Lu Mao, Zicong Shen, Weiye Zhu, Kun Wang, Pan Fan, Xiaotao Wu, Lijun Li, Guanyi Liu
{"title":"显微内镜下腰椎间盘切除术与经皮内镜下腰椎间盘切除术治疗青少年腰椎间盘突出症的疗效比较。","authors":"Lu Mao, Zicong Shen, Weiye Zhu, Kun Wang, Pan Fan, Xiaotao Wu, Lijun Li, Guanyi Liu","doi":"10.1038/s41598-025-94635-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Microendoscopic discectomy (MED) has long been employed as the standard operation for adolescent lumbar disc herniation (ALDH). However, due to iatrogenic injury, it has been suspected to cause adverse effects. Alternatively, percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) is considered as effective as MED. Few studies have compared MED and PELD in the treatment of ALDH. The purpose of this study was to compare the possible differences in young patients who underwent MED or PELD. From January 2011 to January 2021, 49 consecutive patients were treated with MED (17 patients) or PELD (32 patients) at the authors institution. Numeric Rating Scales (NRS) scores, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and modified MacNab criteria demonstrated significant improvement in both early and late follow-up evaluations (P < 0.01). PELD group resulted in shorter operative times and lower re-operation and complication rate. The PELD group exhibited shorter incision length, length of hospital stay and less intraoperative blood loss than the MED group. Both PELD and MED have demonstrated great efficacy in managing symptomatic ALDH. PELD appears to offer superior control over surgical trauma and promotes rapid recovery compared to MED.</p>","PeriodicalId":21811,"journal":{"name":"Scientific Reports","volume":"15 1","pages":"10185"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11933457/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of the efficacy of microendoscopic discectomy and percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy for treating adolescent lumbar disc herniation.\",\"authors\":\"Lu Mao, Zicong Shen, Weiye Zhu, Kun Wang, Pan Fan, Xiaotao Wu, Lijun Li, Guanyi Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41598-025-94635-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Microendoscopic discectomy (MED) has long been employed as the standard operation for adolescent lumbar disc herniation (ALDH). However, due to iatrogenic injury, it has been suspected to cause adverse effects. Alternatively, percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) is considered as effective as MED. Few studies have compared MED and PELD in the treatment of ALDH. The purpose of this study was to compare the possible differences in young patients who underwent MED or PELD. From January 2011 to January 2021, 49 consecutive patients were treated with MED (17 patients) or PELD (32 patients) at the authors institution. Numeric Rating Scales (NRS) scores, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and modified MacNab criteria demonstrated significant improvement in both early and late follow-up evaluations (P < 0.01). PELD group resulted in shorter operative times and lower re-operation and complication rate. The PELD group exhibited shorter incision length, length of hospital stay and less intraoperative blood loss than the MED group. Both PELD and MED have demonstrated great efficacy in managing symptomatic ALDH. PELD appears to offer superior control over surgical trauma and promotes rapid recovery compared to MED.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21811,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Scientific Reports\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"10185\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11933457/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Scientific Reports\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"103\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-94635-5\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"综合性期刊\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scientific Reports","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-94635-5","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
长期以来,显微内窥镜椎间盘切除术(MED)一直是治疗青少年腰椎间盘突出症(ALDH)的标准手术。然而,由于先天性损伤,该手术被怀疑会造成不良影响。另外,经皮内窥镜腰椎间盘切除术(PELD)被认为与 MED 同样有效。很少有研究对 MED 和 PELD 治疗 ALDH 进行比较。本研究旨在比较接受 MED 或 PELD 的年轻患者可能存在的差异。从 2011 年 1 月到 2021 年 1 月,作者所在机构连续对 49 例患者进行了 MED(17 例)或 PELD(32 例)治疗。数字评定量表(NRS)评分、Oswestry 失能指数(ODI)和改良 MacNab 标准在早期和晚期随访评估中均显示出显著改善(P<0.05)。
Comparison of the efficacy of microendoscopic discectomy and percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy for treating adolescent lumbar disc herniation.
Microendoscopic discectomy (MED) has long been employed as the standard operation for adolescent lumbar disc herniation (ALDH). However, due to iatrogenic injury, it has been suspected to cause adverse effects. Alternatively, percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) is considered as effective as MED. Few studies have compared MED and PELD in the treatment of ALDH. The purpose of this study was to compare the possible differences in young patients who underwent MED or PELD. From January 2011 to January 2021, 49 consecutive patients were treated with MED (17 patients) or PELD (32 patients) at the authors institution. Numeric Rating Scales (NRS) scores, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and modified MacNab criteria demonstrated significant improvement in both early and late follow-up evaluations (P < 0.01). PELD group resulted in shorter operative times and lower re-operation and complication rate. The PELD group exhibited shorter incision length, length of hospital stay and less intraoperative blood loss than the MED group. Both PELD and MED have demonstrated great efficacy in managing symptomatic ALDH. PELD appears to offer superior control over surgical trauma and promotes rapid recovery compared to MED.
期刊介绍:
We publish original research from all areas of the natural sciences, psychology, medicine and engineering. You can learn more about what we publish by browsing our specific scientific subject areas below or explore Scientific Reports by browsing all articles and collections.
Scientific Reports has a 2-year impact factor: 4.380 (2021), and is the 6th most-cited journal in the world, with more than 540,000 citations in 2020 (Clarivate Analytics, 2021).
•Engineering
Engineering covers all aspects of engineering, technology, and applied science. It plays a crucial role in the development of technologies to address some of the world''s biggest challenges, helping to save lives and improve the way we live.
•Physical sciences
Physical sciences are those academic disciplines that aim to uncover the underlying laws of nature — often written in the language of mathematics. It is a collective term for areas of study including astronomy, chemistry, materials science and physics.
•Earth and environmental sciences
Earth and environmental sciences cover all aspects of Earth and planetary science and broadly encompass solid Earth processes, surface and atmospheric dynamics, Earth system history, climate and climate change, marine and freshwater systems, and ecology. It also considers the interactions between humans and these systems.
•Biological sciences
Biological sciences encompass all the divisions of natural sciences examining various aspects of vital processes. The concept includes anatomy, physiology, cell biology, biochemistry and biophysics, and covers all organisms from microorganisms, animals to plants.
•Health sciences
The health sciences study health, disease and healthcare. This field of study aims to develop knowledge, interventions and technology for use in healthcare to improve the treatment of patients.