Linical efficacy of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis in elderly patients: a retrospective study

Clinical outcome of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression in treatment of elderly patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a matched retrospective study

PURPOSE

This retrospective cohort study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression (PELD) in elderly patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS).

STUDY DESIGN

A matched retrospective study.

SETTING

The research was conducted in Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, China.

METHODS

This study included patients treated with PELD for LSS from September 2016 to September 2020. Patients with LSS aged ≥ 80 years were screened according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria as the study group, and then the same number of patients with LSS aged 50-80 years were matched according to gender, stenosis type, and surgical segment as the control group. Preoperative patient status was assessed using the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) and the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification score. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, modified Macnab criteria, radiological parameters and complication rates.

RESULTS

A total of 624 LSS patients met the screening criteria between September 2016 and September 2020, with 47 LSS patients ≥ 80 years old serving as the study group. Forty-seven LSS patients aged 50-80 years were matched to the study group according to gender, stenosis type, and stenosis segment. The CCI score (1.77 ± 1.67) and ASA classification (2.62 ± 0.74) of the study group were significantly higher than the CCI score (0.66 ± 0.96) and ASA classification (1.28 ± 0.54) of the control group, and the difference was statistically significant. Compared with preoperative data, postoperative ODI, leg pain VAS scores and back pain VAS scores were significantly improved in both groups (p < 0.05). However, no significant difference was found between two groups in preoperative and postoperative ODI, leg pain VAS scores and back pain VAS scores (p > 0.05). The operation time and postoperative hospital stay in control group were significantly lower than those in study (p < 0.05), but there was no significant difference in blood loss between the two groups (p > 0.05). Besides, overall radiological parameters were comparable in elder and younger patients (p > 0.05), and disc height (DH), lumbar lordosis and segmental lordosis decreased after two year follow-up in both groups (p < 0.05). In addition, complication rates were similar between the two groups (p > 0.05), and no serious complications and deaths were found.

LIMITATIONS

Single-centre retrospective design, non-randomized sample, small sample size.

CONCLUSION

Although elderly LSS patients (≥ 80 years old) are less fit and have more comorbidities, satisfactory outcomes can be achieved with PELD, comparable to those of LSS patients < 80 years old, and without increased complications.

Efficacy of Repeat Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Decompression for Reoperation of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Retrospective Study

Purpose

To evaluate the efficacy of repeat percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression (PELD) in lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) reoperation.

Patients and Methods

This study included patients with LSS who relapsed following treatment with PELD therapy between March 2017 and March 2020. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were analyzed preoperatively, postoperatively at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months, and at final follow-up. The modified MacNab criteria were used to assess clinical effects. All complications were recorded.

Results

At a mean follow-up of 3 years, 24 patients with LSS who underwent repeat PELD were identified. The patients' mean operative time was 122.3±29.2 min, blood loss was 12.5±5.3 mL, and mean hospital stay was 7.0±1.9 days. VAS leg-pain score improved from 6.1±1.0 to 2.0±1.2 (P<0.001), VAS back-pain score improved from 6.2±0.8 to 2.1±1.1 (P<0.001), and ODI improved from 68.9±6.0 to 20.9±5.6 (P <0.001). According to the modified MacNab criteria, the good-to-excellent rate was 83.3%. Postoperative complications, including hematoma, nerve root injury, and dural injury, developed in four patients.

Conclusion

Repeat PELD for reoperation in patients with LSS has a good clinical effect, and is recommended in routine clinical practice. Careful intraoperative manipulation is recommended to prevent complications.

Global Trends and Hotspots in Endoscopic Discectomy: A Study Based on Bibliometric Analysis

OBJECTIVE

With the advancement of minimally invasive spine surgery, endoscopic discectomy (ED) has become a common technique for degenerative disease of the spine. The present study aimed to explore the knowledge structure, emerging trends, and future research hotspots in this field.

METHODS

All relevant publications on ED from 2002 to 2021 were extracted from the Web of Science databases. Key bibliometric indicators, including countries/regions, institutions, authors, journals, references, and keywords were calculated and evaluated using VOSviewer and CiteSpace software.

RESULTS

A total of 1,196 articles and reviews were included for analysis. The number of publications regarding ED increased yearly. From the quality and quantity viewpoint, China, South Korea, and the United States were the major contributors in this field. The most influential institution in the field of ED was Wooridul Spine Hospital. We identified 3,488 authors, among which Lee SH had the most significant number of papers, and Ruetten S was cocited most often. <World Neurosurgery was the journal with the most papers, and Spine was the most commonly cocited journal. Keywords were stratified into 4 clusters by VOSviewer software: cluster 1 (clinical outcomes of ED in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation); cluster 2 (surgical technique of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy); cluster 3 (clinical outcomes of ED in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis); and cluster 4 (clinical outcomes of percutaneous endoscopic cervical discectomy). Several topics including lateral recess stenosis, spinal stenosis, and reoperation were considered as the next hotspot in ED research.

