Full-Endoscopic Foraminotomy with a Novel Large Endoscopic Trephine for Severe Degenerative Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis at L5 S1 Level: An Advanced Surgical Technique

Endoscopic Foraminotomy for the Treatment of Lumbar Neuro-Foramen Stenosis: Role of CT in Treatment Planning and Post-Operative Assessment

PURPOSE

to outline the role of CT in pre- and post-treatment evaluation in the case of lumbar endoscopic foraminotomy.

METHODS

This prospective study, conducted between September 2020 and January 2024, included consecutive patients with clinical symptoms of lumbar sciatica/lumbalgia/lombo-cruralgia/lower limb peripheral neuropathy. Pre- and post-foraminotomy CT imaging was used to assess the foraminal diameters (cranio-caudal, transverse and free hand ROI area) before and after the treatment. Two independent blinded readers assessed the CT randomly. VAS pain scale and the measurements of each foramen were compared before and after treatment. Interobserver agreement was assessed using the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC).

RESULTS

A total of 47 participants were enrolled, with 53 intervertebral levels analyzed. The mean VAS value decreased from 9.17 in the preoperative period to 0.66 at the one-month postoperative follow-up. The clinical response was associated with statistically significant changes in the cranio-caudal and transverse diameters, as well as the area of the treated neuroforamina (p-values < 0.05). Inter-rater reliability between the two operators ranged from 0.75 to 0.90.

CONCLUSIONS

CT can demonstrate a significant enlargement of the neuroforaminal diameters after the endoscopic foraminotomy, with good correlation with clinical improvement.

Comparative study of clinical effects between oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) in the treatment of degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine

Objective

To compare the clinical effects of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) in the treatment of degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine.

Method

This was a retrospective study. The clinical data of 80 patients with lumbar disc degenerative disease who underwent surgery in Affiliated Hospital of Beihua University from May 2018 to May 2023 were selected. The patients were divided into LLIF group and OLIF group according to surgical methods. Compare the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey(SF-36), Visual Analog Scale(VAS) scores, Oswesterly Disability Index(ODI), Japanese Orthopedic Association(JOA) scores, Cobb angle, and intervertebral height changes between two groups of patients pre- and posttreatment, and evaluate the differences in clinical efficacy and surgical complications.

Result

Postsurgery, the SF-36 score, VAS score, ODI index, and JOA score of two groups were significantly better than presurgery(p<0.05); After three months of treatment, the improvement in OLIF group was better than LLIF group(p<0.05), while there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups at six months postsurgery(p>0.05). Six months postsurgery, the intervertebral space height and Cobb angle of the two groups were significantly improved compared to presurgery (p<0.05), but there was no significant difference between the groups(p>0.05). There was no difference in clinical efficacy and incidence between the two groups(p>0.05).

Conclusion

LLIF and OLIF may be both safe and effective minimally invasive surgical methods for the treatment of degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine.

Uniportal Full-endoscopic Foraminotomy for Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis: Clinical Characteristics and Functional Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

Uniportal full-endoscopic foraminotomy offers a promising alternative to conventional surgical methods for individuals afflicted by lumbar foraminal stenosis. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and clinical outcomes of uniportal full-endoscopic foraminotomy in patients diagnosed with lumbar foraminal stenosis.

METHODS

A comprehensive retrospective analysis was conducted on individuals who underwent full-endoscopic foraminotomy in our medical center, between January 2018 and December 2019. The investigation encompassed the demographic data of patients and key clinical metrics such as the visual analogue scale of leg (VAS-L) and back pain (VAS-B), Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores, the Short Form-36 Health Survey physical component summary (SF-36 PCS) and the mental component summary (SF-36 MCS), as well as modified MacNab grades, were systematically assessed and compared. Furthermore, radiological parameters: Coronal Cobb angle (CCA), Intervertebral angle changes (IAC), Disc height index (DHI), the foraminal cross-sectional area (FCSA) and the FCSA enlargement ratio were also compared. A variety of statistical analyses including Student t-test, chi-square tests, Fisher's exact tests, Pearson's and Spearman's correlation analyses, and Interclass Correlation Coefficients (ICCs) were employed.

