{"title":"年龄特异性的康多莉亚酶化学核溶解术与显微内镜椎间盘切除术治疗腰椎间盘突出症的临床效果比较。","authors":"Tomohiro Banno, Takuya Takahashi, Shunichi Fujii, Kentaro Sakaeda, Yohei Takahashi, Kota Watanabe, Kyohei Sakaki, Yoshiyasu Arai, Yuichi Takano, Yawara Eguchi, Yuki Taniguchi, Satoshi Maki, Yasuchika Aoki, Hiroshi Yamada, Takashi Kaito, Yutaka Hiraizumi, Masatune Yamagata, Masaya Nakamura, Hirotaka Haro, Seiji Ohtori, Takashi Hirai","doi":"10.22603/ssrr.2024-0201","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Condoliase-based chemonucleolysis and microendoscopic discectomy (MED) are considered to be minimally invasive treatments for lumbar disc herniation (LDH). The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of both treatments, specifically focusing on whether the outcomes vary by age group.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with LDH who received intradiscal condoliase injections (condoliase group) or underwent MED (MED group) with 1-year follow-up were enrolled in this study. A numerical rating scale (NRS) was developed for leg and back pains. Using magnetic resonance imaging, changes in disc height and degeneration were evaluated. The data were assessed at baseline and at 3-month and 1-year follow-ups. The therapy was considered effective in patients whose NRS for leg pain improved by ≥50% at 1 year from baseline and for whom surgery was not required. Comparative analyses were conducted between the condoliase and MED groups and among the <20, 20-39, 40-59, and ≥60 year age groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In this study, a total of 345 patients (condoliase group, n=233; MED group, n=112) were enrolled. Subsequent surgery was required in 23 patients (9.9%) in the condoliase group because of the ineffectiveness of the condoliase therapy. Because of herniation recurrence, reoperation was required in five patients (4.5%) in the MED group. The efficacy rates were respectively 74.4% and 74.6% in the condoliase and MED groups, and no intergroup or age-group differences were found. The condoliase group had a significantly higher decrease in disc height when compared with the MED group (9.0% vs. 4.4%, p<0.05). Compared with the older age group, the younger age group had a greater decrease in disc height and disc degeneration; however, their recovery was better than that of the older age group. Among the age groups, the herniation reduction rate did not significantly vary.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Condoliase and MED had equivalent 1-year outcomes, with no differences observed in efficacy across age groups. For informed decision-making, the advantages and disadvantages of each treatment must be understood.</p>","PeriodicalId":22253,"journal":{"name":"Spine Surgery and Related Research","volume":"9 2","pages":"251-257"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11983117/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Age-specific Comparative Clinical Outcomes of Chemonucleolysis with Condoliase versus Microendoscopic Discectomy in Patients with Lumbar Disc Herniation.\",\"authors\":\"Tomohiro Banno, Takuya Takahashi, Shunichi Fujii, Kentaro Sakaeda, Yohei Takahashi, Kota Watanabe, Kyohei Sakaki, Yoshiyasu Arai, Yuichi Takano, Yawara Eguchi, Yuki Taniguchi, Satoshi Maki, Yasuchika Aoki, Hiroshi Yamada, Takashi Kaito, Yutaka Hiraizumi, Masatune Yamagata, Masaya Nakamura, Hirotaka Haro, Seiji Ohtori, Takashi Hirai\",\"doi\":\"10.22603/ssrr.2024-0201\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Condoliase-based chemonucleolysis and microendoscopic discectomy (MED) are considered to be minimally invasive treatments for lumbar disc herniation (LDH). The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of both treatments, specifically focusing on whether the outcomes vary by age group.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with LDH who received intradiscal condoliase injections (condoliase group) or underwent MED (MED group) with 1-year follow-up were enrolled in this study. A numerical rating scale (NRS) was developed for leg and back pains. Using magnetic resonance imaging, changes in disc height and degeneration were evaluated. The data were assessed at baseline and at 3-month and 1-year follow-ups. The therapy was considered effective in patients whose NRS for leg pain improved by ≥50% at 1 year from baseline and for whom surgery was not required. Comparative analyses were conducted between the condoliase and MED groups and among the <20, 20-39, 40-59, and ≥60 year age groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In