Cargando…

Clinical outcomes of transforaminal endoscopic lateral recess decompression by using the visualized drilled foraminoplasty and visualized reamed foraminoplasty: a comparison study

BACKGROUND: Lateral recess stenosis (LRS) is a common degenerative disease in the elderly. Since the rise of comorbidity is associated with increasing age, transforaminal endoscopic lateral recess decompression (TE-LRD) is advocated. The objective of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wu, Boyu, Xiong, Chengjie, Huang, Biwang, Zhao, Dongdong, Yao, Zhipeng, Yao, Yawei, Xu, Feng, Kang, Hui
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7727179/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33302913
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-03849-3
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Lateral recess stenosis (LRS) is a common degenerative disease in the elderly. Since the rise of comorbidity is associated with increasing age, transforaminal endoscopic lateral recess decompression (TE-LRD) is advocated. The objective of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of TE-LRD in patients with LRS via visualized drilled foraminoplasty (VDF) or visualized reamed foraminoplasty (VRF) technique. METHODS: A total of 45 and 42 consecutive patients with limp or unilateral radiculopathy symptoms underwent TE-LRD using the VDF and VRF technique, respectively. The radiation exposure and operation time, time to return to work, and complications were compared between two groups. Their clinical outcomes were evaluated with the visual analogue scale (VAS) leg pain score, VAS back pain score, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and modified MacNab’s criteria. RESULTS: The average values of radiation exposure and operative time in the VDF group were significantly higher than those in the VRF group (P <  0.05). The postoperative VAS and ODI scores in both groups were significantly improved compared with those before the operation (P <  0.05). In addition, the VAS score of the leg pain and ODI score in the VRF group were significantly lower than those in the VDF group at the 1-week follow-up (P <  0.05). The good-to-excellent rates of the VDF group and VRF group were 88.89 and 90.48%, respectively, whereas the complication occurrence rates were 6.67 and 4.76% in the VDF group and VRF group, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: TE-LRD performed by using VRF technique can be applied to treat LRS safely and effectively with short radiation exposure and operation time. This technique was comparable to the VDF technique with improved VAS leg pain and ODI scores in the short period after the operation. However, potential complications and risks still need to be considered.