RESULTS

64 patients, including 34 males and 30 females were enrolled. The mean follow-up period extended to 22.66 ± 7.05 months. Distribution by affected segments revealed 26.6% at L4-5, 67.1% at L5-S1 level, and 6.25% at both L4-L5 and L5-S1 levels. At the final follow-up, VAS-L decreased from 7.26 ± 1.19 to 1.37 ± 1.25, while VAS-B decreased from 6.95 ± 0.54 to 1.62 ± 1.13 (p < 0.001). ODI score also demonstrated a substantial decrease from 74.73 ± 8.68 to 23.27 ± 8.71 (p < 0.001). Both SF-36 PCS and SF-36 MCS scores improved significantly (p < 0.001). Modified MacNab criteria revealed 58 excellent-good patients (90.7%), and 6 fair-poor patients (9.3%). No significant differences were founded in the CCA (p = 0.1065), IAC (p = 0.5544), and DHI (p = 0.1348) between pre-operation and the final follow-up. However, the FCSA significantly increased from 73.41 ± 11.75 to 173.40 ± 18.62 mm2 (p < 0.001), and the enlargement ratio was 142.9% ± 49.58%. Notably, the final follow-up FCSA and the FCSA enlargement ratio were found to be larger in the excellent and good group compared to the fair and poor group, according to the modified MacNab criteria.

CONCLUSION

The utilization of uniportal full-endoscopic foraminotomy has demonstrated its safety and efficacy in addressing lumbar foraminal stenosis. The clinical success of this procedure appears to be closely associated with the radiological decompression of the intervertebral foramen area. Importantly, the application of this technology does not seem to compromise the overall stability of the lumbar region.

Outcomes of FETD versus UBE in the treatment of L5S1 foraminal stenosis: A comparative study

Background

The L5S1 level exhibits unique anatomical features compared with other levels. This makes minimally invasive surgery for L5S1 foraminal stenosis (FS) challenging. This study compared the surgical outcomes of full endoscopic transforaminal decompression (FETD) and unilateral biportal endoscopy with the far-lateral approach (UBEFLA) in patients with L5S1FS.

Methods

In this retrospective study, 49 patients with L5S1FS were divided into two groups. Of these, 24 patients underwent FETD, 25 patients underwent UBEFLA. The study assessed demographic data, leg pain visual analog scale (VAS) score, back pain VAS score, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), modified MacNab outcome scale, and radiographic parameters including postoperative lateral facet preservation (POLFP).

Results

The Mann-Whitney U test revealed that the UBEFLA group exhibited a higher VAS score for back pain at one week after the operation, whereas the FETD group exhibited a higher leg pain VAS score 6 weeks after the operation. All four undesired MacNab outcomes in the FETD group were attributed to residual leg pain, whereas all five undesired MacNab outcomes in the UBEFLA group were due to recurrent symptoms. Radiographically, the FETD group exhibited greater POLFP.

Conclusions

When L5S1FS is performed, there may be challenges in adequately clearing the foraminal space in FETD. On the other hand, UBEFLA allowed for a more comprehensive clearance. However, this advantage of UBEFLA was associated with spinal instability as a future outcome.

Does Immediate Postoperative Early Ambulation Affect Clinical Results of Full-Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy? A Historical Control Study of Daytime Operation with a 8-Hour Hospital Stay versus Inpatient Operation

OBJECTIVE

Full-endoscopic lumbar discectomy (FELD) is a popular operation for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation (LDH) and day surgery mode is increasingly popular. However, only a few studies have reported about day surgery patients undergoing Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD). This retrospective study was to evaluate and analyze the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing FELD for LDH as day surgery versus inpatient surgery.

