Cargando…

Clinical comparison of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy and unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy for single-level lumbar disc herniation

PURPOSE: To compare the clinical outcomes of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) and unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy (UBE) for the treatment of single-level lumbar disc herniation (LDH). MATERIALS AND METHODS: From January 2020 to November 2021, 62 patients with single...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cheng, Xiaokang, Bao, Beixi, Wu, Yuxuan, Cheng, Yuanpei, Xu, Chunyang, Ye, Yang, Dou, Chentao, Chen, Bin, Yan, Hui, Tang, Jiaguang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9884965/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36726945
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2022.1107883
_version_ 1784879825970790400
author Cheng, Xiaokang
Bao, Beixi
Wu, Yuxuan
Cheng, Yuanpei
Xu, Chunyang
Ye, Yang
Dou, Chentao
Chen, Bin
Yan, Hui
Tang, Jiaguang
author_facet Cheng, Xiaokang
Bao, Beixi
Wu, Yuxuan
Cheng, Yuanpei
Xu, Chunyang
Ye, Yang
Dou, Chentao
Chen, Bin
Yan, Hui
Tang, Jiaguang
author_sort Cheng, Xiaokang
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To compare the clinical outcomes of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) and unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy (UBE) for the treatment of single-level lumbar disc herniation (LDH). MATERIALS AND METHODS: From January 2020 to November 2021, 62 patients with single-level LDH were retrospectively reviewed. All patients underwent spinal surgeries at the Affiliated Hospital of Chengde Medical University and Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University. Among them, 30 patients were treated with UBE, and 32 were treated with PTED. The patients were followed up for at least one year. Patient demographics and perioperative outcomes were reviewed before and after surgery. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS) for back pain and leg pain, and modified MacNab criteria were used to evaluate the clinical outcomes. x-ray examinations were performed one year after surgery to assess the stability of the lumbar spine. RESULTS: The mean ages in the UBE and PTED groups were 46.7 years and 48.0 years, respectively. Compared to the UBE group, the PTED group had better VAS scores for back pain at 1 and 7 days after surgery (3.06 ± 0.80 vs. 4.03 ± 0.81, P < 0.05; 2.81 ± 0.60 vs. 3.70 ± 0.79, P < 0.05). The UBE and PTED groups demonstrated significant improvements in the VAS score for leg pain and ODI score, and no significant differences were found between the groups at any time after the first month (P > 0.05). Although the good-to-excellent rate of the modified MacNab criteria in the UBE group was similar to that in the PTED group (86.7% vs. 87.5%, P > 0.05), PTED was advantageous in terms of the operation time, estimated blood loss, incision length, and length of postoperative hospital stay. CONCLUSIONS: Both UBE and PTED have favorable outcomes in patients with single-level LDH. However, PTED is superior to UBE in terms of short-term postoperative back pain relief and perioperative quality of life.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9884965
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98849652023-01-31 Clinical comparison of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy and unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy for single-level lumbar disc herniation Cheng, Xiaokang Bao, Beixi Wu, Yuxuan Cheng, Yuanpei Xu, Chunyang Ye, Yang Dou, Chentao Chen, Bin Yan, Hui Tang, Jiaguang Front Surg Surgery PURPOSE: To compare the clinical outcomes of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) and unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy (UBE) for the treatment of single-level lumbar disc herniation (LDH). MATERIALS AND METHODS: From January 2020 to November 2021, 62 patients with single-level LDH were retrospectively reviewed. All patients underwent spinal surgeries at the Affiliated Hospital of Chengde Medical University and Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University. Among them, 30 patients were treated with UBE, and 32 were treated with PTED. The patients were followed up for at least one year. Patient demographics and perioperative outcomes were reviewed before and after surgery. