全内窥镜下腰椎间盘切除术治疗L4/5中央-中央旁椎间盘突出症的比较结果:椎间入路与经椎间孔入路:一项2年前瞻性随机对照随访研究。

Asian journal of neurosurgery Pub Date : 2024-12-30 eCollection Date: 2025-06-01 DOI:10.1055/s-0044-1801376
Pritsanai Pruttikul, Tinnakorn Pluemvitayaporn, Palapat Ananpipatkij, Kinzang Dorji, Sombat Kunakornsawat, Suttinont Surapuchong, Warot Ratanakoosakul, Kitjapat Tiracharnvut, Chaiwat Piyasakulkaew, Piyabuth Kittithamvongs
{"title":"全内窥镜下腰椎间盘切除术治疗L4/5中央-中央旁椎间盘突出症的比较结果:椎间入路与经椎间孔入路:一项2年前瞻性随机对照随访研究。","authors":"Pritsanai Pruttikul, Tinnakorn Pluemvitayaporn, Palapat Ananpipatkij, Kinzang Dorji, Sombat Kunakornsawat, Suttinont Surapuchong, Warot Ratanakoosakul, Kitjapat Tiracharnvut, Chaiwat Piyasakulkaew, Piyabuth Kittithamvongs","doi":"10.1055/s-0044-1801376","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background</b>  The interlaminar and transforaminal approaches are commonly employed in full endoscopic lumbar spine surgery. Both approaches are well-suited for addressing specific types of lumbar disc herniation, particularly at the L4/5 level. <b>Objective</b>  This article compares the clinical outcomes of full endoscopic discectomy for L4/5 central-paracentral disc herniation between the interlaminar and transforaminal approaches. <b>Materials and Methods</b>  Sixty patients were randomly assigned to either a full endoscopic interlaminar discectomy group or a full endoscopic transforaminal discectomy group, with 30 patients each. The procedures were performed by a single spine surgeon at our institution between 2017 and 2019. Over a 2-year follow-up period, various parameters, including operative time, postoperative hospitalization duration, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores for leg and back pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and modified MacNab criteria, were assessed and compared between the two groups. Additionally, the complication rates were documented. <b>Results</b>  The two full endoscopic approaches resulted in significant improvements in back-leg pain measured by the VAS and in the ODI scores postsurgery. A comparison between the two approaches revealed a significant difference in the ODI score at the 6-week postoperative mark ( <i>p</i>  = 0.02). However, other clinical outcome parameters did not show significant differences at the other follow-up time points. Postoperative dysesthesia was more prevalent in patients who underwent endoscopic transforaminal discectomy ( <i>p</i>  < 0.05). The operative time was notably longer for the interlaminar approach compared with the transforaminal approach (62.6 ± 18.0 vs. 37.0 ± 13.6). Postoperative hospitalization time did not exhibit significant differences between the two groups. <b>Conclusion</b>  Both the interlaminar and transforaminal approaches demonstrate similar clinical outcomes in treating central-paracentral L4/5 disc herniation. Each technique presents distinct advantages and disadvantages regarding operative time and postoperative dysesthesia. The full endoscopic interlaminar and transforaminal approaches have proven to be safe and effective methods for addressing L4/5 central-paracentral disc herniation.</p>","PeriodicalId":94300,"journal":{"name":"Asian journal of neurosurgery","volume":"20 2","pages":"269-277"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12136931/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparative Outcome of Full Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy for L4/5 Central-Paracentral Disc Herniation: Interlaminar versus Transforaminal Approach: A 2-Year Prospective Randomized Controlled Follow-Up Study.\",\"authors\":\"Pritsanai Pruttikul, Tinnakorn Pluemvitayaporn, Palapat Ananpipatkij, Kinzang Dorji, Sombat Kunakornsawat, Suttinont Surapuchong, Warot Ratanakoosakul, Kitjapat Tiracharnvut, Chaiwat Piyasakulkaew, Piyabuth Kittithamvongs\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/s-0044-1801376\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background</b>  The interlaminar and transforaminal approaches are commonly employed in full endoscopic lumbar spine surgery. Both approaches are well-suited for addressing specific types of lumbar disc herniation, particularly at the L4/5 level. <b>Objective</b>  This article compares the clinical outcomes of full endoscopic discectomy for L4/5 central-paracentral disc herniation between the interlaminar and transforaminal approaches. <b>Materials and Methods</b>  Sixty patients were randomly assigned to either a full endoscopic interlaminar discectomy group or a full endoscopic transforaminal discectomy group, with 30 patients each. The procedures were performed by a single spine surgeon at our institution between 2017 and 2019. Over a 2-year follow-up period, various parameters, including operative time, postoperative hospitalization duration, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores for leg and back pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and modified MacNab criteria, were assessed and compared between the two groups. Additionally, the complication rates were documented. <b>Results</b>  The two full endoscopic