METHODS

From January 2020 to January 2022, a retrospective analysis of LDH patients treated with FELD either in day surgery unit (within 8-h hospital stay) or inpatient unit was carried out. All these patients were followed-up for at least 12 months, and were categorized into a FELD-I (inpatient surgery) group or a FELD-D (day surgery) group, according to where the surgical procedures were performed. We assessed and compared the postoperative stand and walk time, postoperative hospitalization stays, time of return to work, modified MacNab criteria, willingness to recommend surgery, complications, revision rate, as well as the visual analogue scale (VAS) and the Oswestry disability index score (ODI). Student t-test was used for continuous variables and chi-square test or Fisher's exact test was used for categorical variables.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference in demographic data and baseline characteristics between two groups. And no significant differences were found in MacNab criteria between two groups. Postoperative VAS and ODI scores at one-day postoperation and final follow-up both improved significantly in both groups, as compared to the preoperative data (p < 0.001). However, no significant difference was found between the two groups on the pre, postoperative, or the last follow-up score for VAS and ODI (p > 0.05). The postoperative first ambulation time and postoperative hospital stays was much longer in FELD-I group than FELD-D group (p < 0.001). However, there were no significant differences in the perioperative complications, revision rate as well as satisfaction rate between two groups (p > 0.05). The overall time of return to work of young patients (<60 years-old) in the FELD-D group was significantly shorter than that in the FELD-I group (p = 0.001). Patients in the FELD-D group were more likely to recommend this kind of surgical model.

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that FELD-D can be effectively performed as day surgery (within 8 h hospital stay). Early ambulation after FELD-D did not affect the clinical outcomes and the revision rates. Day surgery patients are more likely to recommend this surgery mode to other patients and younger patients may be able to return to work earlier.

[Research progress of different minimally invasive spinal decompression in lumbar spinal stenosis]

Objective

To review the application and progress of different minimally invasive spinal decompression in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS).

Methods

The domestic and foreign literature on the application of different minimally invasive spinal decompression in the treatment of LSS was extensively reviewed, and the advantages, disadvantages, and complications of different surgical methods were summarized.

Results

At present, minimally invasive spinal decompression mainly includes microscopic bilateral decompression, microendoscopic decompression, percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression, unilateral biportal endoscopy, and so on. Compared with traditional open surgery, different minimally invasive spinal decompression techniques can reduce the operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative pain of patients, thereby reducing hospital stay and saving treatment costs.

Conclusion

The indications of different minimally invasive spinal decompression are different, but there are certain advantages and disadvantages. When patients have clear surgical indications, individualized treatment plans should be formulated according to the symptoms and signs of patients, combined with imaging manifestations.

Complications and Management of Endoscopic Spinal Surgery

In the past, the use of endoscopic spine surgery was limited to intervertebral discectomy; however, it has recently become possible to treat various spinal degenerative diseases, such as spinal stenosis and foraminal stenosis, and the treatment range has also expanded from the lumbar spine to the cervical and thoracic regions. However, as endoscopic spine surgery develops and its indications widen, more diverse and advanced surgical techniques are being introduced, and the complications of endoscopic spine surgery are also increasing accordingly. We searched the PubMed/MEDLINE databases to identify articles on endoscopic spinal surgery, and key words were set as “endoscopic spinal surgery,” “endoscopic cervical foramoinotomy,” “PECD,” “percutaneous transforaminal discectomy,” “percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy,” “PELD,” “PETD,” “PEID,” “YESS” and “TESSYS.” We analyzed the evidence level and classified the prescribed complications according to the literature. Endoscopic lumbar surgery was divided into full endoscopic interlaminar and transforaminal approaches and a unilateral biportal approach. We performed a comprehensive review of available literature on complications of endoscopic spinal surgery. This study particularly focused on the prevention of complications. Regardless of the surgical methods, the most common complications related to endoscopic spinal surgery include dural tears and perioperative hematoma. transient dysesthesia, nerve root injury and recurrence. However, Endoscopic spinal surgery, including full endoscopic transforaminal and interlaminar and unilateral biportal approaches, is a safe and effective a treatment for lumbar as well as cervical and thoracic spinal diseases such as disc herniation, lumbar spinal stenosis, foraminal stenosis and recurrent disc herniation.

SPINE: High heterogeneity and no significant differences in clinical outcomes of endoscopic foraminotomy vs fusion for lumbar foraminal stenosis: a meta-analysis

Objective

This study aimed to systematically review the literature for comparative and non-comparative studies reporting on clinical outcomes of patients with lumbar foraminal stenosis treated by either endoscopic foraminotomy or fusion.

