{"title":"全内窥镜椎板间腰椎间盘切除术与显微腰椎间盘切除术的比较分析。","authors":"Luay Şerifoğlu, Mustafa Umut Etli, Selçuk Özdoğan","doi":"10.1097/BSD.0000000000001733","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective clinical study.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim is to assess and contrast the results of full endoscopic lumbar discectomy (FELD) and lumbar microdiscectomy (LMD) for L5-S1 disc herniation, with a specific emphasis on postoperative pain reduction and surgical effectiveness.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Although minimally invasive spine operations are becoming more popular, there is still little research on the comparative effectiveness of FELD and LMD.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The research had a total of 50 patients who received surgical intervention for L5-S1 disc herniation, with 25 patients getting full endoscopic interlaminar discectomy and the other 25 patients undergoing LMD. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Visual Analog Scale for low back and leg pain, collected preoperatively and at the end of 1 week, 3 months, and 6 months postsurgery. Patient satisfaction was evaluated using Odoms criteria at the same intervals.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 50 patients (26 men, 24 women), with a mean age of 51.11 ± 13.76 years. The groups had no significant differences in demographic data. Back and leg pain Visual Analog Scale scores decreased more significantly in the FELD group after 1 week of surgery ( P < 0.001), although the declines at 3 months and 6 months were not significantly different between the two groups. According to Odoms criteria, patient satisfaction was favorable in both groups and significantly better in the FELD group than in the LMD group at 1 week postoperatively [excellent in 20 patients (80%) in the FELD group vs 9 patients (36%) in the LMD group ( P = 0.025)]. However, patient satisfaction at 3 months and 6 months did not differ between the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study demonstrates that FELD offers significant early postoperative advantages over LMD at the L5-S1 level when compared with pain and satisfaction scales.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level III.</p>","PeriodicalId":10457,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Spine Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"E312-E315"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Analysis of Full Endoscopic Interlaminar Lumbar Discectomy and Lumbar Microdiscectomy.\",\"authors\":\"Luay Şerifoğlu, Mustafa Umut Etli, Selçuk Özdoğan\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/BSD.0000000000001733\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective clinical study.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim is to assess and contrast the results of full endoscopic lumbar discectomy (FELD) and lumbar microdiscectomy (LMD) for L5-S1 disc herniation, with a specific emphasis on postoperative pain reduction and surgical effectiveness.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Although minimally invasive spine operations are becoming more popular, there is still little research on the comparative effectiveness of FELD and LMD.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The research had a total of 50 patients who received surgical intervention for L5-S1 disc herniation, with 25 patients getting full endoscopic interlaminar discectomy and the other 25 patients undergoing LMD. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Visual Analog Scale for low back and leg pain, collected preoperatively and at the end of 1 week, 3 months, and 6 months postsurgery. Patient satisfaction was evaluated using Odoms criteria at the same intervals.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 50 patients (26 men, 24 women), with a mean age of 51.11 ± 13.76 years. The groups had no significant differences in demographic data. Back and leg pain Visual Analog Scale scores decreased more significantly in the FELD group after 1 week of surgery ( P < 0.001), although the declines at 3 months and 6 months were not significantly different between the two groups. According to Odoms criteria, patient satisfaction was favorable in both groups and significantly better in the FELD group than in the LMD group at 1 week postoperatively [excellent in 20 patients (80%) in the FELD group vs 9 patients (36%) in the LMD group ( P = 0.025)]. However, patient satisfaction at 3 months and 6 months did not differ between the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study demonstrates that FELD offers significant early postoperative advantages over LMD at the L5-S1 level when compared with pain and satisfaction scales.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level III.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10457,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Spine Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"E312-E315\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Spine Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000001733\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/11/18 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Spine Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000001733","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparative Analysis of Full Endoscopic Interlaminar Lumbar Discectomy and Lumbar Microdiscectomy.
Study design: Retrospective clinical study.
Objectives: The aim is to assess and contrast the results of full endoscopic lumbar discectomy (FELD) and lumbar microdiscectomy (LMD) for L5-S1 disc herniation, with a specific emphasis on postoperative pain reduction and surgical effectiveness.
Background: Although minimally invasive spine operations are becoming more popular, there is still little research on the comparative effectiveness of FELD and LMD.
Materials and methods: The research had a total of 50 patients who received surgical intervention for L5-S1 disc herniation, with 25 patients getting full endoscopic interlaminar discectomy and the other 25 patients undergoing LMD. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Visual Analog Scale for low back and leg pain, collected preoperatively and at the end of 1 week, 3 months, and 6 months postsurgery. Patient satisfaction was evaluated using Odoms criteria at the same intervals.
Results: The study included 50 patients (26 men, 24 women), with a mean age of 51.11 ± 13.76 years. The groups had no significant differences in demographic data. Back and leg pain Visual Analog Scale scores decreased more significantly in the FELD group after 1 week of surgery ( P < 0.001), although the declines at 3 months and 6 months were not significantly different between the two groups. According to Odoms criteria, patient satisfaction was favorable in both groups and significantly better in the FELD group than in the LMD group at 1 week postoperatively [excellent in 20 patients (80%) in the FELD group vs 9 patients (36%) in the LMD group ( P = 0.025)]. However, patient satisfaction at 3 months and 6 months did not differ between the groups.
Conclusion: This study demonstrates that FELD offers significant early postoperative advantages over LMD at the L5-S1 level when compared with pain and satisfaction scales.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Spine Surgery is the ideal journal for the busy practicing spine surgeon or trainee, as it is the only journal necessary to keep up to date with new clinical research and surgical techniques. Readers get to watch leaders in the field debate controversial topics in a new controversies section, and gain access to evidence-based reviews of important pathologies in the systematic reviews section. The journal features a surgical technique complete with a video, and a tips and tricks section that allows surgeons to review the important steps prior to a complex procedure.
Clinical Spine Surgery provides readers with primary research studies, specifically level 1, 2 and 3 studies, ensuring that articles that may actually change a surgeon’s practice will be read and published. Each issue includes a brief article that will help a surgeon better understand the business of healthcare, as well as an article that will help a surgeon understand how to interpret increasingly complex research methodology. Clinical Spine Surgery is your single source for up-to-date, evidence-based recommendations for spine care.