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS) for back pain and leg pain, and modified MacNab criteria were used to evaluate the clinical outcomes. x-ray examinations were performed one year after surgery to assess the stability of the lumbar spine. RESULTS: The mean ages in the UBE and PTED groups were 46.7 years and 48.0 years, respectively. Compared to the UBE group, the PTED group had better VAS scores for back pain at 1 and 7 days after surgery (3.06 ± 0.80 vs. 4.03 ± 0.81, P < 0.05; 2.81 ± 0.60 vs. 3.70 ± 0.79, P < 0.05). The UBE and PTED groups demonstrated significant improvements in the VAS score for leg pain and ODI score, and no significant differences were found between the groups at any time after the first month (P > 0.05). Although the good-to-excellent rate of the modified MacNab criteria in the UBE group was similar to that in the PTED group (86.7% vs. 87.5%, P > 0.05), PTED was advantageous in terms of the operation time, estimated blood loss, incision length, and length of postoperative hospital stay. CONCLUSIONS: Both UBE and PTED have favorable outcomes in patients with single-level LDH. However, PTED is superior to UBE in terms of short-term postoperative back pain relief and perioperative quality of life. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-01-16 /pmc/articles/PMC9884965/ /pubmed/36726945 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2022.1107883 Text en © 2023 Cheng, Bao, Wu, Cheng, Xu, Ye, Dou, Chen, Yan and Tang. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Surgery
Cheng, Xiaokang
Bao, Beixi
Wu, Yuxuan
Cheng, Yuanpei
Xu, Chunyang
Ye, Yang
Dou, Chentao
Chen, Bin
Yan, Hui
Tang, Jiaguang
Clinical comparison of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy and unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy for single-level lumbar disc herniation
title Clinical comparison of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy and unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy for single-level lumbar disc herniation
title_full Clinical comparison of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy and unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy for single-level lumbar disc herniation
title_fullStr Clinical comparison of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy and unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy for single-level lumbar disc herniation
title_full_unstemmed Clinical comparison of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy and unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy for single-level lumbar disc herniation
title_short Clinical comparison of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy and unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy for single-level lumbar disc herniation
title_sort clinical comparison of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy and unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy for single-level lumbar disc herniation
topic Surgery
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9884965/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36726945
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2022.1107883
work_keys_str_mv AT chengxiaokang clinicalcomparisonofpercutaneoustransforaminalendoscopicdiscectomyandunilateralbiportalendoscopicdiscectomyforsinglelevellumbardischerniation
AT baobeixi clinicalcomparisonofpercutaneoustransforaminalendoscopicdiscectomyandunilateralbiportalendoscopicdiscectomyforsinglelevellumbardischerniation
AT wuyuxuan clinicalcomparisonofpercutaneoustransforaminalendoscopicdiscectomyandunilateralbiportalendoscopicdiscectomyforsinglelevellumbardischerniation
AT chengyuanpei clinicalcomparisonofpercutaneoustransforaminalendoscopicdiscectomyandunilateralbiportalendoscopicdiscectomyforsinglelevellumbardischerniation
AT xuchunyang clinicalcomparisonofpercutaneoustransforaminalendoscopicdiscectomyandunilateralbiportalendoscopicdiscectomyforsinglelevellumbardischerniation
AT yeyang clinicalcomparisonofpercutaneoustransforaminalendoscopicdiscectomyandunilateralbiportalendoscopicdiscectomyforsinglelevellumbardischerniation
AT douchentao clinicalcomparisonofpercutaneoustransforaminalendoscopicdiscectomyandunilateralbiportalendoscopicdiscectomyforsinglelevellumbardischerniation
AT chenbin clinicalcomparisonofpercutaneoustransforaminalendoscopicdiscectomyandunilateralbiportalendoscopicdiscectomyforsinglelevellumbardischerniation
AT yanhui clinicalcomparisonofpercutaneoustransforaminalendoscopicdiscectomyandunilateralbiportalendoscopicdiscectomyforsinglelevellumbardischerniation
AT tangjiaguang clinicalcomparisonofpercutaneoustransforaminalendoscopicdiscectomyandunilateralbiportalendoscopicdiscectomyforsinglelevellumbardischerniation