Methods

In adherence with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a literature search was done on January 17, 2022, using Medline and Embase. Clinical studies were eligible if they reported outcomes following fusion or endoscopic foraminotomy, in patients with primary lumbar foraminal stenosis. Two independent reviewers screened titles, abstracts, and full-texts to determine eligibility; performed data extraction; and assessed the quality of eligible studies according to the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklist.

Results

The search returned 827 records; 266 were duplicates, 538 were excluded after title/abstract/full-text screening, and 23 were eligible, with 16 case series reporting on endoscopic foraminotomy, 7 case series reporting on fusion, and no comparative studies. The JBI checklist indicated that 21 studies scored ≥4 points. When comparing endoscopic foraminotomy to fusion, pooled data revealed reduced operative time (69 vs 119 min, P < 0.01) but similar Oswestry disability index (19 vs 20, P = 0.67), lower back pain (2 vs 2, P = 0.11), leg pain (2 vs 2, P = 0.15), complication rates (10% vs 5%, P = 0.22), and reoperation rates (5% vs 0%, P = 0.16). The proportions of patients with good/excellent MacNab criteria were similar for endoscopic foraminotomy and fusion (82-91% vs 85-91%).

Conclusions

There were high heterogeneity and no significant differences in clinical outcomes, complication rates, and reoperation rates between endoscopic foraminotomy and fusion for the treatment of lumbar foraminal stenosis; although endoscopic foraminotomy has reduced operative time.

Modified lumbar foraminoplasty using a power-aided reciprocating burr for percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy: A technical note and clinical report

Background

One of the main difficulties in a transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy (TELD), and simultaneously the most critical step, is performing an effective and safe foraminoplasty, which is especially difficult for beginners. To make it safer and faster for beginners to perform, we have used a specially designed power-aided reciprocating burr for TELD and reported the technical details.

Methods

From Jan. 2019 to Nov. 2022, 432 patients with single-level, symptomatic L4/5 or L5/S1 disc herniation were treated with TELD using a novel power-aided reciprocating burr. The surgical procedure is described in detail. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was performed the following day and 3 months after the operation. The learning curves of surgeons with different seniority levels are displayed. The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were used to measure low back pain, leg pain, and lumbar function. All patients were followed up for at least 1 year.

Results

All patients underwent endoscopic surgery successfully. Among the 432 patients, radicular outer membrane damage was observed in 6 cases, and 1 case had hernia of the nerve tract. Except for this patient with aggravation of postoperative numbness, the postoperative neurological symptoms of all patients were significantly improved. The mean VAS scores for low back pain and leg pain and ODI scores were significantly decreased 6 w post-operatively and were maintained until 12 months post-operatively compared to preoperative scores (P < 0.05). All three doctors involved in the study had substantial experience in traditional open spinal surgery. The more operations all three surgeons completed, the more time spent on intervertebral foraminoplasty decreased (P < 0.05). Among them, doctors without experience in TELD surgery became proficient in this technique after accumulating experience in 13 cases. There was no significant difference in foraminoplasty time among these three surgeons during the same growing period (P > 0.05).

Conclusions

Current clinical data demonstrated the safety and efficacy of modified TELD using a power-aided reciprocating burr for treating lumbar disc herniation (LDH) and showed that this technique significantly reduces the learning curve for beginners when performing foraminoplasty.

Transforaminal Endoscopic Decompression for Foraminal Stenosis: Single-Arm Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to conduct a single-arm meta-analysis and comprehensive systematic review to identify the efficacy and safety of transforaminal endoscopic surgery for the treatment of lumbar foraminal stenosis (LFS).

METHODS

The meta-analysis was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement. The PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase databases were searched from inception to February 20, 2022. Primary research results were visual analog scale scores, Oswestry Disability Index scores, MacNab criterion scores, and reported adverse events. Subgroup analyses were performed on the primary outcome to evaluate the potential effects of several clinical factors that affected the results.

RESULTS

Of the 2020 studies identified, 9 met the inclusion criteria, and 316 participants were eligible for meta-analysis. The meta-analysis results found that transforaminal endoscopic surgery for the treatment of LFS was associated with a significant improvement in postoperative 12-month clinical indicators: 8 studies reported improvements in visual analog scale scores: -5.38, Oswestry Disability Index scores: -40.44, and MacNab criterion scores: odds ratio = 0.86; 8 studies reported 11.53% adverse events occurred in a total of 295 patients, and the most commonly reported event was transient postoperative dysesthesia, which occurred in 26 patients in a total of 6 studies with 240 patients (10.83%).

