Comparison of clinical outcomes between biportal and uniportal full-endoscopy techniques in lumbar spinal stenosis with bilateral symptoms.

IF 2.3 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Song Guo, Rui-Ning Hang, Kai Zhu, Chen-Qiong Wu, Mei-Jun Yan, Xin-Hua Li, Yan-Bin Liu, Qiang Fu
{"title":"Comparison of clinical outcomes between biportal and uniportal full-endoscopy techniques in lumbar spinal stenosis with bilateral symptoms.","authors":"Song Guo, Rui-Ning Hang, Kai Zhu, Chen-Qiong Wu, Mei-Jun Yan, Xin-Hua Li, Yan-Bin Liu, Qiang Fu","doi":"10.5312/wjo.v16.i7.107698","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Uniportal full-endoscopy (UFE) technique has been continuously developed and applied for treating lumbar spinal stenosis. However, achieving effective decompression outcome of using the UFE technique remains technically demanding and uncertain. Previously, we have proposed the biportal full-endoscopy (BFE) technique to integrate the respective advantages of both UFE and unilateral biportal endoscopy technique. There is limited published data on the comparison of clinical outcomes between biportal and UFE techniques in lumbar spinal stenosis with bilateral symptoms.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To contrast the clinical outcomes between biportal and UFE techniques for treating lumbar spinal stenosis with bilateral symptoms.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study retrospectively examined 100 patients diagnosed with lumbar spinal stenosis and bilateral symptoms. Among them, 52 cases were part of group A (BFE technique group), and 48 cases belonged to group B (UFE technique group). The visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and modified Macnab criteria were used to evaluate the clinical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Group A had significantly shorter operation time than group B. Both groups experienced substantial relief in lower back and lower extremity pain on the severe side at postoperative 3 days, 3 months, and 12 months. Group A had notably lower VAS scores for mild side lower extremity pain at postoperative 3 months and 12 months compared to group B. Group A's ODI scores were significantly lower at postoperative 3 months and 12 months, whereas group B's scores did not significantly differ from preoperative values. Group A's ODI scores were significantly lower than group B's at postoperative 3 months and 12 months. Group A had a significantly higher excellent and good response rate (94.23%) compared to group B (81.25%) at postoperative 12 months based on the modified Macnab scale outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The BFE technique offers multiple benefits, including reduced trauma and quicker recovery as a minimally invasive surgery, and enhanced decompression efficiency over the UFE technique when treating lumbar spinal stenosis with bilateral symptoms.</p>","PeriodicalId":47843,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Orthopedics","volume":"16 7","pages":"107698"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12278285/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Orthopedics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v16.i7.107698","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Uniportal full-endoscopy (UFE) technique has been continuously developed and applied for treating lumbar spinal stenosis. However, achieving effective decompression outcome of using the UFE technique remains technically demanding and uncertain. Previously, we have proposed the biportal full-endoscopy (BFE) technique to integrate the respective advantages of both UFE and unilateral biportal endoscopy technique. There is limited published data on the comparison of clinical outcomes between biportal and UFE techniques in lumbar spinal stenosis with bilateral symptoms.

Aim: To contrast the clinical outcomes between biportal and UFE techniques for treating lumbar spinal stenosis with bilateral symptoms.

Methods: This study retrospectively examined 100 patients diagnosed with lumbar spinal stenosis and bilateral symptoms. Among them, 52 cases were part of group A (BFE technique group), and 48 cases belonged to group B (UFE technique group). The visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and modified Macnab criteria were used to evaluate the clinical outcomes.

Results: Group A had significantly shorter operation time than group B. Both groups experienced substantial relief in lower back and lower extremity pain on the severe side at postoperative 3 days, 3 months, and 12 months. Group A had notably lower VAS scores for mild side lower extremity pain at postoperative 3 months and 12 months compared to group B. Group A's ODI scores were significantly lower at postoperative 3 months and 12 months, whereas group B's scores did not significantly differ from preoperative values. Group A's ODI scores were significantly lower than group B's at postoperative 3 months and 12 months. Group A had a significantly higher excellent and good response rate (94.23%) compared to group B (81.25%) at postoperative 12 months based on the modified Macnab scale outcomes.

Conclusion: The BFE technique offers multiple benefits, including reduced trauma and quicker recovery as a minimally invasive surgery, and enhanced decompression efficiency over the UFE technique when treating lumbar spinal stenosis with bilateral symptoms.

双门静脉与单门静脉全内窥镜技术治疗双侧症状腰椎管狭窄的临床效果比较。
背景:单门静脉全内窥镜(UFE)技术在腰椎管狭窄的治疗中不断发展和应用。然而,使用UFE技术获得有效的减压效果在技术上仍然是有要求的和不确定的。在此之前,我们提出了双门静脉全内窥镜(BFE)技术,以整合UFE和单侧双门静脉内窥镜技术各自的优势。关于双侧症状腰椎管狭窄的双门静脉和UFE技术的临床结果比较的已发表数据有限。目的:比较双门静脉技术与UFE技术治疗双侧症状腰椎管狭窄的临床效果。方法:本研究回顾性分析了100例诊断为腰椎管狭窄和双侧症状的患者。其中,A组(BFE技术组)52例,B组(UFE技术组)48例。采用视觉模拟量表(VAS)、Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)和改良Macnab标准评价临床结果。结果:A组手术时间明显短于b组,两组患者术后3天、3个月、12个月均明显减轻了重度侧腰背部和下肢疼痛。A组术后3个月和12个月轻度侧下肢疼痛的VAS评分明显低于B组。A组术后3个月和12个月的ODI评分明显低于B组,而B组的评分与术前无显著差异。A组术后3个月和12个月ODI评分明显低于B组。根据改良Macnab量表结果,A组术后12个月的优良率(94.23%)明显高于B组(81.25%)。结论:BFE技术具有多种优点,包括作为微创手术减少创伤和更快恢复,并且在治疗双侧症状的腰椎管狭窄时,与UFE技术相比,减压效率更高。
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
3.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
814
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信