[Lumbar disc nucleus pulposus excision by percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar approach for single segment giant lumbar disc herniation in young adults].

Q4 Medicine
Kang Chen, Fu-Guo Yang, Yuan-Chao Luo, Ren-Jian He, Hong-Jie Huang
{"title":"[Lumbar disc nucleus pulposus excision by percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar approach for single segment giant lumbar disc herniation in young adults].","authors":"Kang Chen, Fu-Guo Yang, Yuan-Chao Luo, Ren-Jian He, Hong-Jie Huang","doi":"10.12200/j.issn.1003-0034.20240377","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To explore feasibility, clinical and imaging outcomes of percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy (PEID) for single level large lumbar disc herniation(LDH).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From October 2018 to March 2023, 31 patients with single level LDH treated with PEID were retrospectively analyzed. Among patients, including 18 males and 13 females, aged from 15 to 40 years old with an average of (28.5±7.4) years old;L<sub>4,5</sub> in 10 patients, L<sub>5</sub>S<sub>1</sub> in 21 patients;14 patients on the left side, 17 patients on the right side;the courses of disease ranged from 3 to 19 months with an average of (6.8 ± 3.1) months. Operation time, blood loss, fluoroscopy times and hospital stay were observed. Visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to evaluate low back and leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI) was used to evaluate lumbar function, modified MacNab was used to evaluate clinical efficacy at the latest follow-up. Median sagittal diameter of spinal canal, effective sagittal diameter of spinal canal, spinal canal area, and dural sac area were used to evaluate spinal decompression. Anterior, middle, and posterior heights of intervertebral space were used to evaluate intervertebral space changes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All patients were performed spinal endoscopic surgery, operation time ranged from 30 to 71 min with an average of (48.7±14.2) min, blood loss ranged from 10 to 40 ml with an average of (21.1±7.0) ml, and intraoperative fluoroscopy times ranged from 4 to 7 with an average of (4.7±0.7). The hospital stay ranged from 3 to 8 days with an average of (5.1±1.3) days, and postoperative follow-up ranged from 12 to 34 months with an average of (16.9±4.1) months. VAS of low back pain before operation and 3, 6 months after operation, the latest follow-up were (6.2±1.8), (1.4±0.8), (1.9±0.7), (1.6±0.6), respectively;VAS of leg pain were (7.6±1.6), (1.8±0.9), (1.6±0.6), (1.4±0.7), respectively;ODI were (35.74±4.62), (6.68±1.78), (6.90±1.85), (7.10±1.94), respectively;postoperative lower back pain and leg pain VAS and ODI were significantly improved at all time points after operation (<i>P</i><0.05). Postoperative VAS of low back pain at 6 months was higher than that of 3 months after operation (<i>P</i><0.05). At the laest follow-up, 14 patients were excellent, 15 good, and 2 acceptable according to modified MacNab standard. Median diameters of spinal canal were (0.77±0.18) and (1.18±0.24) cm before operation and at the latest follow-up. The effective diameters of spinal canal were (0.48±0.17) and (0.89±0.23) cm, respectively. The vertebral canal areas were (0.90±0.22) and (1.68±0.43) cm<sup>2</sup>, respectively. Dural sac areas were (0.41±0.10) and (0.81±0.24) cm<sup>2</sup>, respectively. At the least follow-up, median diameter, effective diameter, area of spinal canal and dural sac were significantly increased compared with those before operation (<i>P</i><0.05). Anterior vertebral space height before operation was (1.13±0.13) cm, and improved to (0.83±0.11) cm at the latest follow-up. Central height decreased from (0.81±0.20) cm before operation to (0.61±0.14) cm at the latest follow-up. The height of posterior margin decreased from (0.67±0.21) cm before operation to (0.46±0.15) cm at the latest follow-up (<i>P</i><0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>PEID for giant LDH could effectively remove protruding giant nucleus pulposus tissue, and avoid injury to cauda equina nerve and nerve roots, which has good early clinical effect. However, the height of intervertebral space was obviously lost after operation.</p>","PeriodicalId":23964,"journal":{"name":"Zhongguo gu shang = China journal of orthopaedics and traumatology","volume":"37 12","pages":"1173-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zhongguo gu shang = China journal of orthopaedics and traumatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12200/j.issn.1003-0034.20240377","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To explore feasibility, clinical and imaging outcomes of percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy (PEID) for single level large lumbar disc herniation(LDH).

Methods: From October 2018 to March 2023, 31 patients with single level LDH treated with PEID were retrospectively analyzed. Among patients, including 18 males and 13 females, aged from 15 to 40 years old with an average of (28.5±7.4) years old;L4,5 in 10 patients, L5S1 in 21 patients;14 patients on the left side, 17 patients on the right side;the courses of disease ranged from 3 to 19 months with an average of (6.8 ± 3.1) months. Operation time, blood loss, fluoroscopy times and hospital stay were observed. Visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to evaluate low back and leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI) was used to evaluate lumbar function, modified MacNab was used to evaluate clinical efficacy at the latest follow-up. Median sagittal diameter of spinal canal, effective sagittal diameter of spinal canal, spinal canal area, and dural sac area were used to evaluate spinal decompression. Anterior, middle, and posterior heights of intervertebral space were used to evaluate intervertebral space changes.