CONCLUSIONS

Transforaminal endoscopic surgery positively affects postoperative LFS patients' clinical indicators; however, high-level literature with randomized controlled trials is needed to confirm this technique's applicability in LFS.

Utility of Large Diameter Visible Trephine in Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Technical Report

PURPOSE

In this study, a large diameter visible trephine was designed and used in percutaneous endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion to increase endoscopic bone decompression efficiency. Large diameter visible trephine-related technical notes and preliminary clinical experience are described.

METHODS

A large diameter visible trephine was designed with normal diameter visible trephine as template. A total of 38 patients with lumbar degenerative diseases who underwent single-level percutaneous endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion with large or normal diameter visible trephine were included into a retrospective study. Operation time, bone decompression time, blood loss, intraoperative fluoroscopy, bone decompression fluoroscopy, and dura or nerve injury cases were recorded and analyzed statistically. Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were used to analyze the clinical outcomes of the 2 groups.

RESULTS

The baseline data of the 2 groups were statistically similar. There was no significant difference in postoperative VAS and ODI scores between the 2 groups. Operation time and bone decompression time of large diameter visible trephine group were significantly shorter than that of normal diameter visible trephine group (P < 0.05). Intraoperative fluoroscopy times and bone decompression fluoroscopy times of large diameter visible trephine group were significantly more than that of normal diameter visible trephine group (P < 0.05). Blood loss of the 2 groups were not statistically different. There were no dura or nerve injury cases in the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

For percutaneous endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion, the large diameter visible trephine is a safe and efficient endoscopic bone decompression tool under fluoroscopic guidance.

Clinical Application of Large Channel Endoscopic Systems with Full Endoscopic Visualization Technique in Lumbar Central Spinal Stenosis: A Retrospective Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

Recently, large channel endoscopic systems and full endoscopic visualization technique have been used to perform unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (ULBD) treatment for lumbar central spinal stenosis (LCSS). However, various endoscopic systems possess different design parameters, which may affect the technical points and treatment outcomes. The object of this retrospective study was to compare the efficiency, safety, and effectiveness of ULBD under the iLESSYS Delta system versus the Endo-Surgi Plus system.

METHODS

In the period from October 2020 to April 2021, ULBD was performed using the iLESSYS Delta system or Endo-Surgi Plus system to treat LCSS. Patients were classified into two groups based on the endoscopy system employed. Patient demographics, perioperative indexes, complications, and imaging characteristics were reviewed. Clinical outcomes were quantified using back and leg visual analog scale (VAS) scores and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) at the time points of follow-up.

RESULTS

Thirty-two patients were assigned to the iLESSYS Delta system group and 37 to the Endo-Surgi Plus system group. In the comparison between the two groups, the Endo-Surgi Plus system possessed a shorter incision length and operation time (p < 0.005), and no statistical differences in other aspects were observed. The dural sacs of both groups were significantly expanded postoperatively compared to preoperatively (p < 0.001). Both groups experienced improvements in VAS and ODI scores at all time points (p < 0.001) and equally low frequency of complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Current research suggests that both the Endo-Surgi Plus system and iLESSYS Delta system achieved favorable high safety and clinical outcomes in ULBD for treatment of LCSS. The use of a fully visualized trephine may have increased the efficiency of the Endo-Surgi Plus system. Moreover, the Endo-Surgi Plus system may be associated with a wider decompression range and indications.

Comparison of Outcomes of Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Full-endoscopic Laminectomy for L5 Radiculopathy Caused by Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis

