{"title":"单侧双门静脉内窥镜下腰椎间盘切除术与镜下腰椎间盘切除术术后骨愈合的比较","authors":"Jae-young So, Jeong-Yoon Park","doi":"10.21182/jmisst.2023.00801","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: Unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomy and microscopic lumbar discectomy are typical surgical treatments for spinal disease that are performed in different environment. This study investigated differences in bone healing at the postoperative laminecrtomy site between 2 surgical treatments performed in different environments. Methods: From January 2018 to June 2021, 66 patients who underwent laminectomy at Department of Neurosurgery, Gangnam Severance Hospital were retrospectively reviewed. All patients were matched for sex, age, body mass index, bone mineral density, and follow-up duration at a 1:2 matching ratio and were divided into the UBE group (22 patients) and the microscopic discectomy group (44 patients). We investigated the site of laminectomy shown on pre-operative and postoperative x-ray images using ImageJ software. The factors related to bone healing were also investigated. Results: The average bone healing area was 69.59 mm 2 in the UBE group and 44.56 mm 2 in the microscopic discectomy group, constituting a significant difference (p=0.022). The remaining laminectomy area was significantly lower in the UBE group than in the microscopic discectomy group (13.91 mm 2 vs. 53.84 mm 2 , p<0.001). The bone recovery ratio in the UBE group was 85.42%, compared to 51.33% in the microscopic discectomy group, which was a significant difference (p<0.001). The primary laminectomy area, bone healing during 6 months, and clinical outcomes were not significantly different between the 2 groups. Conclusion: Compared with the microscopic discectomy group, the UBE group had a larger bone healing area and a higher bone recovery ratio for patients with lumbar discectomy. These findings suggest that preserving normal structures is more feasible during UBE than during microscopic surgery.","PeriodicalId":405058,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery and Technique","volume":"42 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Postoperative Bone Healing in Patients With Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy and Microscopic Lumbar Discectomy\",\"authors\":\"Jae-young So, Jeong-Yoon Park\",\"doi\":\"10.21182/jmisst.2023.00801\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: Unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomy and microscopic lumbar discectomy are typical surgical treatments for spinal disease that are performed in different environment. This study investigated differences in bone healing at the postoperative laminecrtomy site between 2 surgical treatments performed in different environments. Methods: From January 2018 to June 2021, 66 patients who underwent laminectomy at Department of Neurosurgery, Gangnam Severance Hospital were retrospectively reviewed. All patients were matched for sex, age, body mass index, bone mineral density, and follow-up duration at a 1:2 matching ratio and were divided into the UBE group (22 patients) and the microscopic discectomy group (44 patients). We investigated the site of laminectomy shown on pre-operative and postoperative x-ray images using ImageJ software. The factors related to bone healing were also investigated. Results: The average bone healing area was 69.59 mm 2 in the UBE group and 44.56 mm 2 in the microscopic discectomy group, constituting a significant difference (p=0.022). The remaining laminectomy area was significantly lower in the UBE group than in the microscopic discectomy group (13.91 mm 2 vs. 53.84 mm 2 , p<0.001). The bone recovery ratio in the UBE group was 85.42%, compared to 51.33% in the microscopic discectomy group, which was a significant difference (p<0.001). The primary laminectomy area, bone healing during 6 months, and clinical outcomes were not significantly different between the 2 groups. Conclusion: Compared with the microscopic discectomy group, the UBE group had a larger bone healing area and a higher bone recovery ratio for patients with lumbar discectomy. These findings suggest that preserving normal structures is more feasible during UBE than during microscopic surgery.\",\"PeriodicalId\":405058,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery and Technique\",\"volume\":\"42 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery and Technique\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21182/jmisst.2023.00801\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery and Technique","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21182/jmisst.2023.00801","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:单侧双门静脉内窥镜下腰椎间盘切除术和显微下腰椎间盘切除术是治疗脊柱疾病的典型手术方法,手术环境不同。本研究探讨了在不同环境下进行两种手术治疗后椎板切除术部位骨愈合的差异。方法:回顾性分析2018年1月至2021年6月在江南Severance医院神经外科行椎板切除术的患者66例。所有患者按1:2匹配比例匹配性别、年龄、体重指数、骨密度、随访时间,分为UBE组(22例)和显微椎间盘切除术组(44例)。我们使用ImageJ软件研究了术前和术后x线图像显示的椎板切除术位置。并对影响骨愈合的因素进行了研究。结果:UBE组平均骨愈合面积为69.59 mm 2,显微椎间盘切除术组平均骨愈合面积为44.56 mm 2,差异有统计学意义(p=0.022)。UBE组剩余椎板切除面积明显低于显微椎间盘切除术组(13.91 mm2 vs. 53.84 mm2, p<0.001)。UBE组骨恢复率为85.42%,显微椎间盘切除术组为51.33%,差异有统计学意义(p<0.001)。两组患者的原发性椎板切除面积、6个月骨愈合及临床结果无显著差异。结论:与显微椎间盘切除术组相比,UBE组腰椎间盘切除术患者的骨愈合面积更大,骨恢复率更高。这些发现表明,在UBE手术中保存正常结构比显微手术更可行。
Comparison of Postoperative Bone Healing in Patients With Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy and Microscopic Lumbar Discectomy
Objective: Unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomy and microscopic lumbar discectomy are typical surgical treatments for spinal disease that are performed in different environment. This study investigated differences in bone healing at the postoperative laminecrtomy site between 2 surgical treatments performed in different environments. Methods: From January 2018 to June 2021, 66 patients who underwent laminectomy at Department of Neurosurgery, Gangnam Severance Hospital were retrospectively reviewed. All patients were matched for sex, age, body mass index, bone mineral density, and follow-up duration at a 1:2 matching ratio and were divided into the UBE group (22 patients) and the microscopic discectomy group (44 patients). We investigated the site of laminectomy shown on pre-operative and postoperative x-ray images using ImageJ software. The factors related to bone healing were also investigated. Results: The average bone healing area was 69.59 mm 2 in the UBE group and 44.56 mm 2 in the microscopic discectomy group, constituting a significant difference (p=0.022). The remaining laminectomy area was significantly lower in the UBE group than in the microscopic discectomy group (13.91 mm 2 vs. 53.84 mm 2 , p<0.001). The bone recovery ratio in the UBE group was 85.42%, compared to 51.33% in the microscopic discectomy group, which was a significant difference (p<0.001). The primary laminectomy area, bone healing during 6 months, and clinical outcomes were not significantly different between the 2 groups. Conclusion: Compared with the microscopic discectomy group, the UBE group had a larger bone healing area and a higher bone recovery ratio for patients with lumbar discectomy. These findings suggest that preserving normal structures is more feasible during UBE than during microscopic surgery.