{"title":"Delta large-channel endoscopy versus unilateral biportal endoscopy decompressive laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis: a prospective randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Rushuo Wei, Weiqiang Liu, Mingdong Yu, Yushan Zhu, Ruzhan Yao, Bingwu Wang, Jesse Li-Ling","doi":"10.1186/s13018-024-05409-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Delta large-channel endoscopy and unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) are prominent minimally invasive techniques for treating lumbar spinal stenosis, known for minimal tissue damage, clear visualization, and quick recovery. However, rigorous controlled research comparing these procedures is scarce, necessitating further investigation into their respective complications and long-term effectiveness. This randomized controlled trial aims to compare their perioperative outcomes, focusing on postoperative recovery and complications over time.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In total, 101 participants were randomly assigned to Delta large-channel endoscopy group (n = 50) or UBE group (n = 51). Primary measures were Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores and operation time. Secondary measures included VAS, EQ-5D, JOA scores, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay duration, and costs. Perioperative complications such as dural tears, incision infections, hematomas, thrombosis, and reoperation rates were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Delta group consistently showed lower mean ODI scores throughout the follow-up than UBE group, with significant differences at 2 weeks postoperative (P = 0.048), though they were not significant by 1 month (P = 0.124), 2 months (P = 0.821) and 3 months (P = 0.350). Operation times were shorter in the Delta group (P < 0.001). Hospitalization costs and intraoperative blood loss were slightly higher in the UBE group (P < 0.001). No significant differences were noted in the other secondary outcomes at various post-surgery intervals, such as VAS, EQ-5D, JOA scores, hospital stay duration and complications.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both techniques are safe and effective when performed by experienced surgeons. Compared to UBE, Delta large-channel endoscopy can shorten surgery time and reduce blood loss, and more importantly, it promotes faster recovery of lumbar function in the early postoperative period.</p><p><strong>Research registration unique identifying number (uin): </strong>Name of the registry: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry chictr.org.cn. ( http://www.chictr.org.cn/index.aspx ). Unique Identifying number or registration ID: ChiCTR2300076237. Hyperlink to your specific registration (must be publicly accessible and will be checked): https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=207 ,844.</p>","PeriodicalId":16629,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research","volume":"20 1","pages":"10"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11699819/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-024-05409-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Delta large-channel endoscopy and unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) are prominent minimally invasive techniques for treating lumbar spinal stenosis, known for minimal tissue damage, clear visualization, and quick recovery. However, rigorous controlled research comparing these procedures is scarce, necessitating further investigation into their respective complications and long-term effectiveness. This randomized controlled trial aims to compare their perioperative outcomes, focusing on postoperative recovery and complications over time.
Methods: In total, 101 participants were randomly assigned to Delta large-channel endoscopy group (n = 50) or UBE group (n = 51). Primary measures were Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores and operation time. Secondary measures included VAS, EQ-5D, JOA scores, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay duration, and costs. Perioperative complications such as dural tears, incision infections, hematomas, thrombosis, and reoperation rates were recorded.
Results: The Delta group consistently showed lower mean ODI scores throughout the follow-up than UBE group, with significant differences at 2 weeks postoperative (P = 0.048), though they were not significant by 1 month (P = 0.124), 2 months (P = 0.821) and 3 months (P = 0.350). Operation times were shorter in the Delta group (P < 0.001). Hospitalization costs and intraoperative blood loss were slightly higher in the UBE group (P < 0.001). No significant differences were noted in the other secondary outcomes at various post-surgery intervals, such as VAS, EQ-5D, JOA scores, hospital stay duration and complications.
Conclusion: Both techniques are safe and effective when performed by experienced surgeons. Compared to UBE, Delta large-channel endoscopy can shorten surgery time and reduce blood loss, and more importantly, it promotes faster recovery of lumbar function in the early postoperative period.
Research registration unique identifying number (uin): Name of the registry: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry chictr.org.cn. ( http://www.chictr.org.cn/index.aspx ). Unique Identifying number or registration ID: ChiCTR2300076237. Hyperlink to your specific registration (must be publicly accessible and will be checked): https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=207 ,844.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research is an open access journal that encompasses all aspects of clinical and basic research studies related to musculoskeletal issues.
Orthopaedic research is conducted at clinical and basic science levels. With the advancement of new technologies and the increasing expectation and demand from doctors and patients, we are witnessing an enormous growth in clinical orthopaedic research, particularly in the fields of traumatology, spinal surgery, joint replacement, sports medicine, musculoskeletal tumour management, hand microsurgery, foot and ankle surgery, paediatric orthopaedic, and orthopaedic rehabilitation. The involvement of basic science ranges from molecular, cellular, structural and functional perspectives to tissue engineering, gait analysis, automation and robotic surgery. Implant and biomaterial designs are new disciplines that complement clinical applications.
JOSR encourages the publication of multidisciplinary research with collaboration amongst clinicians and scientists from different disciplines, which will be the trend in the coming decades.