{"title":"单侧双门静脉内窥镜腰椎椎体间融合术:技术要点及与传统微创融合术的疗效比较。","authors":"Asrafi Rizki Gatam, Luthfi Gatam, Harmantya Mahadhipta, Ajiantoro Ajiantoro, Omar Luthfi, Dina Aprilya","doi":"10.2147/ORR.S336479","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In the past few decades, the minimally invasive technique for spine surgery has developed extensively from the scope of decompression until fusion surgeries to reduce damages to the normal anatomical structure. Unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (ULIF) is one of the fusion options which is readily available without a sophisticated minimal invasive instrument. Our aim is to introduce ULIF experience in our center and comparing the result with conventional minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a retrospective cohort study of 145 lumbar spondylolisthesis cases that underwent fusion surgery with either ULIF or the conventional MIS-TLIF. All of the patients were observed within a 12-month follow-up period to evaluate the back pain and leg pain Visual Analogue Score (VAS), the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), and fusion rate.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The leg pain VAS was similarly improved in both groups. ULIF has a significant back pain improvement on direct post operation and at the 3-months follow-up (<i>p</i> value 0.032 and 0.046 respectively). ULIF group also had a significantly better improvement of ODI scores on the early post-operative period (<i>p</i>=0.045). However, both groups similarly showed improvement of ODI score and the SF-36 at the 3-, 6-, and 12- months follow up.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Full endoscopic fusion surgery with ULIF offers a comparable long-term outcome and a significantly better back pain VAS reduction in short-term follow up compared to the conventional MIS-TLIF. ULIF, with further improvement, can be the next gold standard in managing degenerative lumbar spine conditions.</p>","PeriodicalId":19608,"journal":{"name":"Orthopedic Research and Reviews","volume":"13 ","pages":"229-239"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/08/1e/orr-13-229.PMC8628045.pdf","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Technical Note and an Outcome Comparison with the Conventional Minimally Invasive Fusion.\",\"authors\":\"Asrafi Rizki Gatam, Luthfi Gatam, Harmantya Mahadhipta, Ajiantoro Ajiantoro, Omar Luthfi, Dina Aprilya\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/ORR.S336479\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In the past few decades, the minimally invasive technique for spine surgery has developed extensively from the scope of decompression until fusion surgeries to reduce damages to the normal anatomical structure. Unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (ULIF) is one of the fusion options which is readily available without a sophisticated minimal invasive instrument. Our aim is to introduce ULIF experience in our center and comparing the result with conventional minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a retrospective cohort study of 145 lumbar spondylolisthesis cases that underwent fusion surgery with either ULIF or the conventional MIS-TLIF. All of the patients were observed within a 12-month follow-up period to evaluate the back pain and leg pain Visual Analogue Score (VAS), the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), and fusion rate.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The leg pain VAS was similarly improved in both groups. ULIF has a significant back pain improvement on direct post operation and at the 3-months follow-up (<i>p</i> value 0.032 and 0.046 respectively). ULIF group also had a significantly better improvement of ODI scores on the early post-operative period (<i>p</i>=0.045). However, both groups similarly showed improvement of ODI score and the SF-36 at the 3-, 6-, and 12- months follow up.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Full endoscopic fusion surgery with ULIF offers a comparable long-term outcome and a significantly better back pain VAS reduction in short-term follow up compared to the conventional MIS-TLIF. ULIF, with further improvement, can be the next gold standard in managing degenerative lumbar spine conditions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19608,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Orthopedic Research and Reviews\",\"volume\":\"13 \",\"pages\":\"229-239\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/08/1e/orr-13-229.PMC8628045.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Orthopedic Research and Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/ORR.S336479\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthopedic Research and Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/ORR.S336479","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Technical Note and an Outcome Comparison with the Conventional Minimally Invasive Fusion.
Background: In the past few decades, the minimally invasive technique for spine surgery has developed extensively from the scope of decompression until fusion surgeries to reduce damages to the normal anatomical structure. Unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (ULIF) is one of the fusion options which is readily available without a sophisticated minimal invasive instrument. Our aim is to introduce ULIF experience in our center and comparing the result with conventional minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF).
Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study of 145 lumbar spondylolisthesis cases that underwent fusion surgery with either ULIF or the conventional MIS-TLIF. All of the patients were observed within a 12-month follow-up period to evaluate the back pain and leg pain Visual Analogue Score (VAS), the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), and fusion rate.
Results: The leg pain VAS was similarly improved in both groups. ULIF has a significant back pain improvement on direct post operation and at the 3-months follow-up (p value 0.032 and 0.046 respectively). ULIF group also had a significantly better improvement of ODI scores on the early post-operative period (p=0.045). However, both groups similarly showed improvement of ODI score and the SF-36 at the 3-, 6-, and 12- months follow up.
Conclusion: Full endoscopic fusion surgery with ULIF offers a comparable long-term outcome and a significantly better back pain VAS reduction in short-term follow up compared to the conventional MIS-TLIF. ULIF, with further improvement, can be the next gold standard in managing degenerative lumbar spine conditions.
期刊介绍:
Orthopedic Research and Reviews is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access journal focusing on the patho-physiology of the musculoskeletal system, trauma, surgery and other corrective interventions to restore mobility and function. Advances in new technologies, materials, techniques and pharmacological agents will be particularly welcome. Specific topics covered in the journal include: Patho-physiology and bioengineering, Technologies and materials science, Surgical techniques, including robotics, Trauma management and care, Treatment including pharmacological and non-pharmacological, Rehabilitation and Multidisciplinarian care approaches, Patient quality of life, satisfaction and preference, Health economic evaluations. The journal welcomes submitted papers covering original research, basic science and technology, clinical studies, reviews and evaluations, guidelines, expert opinion and commentary, case reports and extended reports.