this study, a total of 345 patients (condoliase group, n=233; MED group, n=112) were enrolled. Subsequent surgery was required in 23 patients (9.9%) in the condoliase group because of the ineffectiveness of the condoliase therapy. Because of herniation recurrence, reoperation was required in five patients (4.5%) in the MED group. The efficacy rates were respectively 74.4% and 74.6% in the condoliase and MED groups, and no intergroup or age-group differences were found. The condoliase group had a significantly higher decrease in disc height when compared with the MED group (9.0% vs. 4.4%, p<0.05). Compared with the older age group, the younger age group had a greater decrease in disc height and disc degeneration; however, their recovery was better than that of the older age group. Among the age groups, the herniation reduction rate did not significantly vary.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Condoliase and MED had equivalent 1-year outcomes, with no differences observed in efficacy across age groups. For informed decision-making, the advantages and disadvantages of each treatment must be understood.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22253,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Spine Surgery and Related Research\",\"volume\":\"9 2\",\"pages\":\"251-257\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11983117/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Spine Surgery and Related Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22603/ssrr.2024-0201\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/3/27 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spine Surgery and Related Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22603/ssrr.2024-0201","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
导读:以吊顶为基础的化学核溶解和显微内镜椎间盘切除术(MED)被认为是治疗腰椎间盘突出症(LDH)的微创治疗方法。本研究的目的是比较两种治疗方法的临床结果,特别关注结果是否因年龄组而异。方法:选取经椎间盘内注射吊唁酶(吊唁酶组)或经MED (MED组)治疗的LDH患者,随访1年。为腿部和背部疼痛制定了数值评定量表(NRS)。通过磁共振成像,评估椎间盘高度和退变的变化。在基线、3个月和1年随访时对数据进行评估。该疗法被认为是有效的患者的NRS在1年从基线改善≥50%的腿痛和不需要手术。结果:本研究共纳入345例患者(吊唁组,n=233;MED组,n=112)。由于吊唁治疗无效,吊唁组中有23例(9.9%)患者需要进行后续手术。MED组有5例(4.5%)患者因疝疝复发需要再次手术。慰问组和MED组的有效率分别为74.4%和74.6%,组间和年龄组无差异。与MED组相比,吊唁酶组的椎间盘高度降低率显著高于MED组(9.0% vs. 4.4%)。结论:吊唁酶和MED具有相同的1年预后,不同年龄组的疗效无差异。为了做出明智的决策,必须了解每种治疗方法的优缺点。
Age-specific Comparative Clinical Outcomes of Chemonucleolysis with Condoliase versus Microendoscopic Discectomy in Patients with Lumbar Disc Herniation.
Introduction: Condoliase-based chemonucleolysis and microendoscopic discectomy (MED) are considered to be minimally invasive treatments for lumbar disc herniation (LDH). The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of both treatments, specifically focusing on whether the outcomes vary by age group.
Methods: Patients with LDH who received intradiscal condoliase injections (condoliase group) or underwent MED (MED group) with 1-year follow-up were enrolled in this study. A numerical rating scale (NRS) was developed for leg and back pains. Using magnetic resonance imaging, changes in disc height and degeneration were evaluated. The data were assessed at baseline and at 3-month and 1-year follow-ups. The therapy was considered effective in patients whose NRS for leg pain improved by ≥50% at 1 year from baseline and for whom surgery was not required. Comparative analyses were conducted between the condoliase and MED groups and among the <20, 20-39, 40-59, and ≥60 year age groups.
Results: In this study, a total of 345 patients (condoliase group, n=233; MED group, n=112) were enrolled. Subsequent surgery was required in 23 patients (9.9%) in the condoliase group because of the ineffectiveness of the condoliase therapy. Because of herniation recurrence, reoperation was required in five patients (4.5%) in the MED group. The efficacy rates were respectively 74.4% and 74.6% in the condoliase and MED groups, and no intergroup or age-group differences were found. The condoliase group had a significantly higher decrease in disc height when compared with the MED group (9.0% vs. 4.4%, p<0.05). Compared with the older age group, the younger age group had a greater decrease in disc height and disc degeneration; however, their recovery was better than that of the older age group. Among the age groups, the herniation reduction rate did not significantly vary.
Conclusions: Condoliase and MED had equivalent 1-year outcomes, with no differences observed in efficacy across age groups. For informed decision-making, the advantages and disadvantages of each treatment must be understood.