approaches resulted in significant improvements in back-leg pain measured by the VAS and in the ODI scores postsurgery. A comparison between the two approaches revealed a significant difference in the ODI score at the 6-week postoperative mark ( <i>p</i>  = 0.02). However, other clinical outcome parameters did not show significant differences at the other follow-up time points. Postoperative dysesthesia was more prevalent in patients who underwent endoscopic transforaminal discectomy ( <i>p</i>  < 0.05). The operative time was notably longer for the interlaminar approach compared with the transforaminal approach (62.6 ± 18.0 vs. 37.0 ± 13.6). Postoperative hospitalization time did not exhibit significant differences between the two groups. <b>Conclusion</b>  Both the interlaminar and transforaminal approaches demonstrate similar clinical outcomes in treating central-paracentral L4/5 disc herniation. Each technique presents distinct advantages and disadvantages regarding operative time and postoperative dysesthesia. The full endoscopic interlaminar and transforaminal approaches have proven to be safe and effective methods for addressing L4/5 central-paracentral disc herniation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94300,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asian journal of neurosurgery\",\"volume\":\"20 2\",\"pages\":\"269-277\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12136931/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asian journal of neurosurgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0044-1801376\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/6/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian journal of neurosurgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0044-1801376","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/6/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景椎间和椎间孔入路是腰椎全内窥镜手术中常用的入路。这两种入路都非常适合治疗特定类型的腰椎间盘突出症,特别是腰4/5节段。目的比较经椎间孔入路和经椎间孔入路治疗L4/5中央-中央旁椎间盘突出症的临床效果。材料与方法将60例患者随机分为经椎间孔椎间盘切除术组和经椎间孔椎间盘切除术组,每组各30例。这些手术在2017年至2019年期间由我们机构的一名脊柱外科医生进行。在2年的随访期间,评估和比较两组患者的各项参数,包括手术时间、术后住院时间、腿部和背部疼痛的视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分、Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)和修改的MacNab标准。此外,还记录了并发症发生率。结果两种全内镜入路均显著改善了VAS测量的背部疼痛和术后ODI评分。两种方法的比较显示,术后6周时ODI评分有显著差异(p = 0.02)。然而,其他临床结局参数在其他随访时间点无显著差异。经椎间孔和经椎间孔入路在治疗L4/5椎间盘突出中表现出相似的临床效果。每种技术在手术时间和术后感觉不良方面都有其独特的优点和缺点。完整的内窥镜椎间和经椎间孔入路已被证明是治疗L4/5中央-中央旁椎间盘突出的安全有效的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Comparative Outcome of Full Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy for L4/5 Central-Paracentral Disc Herniation: Interlaminar versus Transforaminal Approach: A 2-Year Prospective Randomized Controlled Follow-Up Study.

Background  The interlaminar and transforaminal approaches are commonly employed in full endoscopic lumbar spine surgery. Both approaches are well-suited for addressing specific types of lumbar disc herniation, particularly at the L4/5 level. Objective  This article compares the clinical outcomes of full endoscopic discectomy for L4/5 central-paracentral disc herniation between the interlaminar and transforaminal approaches. Materials and Methods  Sixty patients were randomly assigned to either a full endoscopic interlaminar discectomy group or a full endoscopic transforaminal discectomy group, with 30 patients each. The procedures were performed by a single spine surgeon at our institution between 2017 and 2019. Over a 2-year follow-up period, various parameters, including operative time, postoperative hospitalization duration, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores for leg and back pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and modified MacNab criteria, were assessed and compared between the two groups. Additionally, the complication rates were documented. Results  The two full endoscopic approaches resulted in significant improvements in back-leg pain measured by the VAS and in the ODI scores postsurgery. A comparison between the two approaches revealed a significant difference in the ODI score at the 6-week postoperative mark ( p  = 0.02). However, other clinical outcome parameters did not show significant differences at the other follow-up time points. Postoperative dysesthesia was more prevalent in patients who underwent endoscopic transforaminal discectomy ( p  < 0.05). The operative time was notably longer for the interlaminar approach compared with the transforaminal approach (62.6 ± 18.0 vs. 37.0 ± 13.6). Postoperative hospitalization time did not exhibit significant differences between the two groups. Conclusion  Both the interlaminar and transforaminal approaches demonstrate similar clinical outcomes in treating central-paracentral L4/5 disc herniation. Each technique presents distinct advantages and disadvantages regarding operative time and postoperative dysesthesia. The full endoscopic interlaminar and transforaminal approaches have proven to be safe and effective methods for addressing L4/5 central-paracentral disc herniation.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信