This study compared the outcomes of microendoscopy-assisted lumbar interbody fusion (ME-LIF) and uniportal full-endoscopic laminectomy (FEL) for L5 radiculopathy caused by lumbar foraminal stenosis (LFS). ME-LIF was performed using an 18- to 20-mm tubular retractor and endoscope, and FEL via the translaminar approach (TLA) was performed at the dorsal part of the foramen using a 4.1-mm working channel endoscope. Patients with LFS treated using ME-LIF (n = 39) or FEL-TLA (n = 30) were retrospectively evaluated. Patients' background and operative data were collected. The 36-item Short Form Survey (SF-36), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and European Quality of Life-5 Dimension (EQ-5D) scores were recorded preoperatively and 2 years postoperatively. The background data of the two groups (ME-LIF and FEL-TLA) were similar. The mean operation times for ME-LIF and FEL-TLA were 110.7 and 65.2 min, respectively, and the mean length of hospital stay were 10.3 and 1.5 days, respectively. Reoperation was required for surgical site infection, and percutaneous pedicle screw malposition in three patients was treated using ME-LIF. During follow-up, second FEL-TLA and LIF were performed for recurrent L5 radiculopathy in one and three patients in the FEL-TLA group, respectively. Although the SF-36, ODI, and EQ-5D scores 2 years postoperatively improved in both groups, improvement in ODI scores was lower following FEL-TLA than following ME-LIF. FEL-TLA can be performed to treat patients with L5 radiculopathy caused by LFS. Although the ODI score improvement following FEL-TLA was unremarkable, FEL-TLA might be considered because of its better safety profile and minimal invasiveness than ME-LIF.

Complications and risk factors of percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis

Background

With the advancements in surgical methods, optical designs, and surgical instruments, percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy (PETD) has become an effective and minimally invasive procedure to treat lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) in recent years. Few studies have focused on the complications associated with the treatment of LSS using percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD). This study aimed to summarize the complications of PETD and identify the associated risk factors.

Methods

Complications in a total of 738 consecutive LSS patients who underwent single-level PETD were retrospectively recorded and analyzed between January 2016 and July 2020. In addition, a matched case-control study was designed, and according to the date of operation, the control group was matched with patients without complications, with a matching ratio of 1:3. Demographic parameters included age, sex, BMI, smoking and drinking status, comorbidity, and surgical level. The radiological parameters included grade of surgical-level disc degeneration, number of degenerative lumbar discs, grade of lumbar spinal stenosis, degenerative lumbar scoliosis, lumbar lordosis, disc angle, and disc height index. Univariate analysis was performed using independent samples t-test and chi-squared test.

Results

The incidence of different types of complications was 9.76% (72/738). The complications and occurrence rates were as follows: recurrence of LSS (rLSS), 2.30% (17/738); persistent lumbosacral or lower extremity pain, 3.79% (28/738); dural tear, 1.90% (14/738); incomplete decompression, 0.81% (6/738); surgical site infection, 0.41% (3/738); epidural hematoma, 0.27% (2/738); and intraoperative posterior neck pain, 0.27% (2/738). Univariate analysis demonstrated that age, the grade of surgical-level disc degeneration (P < 0.001) and the number of disc degeneration levels (P = 0.004) were significantly related to the complications.

Conclusion

Complications in the treatment of LSS using PELD included rLSS, persistent pain of the lumbosacral or lower extremity, dural tear, incomplete decompression, surgical site infection, epidural hematoma, and intraoperative posterior neck pain. In addition, old age, severe grade of surgical-level disc degeneration and more disc degeneration levels significantly increased the incidence of complications.

Clinical efficacy of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic TESSYS technique in the treatment of senile lumbar spinal stenosis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the clinical efficacy percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic TESSYS technique in the treatment of senile lumbar spinal stenosis.

METHODS

157 senile with lumbar spinal stenosis were prospectively recruited at this study. The subjects in the experimental group received TESSYS operation, and the control group received traditional open surgery for posterior lumbar interbody fusion. The clinical pain relief, indexes of perioperative period, dysfunction of the lumbar spine and clinical effect of the two groups were measured.

RESULTS

The operation time of experimental group was (53.32±10.27) min, average blood loss in operation was (50.01±5.74) ml, and length of hospitalization was (6.73±3.21) d, which were all better than the control group (97.46±13.47) min, (172.23±8.61) ml, (13.94±2.15) d, with statistical significance (P < 0.05). The VAS scores at one day, one week, 1 month and 3 months were significantly lower than those before operation (P < 0.05). The VAS scores of the two groups were significantly lower than those of the open surgery group (P < 0.05). ODI scores of patients were significantly lower than those before operation (P < 0.05). The MACNAB scores of the two groups were significantly lower than those of the open surgery group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Percutaneous transforaminal TESSYS technique is a safe and minimally invasive technique for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis in the elderly. Compared with traditional open surgery for posterior lumbar interbody fusion, percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic TESSYS technique has less trauma and does not damage the stability of the spine. It can significantly shorten the hospitalization and operation time, reduce intraoperative fluoroscopy and blood loss, reduce the degree of pain and postoperative complications, and quickly restore daily life function. and thus an effective and more advantageous scheme for the treatment of elderly lumbar spinal stenosis.

