Transforaminal Endoscopic Decompression Alone Versus Limited Decompression/Fusion in the Treatment of Adult Degenerative Scoliosis: A Retrospective Study.
Yao Zhang, Wancheng Lin, Xin Lian, Lixiang Ding, Jipeng Song
{"title":"Transforaminal Endoscopic Decompression Alone Versus Limited Decompression/Fusion in the Treatment of Adult Degenerative Scoliosis: A Retrospective Study.","authors":"Yao Zhang, Wancheng Lin, Xin Lian, Lixiang Ding, Jipeng Song","doi":"10.1177/21925682241288189","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>A retrospective study.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To investigate and compare the clinical and radiographical outcomes of endoscopic decompression alone and limited decompression/fusion surgery in the treatment of adult degenerative scoliosis (ADS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Follow-up data of 53 patients with lower limb radiculopathy associated with ADS who underwent focal surgical treatment were collected (endoscope group: 31 patients treated by transforaminal endoscopic decompression alone; fusion group: 22 patients who underwent limited decompression/fusion). The following data were retrospectively analyzed and compared between the two group: the demographics, Lenke-Silva level, radiographic parameters, surgical data, visual analogue scale (VAS) for back/leg pain, the Oswestry disability index (ODI), and the modified MacNab criteria.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean follow-up period was 15.68 ± 3.26 months. The most frequent Lenke-Silva level was I in the endoscope group, and III in the fusion group. Preoperative Cobb angle in the endoscope group was significantly lower than that in the fusion group (23.92 ± 9.06 vs 39.58 ± 13.12, <i>P</i> < 0.05). All patients exhibited improved VAS and ODI scores postoperatively (<i>P</i> < 0.05). At the last follow-up, the Cobb angle had progressed by 1.51° in the endoscope group, whereas radiographic parameters were significantly improved in the fusion group. The reoperation and complication rate in the endoscope group were lower than those in the fusion group. The satisfaction rate post-surgery was comparable between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>For patients with focal ADS, both limited decompression/fusion and transforaminal endoscopic decompression are viable treatment options. Advanced transforaminal endoscopic techniques enable effective decompression of the symptomatic foramen with minimal complication risk and negligible deformity progression, even in cases of significant scoliosis. While limited fusion surgery can achieve comparable clinical outcomes, it offers inferior deformity correction.</p>","PeriodicalId":12680,"journal":{"name":"Global Spine Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Spine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682241288189","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Study design: A retrospective study.
Objectives: To investigate and compare the clinical and radiographical outcomes of endoscopic decompression alone and limited decompression/fusion surgery in the treatment of adult degenerative scoliosis (ADS).
Methods: Follow-up data of 53 patients with lower limb radiculopathy associated with ADS who underwent focal surgical treatment were collected (endoscope group: 31 patients treated by transforaminal endoscopic decompression alone; fusion group: 22 patients who underwent limited decompression/fusion). The following data were retrospectively analyzed and compared between the two group: the demographics, Lenke-Silva level, radiographic parameters, surgical data, visual analogue scale (VAS) for back/leg pain, the Oswestry disability index (ODI), and the modified MacNab criteria.
Results: The mean follow-up period was 15.68 ± 3.26 months. The most frequent Lenke-Silva level was I in the endoscope group, and III in the fusion group. Preoperative Cobb angle in the endoscope group was significantly lower than that in the fusion group (23.92 ± 9.06 vs 39.58 ± 13.12, P < 0.05). All patients exhibited improved VAS and ODI scores postoperatively (P < 0.05). At the last follow-up, the Cobb angle had progressed by 1.51° in the endoscope group, whereas radiographic parameters were significantly improved in the fusion group. The reoperation and complication rate in the endoscope group were lower than those in the fusion group. The satisfaction rate post-surgery was comparable between the two groups.
Conclusions: For patients with focal ADS, both limited decompression/fusion and transforaminal endoscopic decompression are viable treatment options. Advanced transforaminal endoscopic techniques enable effective decompression of the symptomatic foramen with minimal complication risk and negligible deformity progression, even in cases of significant scoliosis. While limited fusion surgery can achieve comparable clinical outcomes, it offers inferior deformity correction.
期刊介绍：
Global Spine Journal (GSJ) is the official scientific publication of AOSpine. A peer-reviewed, open access journal, devoted to the study and treatment of spinal disorders, including diagnosis, operative and non-operative treatment options, surgical techniques, and emerging research and clinical developments.GSJ is indexed in PubMedCentral, SCOPUS, and Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI).
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
