经椎间孔入路的全内镜腰椎间盘切除术与椎间孔入路治疗 L5-S1 腰椎间盘突出症的比较:一项 Meta 分析。

IF 0.9 4区 医学 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Ming-Tao Zhu, Bao-Shan Hu, Chien-Min Chen, Hong-Qi Liu, Guang-Xun Lin
{"title":"经椎间孔入路的全内镜腰椎间盘切除术与椎间孔入路治疗 L5-S1 腰椎间盘突出症的比较:一项 Meta 分析。","authors":"Ming-Tao Zhu, Bao-Shan Hu, Chien-Min Chen, Hong-Qi Liu, Guang-Xun Lin","doi":"10.1055/a-2053-8365","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong> Numerous studies have examined the clinical effectiveness of transforaminal full endoscopic lumbar diskectomy (T-FELD) and interlaminar full endoscopic lumbar diskectomy (I-FELD) for L5-S1 lumbar disk herniation (LDH), with mixed findings. The goal of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the perioperative outcomes, clinical results, and complications of T-FELD and I-FELD to determine their efficacy and safety for treating L5-S1 LDH and to examine the features of complications in depth.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong> Several databases were searched for articles that matched all of the inclusion criteria. The visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were used to assess the clinical results. Information on perioperative outcomes and complications was gathered and analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong> Eight studies with 756 participants were included. There were no significant differences in postoperative bed time (<i>p</i> = 0.44) and hospitalization time (<i>p</i> = 0.49) between T-FELD and I-FELD. When compared with I-FELD, T-FELD was associated with substantially longer fluoroscopy time (<i>p</i> < 0.0001) and operating time (<i>p</i> < 0.0001). There were no significant differences in the preoperative and postoperative VAS and ODI scores between T-FELD and I-FELD. The rates for overall complications, postoperative dysesthesia, postoperative lower extremity pain, incomplete decompression, recurrence, and conversion to open surgery were comparable for T-FLED and I-FELD.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> T-FELD and I-FELD had equal clinical results and safety for treatment of L5-S1 LDH. Fluoroscopy and operative times were shorter for I-FELD than for T-FELD.</p>","PeriodicalId":16544,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neurological surgery. Part A, Central European neurosurgery","volume":" ","pages":"501-512"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Full Endoscopic Lumbar Diskectomy Using the Transforaminal Approach versus Interlaminar Approach for L5-S1 Lumbar Disk Herniation Treatment: A Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Ming-Tao Zhu, Bao-Shan Hu, Chien-Min Chen, Hong-Qi Liu, Guang-Xun Lin\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2053-8365\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong> Numerous studies have examined the clinical effectiveness of transforaminal full endoscopic lumbar diskectomy (T-FELD) and interlaminar full endoscopic lumbar diskectomy (I-FELD) for L5-S1 lumbar disk herniation (LDH), with mixed findings. The goal of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the perioperative outcomes, clinical results, and complications of T-FELD and I-FELD to determine their efficacy and safety for treating L5-S1 LDH and to examine the features of complications in depth.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong> Several databases were searched for articles that matched all of the inclusion criteria. The visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were used to assess the clinical results. Information on perioperative outcomes and complications was gathered and analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong> Eight studies with 756 participants were included. There were no significant differences in postoperative bed time (<i>p</i> = 0.44) and hospitalization time (<i>p</i> = 0.49) between T-FELD and I-FELD. When compared with I-FELD, T-FELD was associated with substantially longer fluoroscopy time (<i>p</i> < 0.0001) and operating time (<i>p</i> < 0.0001). There were no significant differences in the preoperative and postoperative VAS and ODI scores between T-FELD and I-FELD. The rates for overall complications, postoperative dysesthesia, postoperative lower extremity pain, incomplete decompression, recurrence, and conversion to open surgery were comparable for T-FLED and I-FELD.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> T-FELD and I-FELD had equal clinical results and safety for treatment of L5-S1 LDH. Fluoroscopy and operative times were shorter for I-FELD than for T-FELD.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16544,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of neurological surgery. Part A, Central European neurosurgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"501-512\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of neurological surgery. Part A, Central European neurosurgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2053-8365\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/3/14 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of neurological surgery. Part A, Central European neurosurgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2053-8365","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/3/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:许多研究都探讨了经椎间孔全内镜腰椎间盘切除术(T-FELD)和椎板间全内镜腰椎间盘切除术(I-FELD)治疗L5-S1腰椎间盘突出症(LDH)的临床效果,但结果不一。本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在评估T-FELD和I-FELD的围手术期结果、临床效果和并发症,以确定其治疗L5-S1腰椎间盘突出症的有效性和安全性,并深入研究并发症的特征:方法: 在多个数据库中搜索符合所有纳入标准的文章。采用视觉模拟量表(VAS)和Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)评估临床结果。收集并分析了围手术期结果和并发症的相关信息:结果:共纳入 8 项研究,756 名参与者。T-FELD和I-FELD在术后卧床时间(p = 0.44)和住院时间(p = 0.49)方面没有明显差异。与 I-FELD 相比,T-FELD 的透视时间大大延长(p p 结论):T-FELD和I-FELD治疗L5-S1 LDH的临床效果和安全性相当。I-FELD 的透视和手术时间比 T-FELD 短。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of Full Endoscopic Lumbar Diskectomy Using the Transforaminal Approach versus Interlaminar Approach for L5-S1 Lumbar Disk Herniation Treatment: A Meta-Analysis.

Background:  Numerous studies have examined the clinical effectiveness of transforaminal full endoscopic lumbar diskectomy (T-FELD) and interlaminar full endoscopic lumbar diskectomy (I-FELD) for L5-S1 lumbar disk herniation (LDH), with mixed findings. The goal of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the perioperative outcomes, clinical results, and complications of T-FELD and I-FELD to determine their efficacy and safety for treating L5-S1 LDH and to examine the features of complications in depth.

Methods:  Several databases were searched for articles that matched all of the inclusion criteria. The visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were used to assess the clinical results. Information on perioperative outcomes and complications was gathered and analyzed.

Results:  Eight studies with 756 participants were included. There were no significant differences in postoperative bed time (p = 0.44) and hospitalization time (p = 0.49) between T-FELD and I-FELD. When compared with I-FELD, T-FELD was associated with substantially longer fluoroscopy time (p < 0.0001) and operating time (p < 0.0001). There were no significant differences in the preoperative and postoperative VAS and ODI scores between T-FELD and I-FELD. The rates for overall complications, postoperative dysesthesia, postoperative lower extremity pain, incomplete decompression, recurrence, and conversion to open surgery were comparable for T-FLED and I-FELD.

Conclusion:  T-FELD and I-FELD had equal clinical results and safety for treatment of L5-S1 LDH. Fluoroscopy and operative times were shorter for I-FELD than for T-FELD.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
90
期刊介绍: The Journal of Neurological Surgery Part A: Central European Neurosurgery (JNLS A) is a major publication from the world''s leading publisher in neurosurgery. JNLS A currently serves as the official organ of several national neurosurgery societies. JNLS A is a peer-reviewed journal publishing original research, review articles, and technical notes covering all aspects of neurological surgery. The focus of JNLS A includes microsurgery as well as the latest minimally invasive techniques, such as stereotactic-guided surgery, endoscopy, and endovascular procedures. JNLS A covers purely neurosurgical topics.
×
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