Results: All patients were performed spinal endoscopic surgery, operation time ranged from 30 to 71 min with an average of (48.7±14.2) min, blood loss ranged from 10 to 40 ml with an average of (21.1±7.0) ml, and intraoperative fluoroscopy times ranged from 4 to 7 with an average of (4.7±0.7). The hospital stay ranged from 3 to 8 days with an average of (5.1±1.3) days, and postoperative follow-up ranged from 12 to 34 months with an average of (16.9±4.1) months. VAS of low back pain before operation and 3, 6 months after operation, the latest follow-up were (6.2±1.8), (1.4±0.8), (1.9±0.7), (1.6±0.6), respectively;VAS of leg pain were (7.6±1.6), (1.8±0.9), (1.6±0.6), (1.4±0.7), respectively;ODI were (35.74±4.62), (6.68±1.78), (6.90±1.85), (7.10±1.94), respectively;postoperative lower back pain and leg pain VAS and ODI were significantly improved at all time points after operation (P<0.05). Postoperative VAS of low back pain at 6 months was higher than that of 3 months after operation (P<0.05). At the laest follow-up, 14 patients were excellent, 15 good, and 2 acceptable according to modified MacNab standard. Median diameters of spinal canal were (0.77±0.18) and (1.18±0.24) cm before operation and at the latest follow-up. The effective diameters of spinal canal were (0.48±0.17) and (0.89±0.23) cm, respectively. The vertebral canal areas were (0.90±0.22) and (1.68±0.43) cm2, respectively. Dural sac areas were (0.41±0.10) and (0.81±0.24) cm2, respectively. At the least follow-up, median diameter, effective diameter, area of spinal canal and dural sac were significantly increased compared with those before operation (P<0.05). Anterior vertebral space height before operation was (1.13±0.13) cm, and improved to (0.83±0.11) cm at the latest follow-up. Central height decreased from (0.81±0.20) cm before operation to (0.61±0.14) cm at the latest follow-up. The height of posterior margin decreased from (0.67±0.21) cm before operation to (0.46±0.15) cm at the latest follow-up (P<0.05).

Conclusion: PEID for giant LDH could effectively remove protruding giant nucleus pulposus tissue, and avoid injury to cauda equina nerve and nerve roots, which has good early clinical effect. However, the height of intervertebral space was obviously lost after operation.

[经皮内窥镜椎间入路腰椎间盘髓核切除治疗青年单节段巨大腰椎间盘突出症]。
目的:探讨经皮内镜椎间盘切除术(PEID)治疗单节段大腰椎间盘突出症(LDH)的可行性、临床及影像学结果。方法:回顾性分析2018年10月至2023年3月31例采用PEID治疗的单水平LDH患者。患者男18例,女13例,年龄15 ~ 40岁,平均(28.5±7.4)岁,L4、l5 10例,L5S1 21例,左侧14例,右侧17例,病程3 ~ 19个月,平均(6.8±3.1)个月。观察手术时间、出血量、透视次数及住院时间。采用视觉模拟量表(Visual analogue scale, VAS)评价腰、下肢疼痛,采用Oswestry残疾指数(Oswestry disability index, ODI)评价腰椎功能,最新随访时采用改良MacNab评价临床疗效。椎管正中矢状径、椎管有效矢状径、椎管面积、硬脑膜囊面积评价椎管减压。采用椎间隙前、中、后高度评价椎间隙变化。结果:所有患者均行脊柱内镜手术,手术时间30 ~ 71 min,平均(48.7±14.2)min,出血量10 ~ 40 ml,平均(21.1±7.0)ml,术中透视4 ~ 7次,平均(4.7±0.7)次。住院时间3 ~ 8天,平均(5.1±1.3)天;术后随访12 ~ 34个月,平均(16.9±4.1)个月。术前及术后3、6个月腰痛VAS最新随访值分别为(6.2±1.8)、(1.4±0.8)、(1.9±0.7)、(1.6±0.6);下肢疼痛VAS分别为(7.6±1.6)、(1.8±0.9)、(1.6±0.6)、(1.4±0.7);ODI分别为(35.74±4.62)、(6.68±1.78)、(6.90±1.85)、(7.10±1.94);术后各时间点腰痛、下肢疼痛VAS及ODI均有明显改善(PP2)。硬膜囊面积分别为(0.41±0.10)cm2和(0.81±0.24)cm2。随访最少时,椎管中径、有效径、椎管及硬膜囊面积均较术前显著增加(ppp)。结论:巨大LDH的PEID可有效去除突出的巨大髓核组织,避免损伤马尾神经及神经根,具有良好的早期临床效果。但术后椎间隙高度明显下降。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
189
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信