.8 years (34–77) in PDL group. No statistical difference was found between two groups with regards to neurological status at pre-operative and final follow-up. The RR in PED group achieved the same improvement as PDL group (87.5% vs 85.7%, P > 0.05), while the PED brought advantages in operative time(m) (86.4 vs 132.1, p < 0.05), blood loss (mL) (18.21 vs 228.57, p < 0.05),drainage volume(mL) (15.5 vs 601.4, p < 0.05), and hospital stay (d) (3.6 vs 5.6, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Both PED and PDL showed favorable outcome in the treatment of TSS. Besides, PED had advantages in reducing traumatization. In terms of perioperative quality of life, PED could be an efficient supplement to traditional posterior decompressive laminectomy in patients with TSS.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7641830
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76418302020-11-05 A comparison study of percutaneous endoscopic decompression and posterior decompressive laminectomy in the treatment of thoracic spinal stenosis Cheng, Xiao-Kang Bian, Fu-Cheng Liu, Zhao-Yu Yang, Feng-Kai Chen, Bin BMC Musculoskelet Disord Research Article BACKGROUND: Percutaneous endoscopic decompression (PED) is considered a minimally invasive and safe procedure in lumbar degenerative disease. Few authors report the success of PED for thoracic spinal stenosis (TSS) with thoracic myelopathy. The objective of this study was to compare the outcome of PED versus posterior decompressive laminectomy (PDL) for TSS. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 30 consecutive patients who underwent surgery for single-level TSS from January 1, 2015 to May 1, 2019.These patients were divided into PED (n = 16) and PDL(n = 14) group. Preoperative demographic characteristics and perioperative outcomes were reviewed. Pre- and postoperative neurological status was evaluated using the modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) score and the recovery rate (RR). RESULTS: The patients’ mean age was 57.3 years (27–76) in PED group and 58.8 years (34–77) in PDL group. No statistical difference was found between two groups with regards to neurological status at pre-operative and final follow-up. The RR in PED group achieved the same improvement as PDL group (87.5% vs 85.7%, P > 0.05), while the PED brought advantages in operative time(m) (86.4 vs 132.1, p < 0.05), blood loss (mL) (18.21 vs 228.57, p < 0.05),drainage volume(mL) (15.5 vs 601.4, p < 0.05), and hospital stay (d) (3.6 vs 5.6, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Both PED and PDL showed favorable outcome in the treatment of TSS. Besides, PED had advantages in reducing traumatization. In terms of perioperative quality of life, PED could be an efficient supplement to traditional posterior decompressive laminectomy in patients with TSS. BioMed Central 2020-11-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7641830/ /pubmed/33143667 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-03739-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Cheng, Xiao-Kang
Bian, Fu-Cheng
Liu, Zhao-Yu
Yang, Feng-Kai
Chen, Bin
A comparison study of percutaneous endoscopic decompression and posterior decompressive laminectomy in the treatment of thoracic spinal stenosis
title A comparison study of percutaneous endoscopic decompression and posterior decompressive laminectomy in the treatment of thoracic spinal stenosis
title_full A comparison study of percutaneous endoscopic decompression and posterior decompressive laminectomy in the treatment of thoracic spinal stenosis
title_fullStr A comparison study of percutaneous endoscopic decompression and posterior decompressive laminectomy in the treatment of thoracic spinal stenosis
title_full_unstemmed A comparison study of percutaneous endoscopic decompression and posterior decompressive laminectomy in the treatment of thoracic spinal stenosis
title_short A comparison study of percutaneous endoscopic decompression and posterior decompressive laminectomy in the treatment of thoracic spinal stenosis
title_sort comparison study of percutaneous endoscopic decompression and posterior decompressive laminectomy in the treatment of thoracic spinal stenosis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7641830/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33143667
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-03739-8
work_keys_str_mv AT chengxiaokang acomparisonstudyofpercutaneousendoscopicdecompressionandposteriordecompressivelaminectomyinthetreatmentofthoracicspinalstenosis
AT bianfucheng acomparisonstudyofpercutaneousendoscopicdecompressionandposteriordecompressivelaminectomyinthetreatmentofthoracicspinalstenosis
AT liuzhaoyu acomparisonstudyofpercutaneousendoscopicdecompressionandposteriordecompressivelaminectomyinthetreatmentofthoracicspinalstenosis
AT yangfengkai acomparisonstudyofpercutaneousendoscopicdecompressionandposteriordecompressivelaminectomyinthetreatmentofthoracicspinalstenosis
AT chenbin acomparisonstudyofpercutaneousendoscopicdecompressionandposteriordecompressivelaminectomyinthetreatmentofthoracicspinalstenosis
AT chengxiaokang comparisonstudyofpercutaneousendoscopicdecompressionandposteriordecompressivelaminectomyinthetreatmentofthoracicspinalstenosis
AT bianfucheng comparisonstudyofpercutaneousendoscopicdecompressionandposteriordecompressivelaminectomyinthetreatmentofthoracicspinalstenosis
AT liuzhaoyu comparisonstudyofpercutaneousendoscopicdecompressionandposteriordecompressivelaminectomyinthetreatmentofthoracicspinalstenosis
AT yangfengkai comparisonstudyofpercutaneousendoscopicdecompressionandposteriordecompressivelaminectomyinthetreatmentofthoracicspinalstenosis
AT chenbin comparisonstudyofpercutaneousendoscopicdecompressionandposteriordecompressivelaminectomyinthetreatmentofthoracicspinalstenosis