论文已发表
提 交 论 文
注册即可获取Ebpay生命的最新动态
注 册
IF 收录期刊
单侧双通道内镜与经椎间孔入路椎间盘镜腰椎减压术治疗腰椎管狭窄症的疗效及安全性:至少 1 年随访
Authors Sun W, Wang J, Hu Y, Tao J, Yang C
Received 1 October 2024
Accepted for publication 23 February 2025
Published 4 March 2025 Volume 2025:18 Pages 1071—1080
DOI http://doi.org/10.2147/JPR.S493602
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single anonymous peer review
Peer reviewer comments 2
Editor who approved publication: Dr Krishnan Chakravarthy
Weixiang Sun, Jie Wang, Yafei Hu, Jinzhuo Tao, Chengwu Yang
Pain Department, the Eighth People’s Hospital of Hefei, Hefei, People’s Republic of China
Correspondence: Chengwu Yang, The Eighth People’s Hospital of Hefei, No. 319, Renmin Road, Chaohu City, Hefei City, Anhui Provience, 238000, People’s Republic of China, Tel +86 15256298182, Email yangchengwu0508@126.com
Objective: This study compared the efficacy and safety of unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) decompression and transforaminal route percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression (PELD) for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), assessing 1-year clinical outcomes.
Methods: A total of 120 patients (64 UBE, 56 PELD) diagnosed with LSS in 2021 were evaluated. Perioperative outcomes included overall operation time, extracanal operative time, intracanal decompression time, incision length, fluoroscopy time, estimated blood loss, preoperative and postoperative day 3 hb levels, length of post-operative hospital stays, total expenses, postoperative complications. Clinical outcomes were measured using visual analog scale (VAS) for back and leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI) for physical impairment and the modified MacNab criteria.
Results: Results showed no demographic differences between groups. UBE had shorter total operation and intracanal decompression times but longer extracanal operative time than PELD (all P< 0.01). Fluoroscopy time was significantly lower in UBE (P< 0.01). While UBE had longer incisions, greater blood loss, and higher costs, hemoglobin level changes and hospital stays were similar between groups. Postoperatively, UBE resulted in lower VAS-leg pain scores (P< 0.01) and had a higher excellent/good rate (93.75% vs 85.71%, P< 0.05). Moreover, there were 3 patients in PELD group who needed a revision surgery at the same level within postoperative 1-year follow-up due to the unrelieved symptoms.
Conclusion: Both techniques were safe, but PELD posed a higher risk of reoperation due to decompression failure. UBE demonstrated advantages in decompression efficiency and clinical outcomes despite longer incision length and greater blood loss.
Keywords: unilateral biportal endoscopic, percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy, lumbar spinal stenosis, decompression