One-Stage Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy for Symptomatic Double-Level Contiguous Adolescent Lumbar Disc Herniation

Objective

To assess the clinical efficacy of one‐stage percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) for symptomatic double‐level contiguous adolescent lumbar disc herniation (ALDH).

Methods

This retrospective study included 16 patients who presented with back and/or leg pain due to double‐level disc herniation underwent PELD for symptomatic lumbar disc herniation (0.27%,16/5877) from January 2014 to September 2019. After follow‐up period of 17.3 months in average, numeric rating scale (NRS) scores and modified Macnab criteria were used to assess the preoperative and postoperative clinical results. Quantitative data were expressed as mean standard deviation (SD) and the data for the variation in the NRS scores before and after the operation were compared using the Wilcoxon two‐sample test. Analyses were performed with IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 19.0 (IBM, Armonk, NY, USA). Values of P < 0.05 were considered significantly different.

Results

There were 11 male and 5 female patients, with an average age of 19.3 years (range, 15–22 years). One case affected the L₂‐ L₃ /L₃‐L₄ level, seven cases affected the L₃‐ L₄ /L₄‐ L₅ level, and eight cases affected the L₄‐ L₅ /L₅‐S₁ level. The NRS scores decreased significantly in both early and late follow‐up evaluations and these scores demonstrated significant improvement in late follow‐up (P < 0.05). For the modified Macnab criteria, the final outcome results were excellent in 14 patients (87.5%), good in 1 patient (6.25%), fair in 1 patient (6.25%), and the overall success rate was 93.75%.

Conclusion

This study's data suggest that one‐stage PELD is promising treatment strategy for selected symptomatic double‐level contiguous adolescent lumbar disc herniation.

Full-Endoscopic Lumbar Decompression versus Open Decompression and Fusion Surgery for the Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A 3-Year Follow-Up Study

Purpose

Compare the efficacy of full-endoscopic lumbar decompression surgery (FELDS) and open decompression and fusion surgery (ODFS) for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS).

Patients and Methods

A retrospective analysis of 358 LSS patients treated by FELDS (“FELD” group) or ODFS (“open” group) was undertaken. There were 177 patients in the FELDS group with a mean age of 65.47±9.26 years and 181 patients in the open group with a mean age of 64.18±10.24 years. Duration of follow-up was 38.63±11.88 months in the FELDS group and 38.56±12.29 months in the open group. Visual analog scale (VAS) score, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Modified MacNab criteria were used to access clinical outcomes. Surgical outcomes (duration of surgical procedure, blood loss, complications, duration of postoperative hospital stay (DOPHS), prevalence of revision procedures) were evaluated. Magnetic resonance imaging was used to evaluate the change in the Pfirrmann grade at adjacent segments.

Results

VAS score (leg and back) and ODI improved significantly in both groups (P<0.001). Success rate reached 86.55% and 90.60% in the FELDS group and open group (P>0.05), respectively. Procedure duration (84.12 vs 112.08 min), blood loss (7.97 vs 279.67 mL), and DOPHS (2.68 vs 4.78 days) of the FELDS group were significantly better than those of the open group (P<0.05). Total prevalence of complications and procedure revisions was 14.69% and 10.73% in the FELD group, respectively, but did not show a significant difference with that in the open group (12.15% and 9.39%, respectively). The Pfirrmann grade increased in 13.04% of adjacent segments in the FELDS group, significantly better than that in the open group (32.67%) (P<0.05).

Conclusion

FELDS had the same efficacy as ODFS for LSS treatment. FELDS had the advantages of minimal invasiveness, less surgical trauma, rapid recovery, and lower risk of degeneration of adjacent segments compared with that of ODFS.