Comparative Analysis between Three Different Lumbar Decompression Techniques (Microscopic, Tubular, and Endoscopic)‎ in Lumbar Canal and Lateral Recess Stenosis: Preliminary Report

المؤلفون المشاركون

Lee, Chul-Woo
Yoon, Kang-Jun
Ha, Sang-Soo

المصدر

BioMed Research International

العدد

المجلد 2019، العدد 2019 (31 ديسمبر/كانون الأول 2019)، ص ص. 1-11، 11ص.

الناشر

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

تاريخ النشر

2019-03-24

دولة النشر

مصر

عدد الصفحات

11

التخصصات الرئيسية

الطب البشري

الملخص EN

Purpose.

The purpose of our study is to compare the results of spinal decompression using the full-endoscopic interlaminar technique, tubular retractor, and a conventional microsurgical laminotomy technique and evaluate the advantages and clinical feasibility of minimally invasive spinal (MIS) lumbar decompression technique in the lumbar canal and lateral recess stenosis.

Methods.

The authors retrospectively reviewed clinical and radiological data from 270 patients who received microsurgical (group E: 72 patients), tubular (group T: 34 patients), or full-endoscopic decompression surgery (group E: 164 patients) for their lumbar canal and lateral recess stenosis from June 2016 to August 2017.

Clinical (VAS, ODI, and Mcnab criteria), radiologic (spinal canal diameter, segmental dynamic angle, and disc height), and surgical outcome parameters (CPK level, Operative time, blood loss, and hospital stay) were evaluated pre- and postoperatively and compared among the three groups by means of statistical analysis.

Failed cases and complications were reviewed in all groups.

Results.

The mean follow-up period was 6.38 months.

The Overall clinical success rate was 89.4%.

All groups showed favorable clinical outcome.

The clinical and radiologic results were similar in all groups.

Regarding surgical outcome, group E showed longer operation time than group M and T (group E: 84.17 minutes/level, group M: 52.22 minutes/level, and group T: 66.12 minutes/level) (p<0.05).

However, groups E and T showed minimal surgical invasiveness compared with group M.

Groups E and T showed less immediate postoperative back pain (VAS) (group E: 3.13, group M: 4.28, group T: 3.54) (p<0.05), less increase of serum CPK enzyme (group E: 66.38 IU/L, group M: 120 IU/L, and group T: 137.5 IU/L) (p<0.05), and shorter hospital stay (group E: 2.12 days, group M: 4.85 days, and group T: 2.83 days) (p<0.05).

The rates of complications and revisions were not significantly different among the three groups.

Conclusions.

MIS decompression technique is clinically feasible and safe to treat the lumbar canal and lateral recess stenosis, and it has many surgical advantages such as less muscle trauma, minimal postoperative back pain, and fast recovery of the patient compared to traditional open microscopic technique.

نمط استشهاد جمعية علماء النفس الأمريكية (APA)

Lee, Chul-Woo& Yoon, Kang-Jun& Ha, Sang-Soo. 2019. Comparative Analysis between Three Different Lumbar Decompression Techniques (Microscopic, Tubular, and Endoscopic) in Lumbar Canal and Lateral Recess Stenosis: Preliminary Report. BioMed Research International،Vol. 2019, no. 2019, pp.1-11.
https://search.emarefa.net/detail/BIM-1126454

نمط استشهاد الجمعية الأمريكية للغات الحديثة (MLA)

Lee, Chul-Woo…[et al.]. Comparative Analysis between Three Different Lumbar Decompression Techniques (Microscopic, Tubular, and Endoscopic) in Lumbar Canal and Lateral Recess Stenosis: Preliminary Report. BioMed Research International No. 2019 (2019), pp.1-11.
https://search.emarefa.net/detail/BIM-1126454

نمط استشهاد الجمعية الطبية الأمريكية (AMA)

Lee, Chul-Woo& Yoon, Kang-Jun& Ha, Sang-Soo. Comparative Analysis between Three Different Lumbar Decompression Techniques (Microscopic, Tubular, and Endoscopic) in Lumbar Canal and Lateral Recess Stenosis: Preliminary Report. BioMed Research International. 2019. Vol. 2019, no. 2019, pp.1-11.
https://search.emarefa.net/detail/BIM-1126454

نوع البيانات

مقالات

لغة النص

الإنجليزية

الملاحظات

Includes bibliographical references

رقم السجل

BIM-1126454