CONCLUSION

ED research has gained considerable attention over the last 2 decades. Our bibliometric findings illuminate the publication trends and research hotspots of the ED field, which may provide useful references for scholars and decision-makers interested in this field.

Can the Full-Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy in Day Surgery Mode Achieve Better Outcomes Following Enhanced Recovery after Surgery Protocol? A Retrospective Comparative Study

Background

Full-percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (F-PELD) is a popular operation for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation (LDH). Some studies have reported that F-PELD in day surgery mode produced favorable outcomes for LDH. At the same time, minimally invasive spinal surgery following enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) presents a rising trend in recent years, but few studies reported whether F-PELD will produce better outcomes in the day surgery (DS) mode combined with ERAS.

Objective

To analyze whether F-PELD in day surgery mode following ERAS can produce better clinical outcomes than in traditional surgery mode.

Methods

The patients who underwent F-PELD between January 2019 and October 2020 were retrospectively analyzed, and the patients who met the inclusive criteria were followed up. The patients were divided into day surgery (DS) group (n = 152) that combined with ERAS and traditional surgery (TS) group (n = 123) without ERAS. The length of hospital stays (LOS), visual analogue scale (VAS), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) of two groups were compared before surgery, immediately after surgery, one month after surgery, and one year after surgery.

Results

A total of 298 patients who underwent F-PELD were reviewed. 290 patients were included in the study and followed up, and 275 patients who had completed the follow-up were available for analysis. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of age, gender, preoperative VAS, and ODI. There were significant statistical differences in the VAS and ODI immediately after surgery (VAS for back pain: DS group 1.4 ± 1.1, TS group 2.0 ± 1.2, p &lt; 0.001; VAS for leg pain: DS group 0.8 ± 0.8, TS group 1.1 ± 1.1, p = 0.010; ODI: DS group 5.8 ± 4.3, TS group 7.6 ± 7.4, p = 0.010) and one month after surgery (VAS for back pain: DS group 0.8 ± 0.9, TS group 1.1 ± 1.0, p = 0.035; ODI: DS group 3.2 ± 3.5, TS group 4.5 ± 6.5, p = 0.036). At one year after surgery, the VAS (back pain: DS group 0.3 ± 0.6, TS group 0.3 ± 0.7, p = 0.798; leg pain: DS group 0.2 ± 0.4, TS group 0.1 ± 0.4, p = 0.485) and ODI (DS group 0.8 ± 1.2, TS group 0.7 ± 1.7, p = 0.729) were further improved, but no statistically significant difference was observed between two groups. LOS of DS group (1.38 ± 0.49 days) was significantly shorter than the TS group (5.83 ± 2.24 days, p &lt; 0.001), and some postoperative complications occurred in the TS group, including throat discomfort (n = 5, 4.1%), discomfort after catheterization (n = 7, 5.7%), abdominal distention (n = 3, 2.4%), and nausea (n = 5, 4.1%). None of the above complications resulted in serious consequences.

Conclusion

The F-PELD in day surgery mode following ERAS produced a better short-term clinical effect and reduced the LOS, which is worthy of promotion.

Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Percutaneous Spinal Endoscopy versus Traditional Open Surgery for Lumbar Disc Herniation: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective

Systematic analysis of the incidence of percutaneous spinal endoscopic technique and traditional open surgery for lumbar disc herniation.

Methods

A randomized controlled trial (RCT) and cohort study on complications related to traditional open surgery was searched on the MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science, Chinese journal full-text database (CNKI), Wanfang, and Embase database. Language is not limited. The quality of each study was evaluated, various complications were compiled into electronic baseline tables, and the data from these studies were available. Meta-analysis and synthesis were performed with the RevMan 5.3 software to evaluate the statistical significance of both surgical techniques in terms of various complications.

Results

12 studies were eventually included, and a total of 2,797 patients were included in the analysis. Meta-analysis results showed that there was no statistical difference in postoperative paresthesia between percutaneous spinal endoscopy and traditional open surgery (OR = 1.17, 95% CI (0.82, 1.66), P = 0.38, I ² = 0%, Z = 0.88), direct nerve root damage (OR = 0.79, 95% CI (0.58, 1.07), P = 0.13, I ² = 73%, Z = 1.52), and intraoperative hemorrhage and hematoma formation (OR = 1.00, 95% CI (0.67, 1.48), P = 0.99, I ² = 0%, Z = 0.02), but there was a statistical difference in disc recurrence (OR = 2.24, 95% CI (1.56, 3.21), P < 0.0001, I ² = 81%, Z = 4.39).

Conclusion

Compared with the traditional open surgical treatment of lumbar disc herniation, percutaneous spinal endoscopic technology has obvious advantages in reducing nerve root injury, dural injury, and surgical area wound complications, but it is limited to preventing the technical characteristics of the surgical site, which is worse than that of open surgery.

Full-Endoscopic Ventral Facetectomy vs Open Laminectomy for Lumbar Lateral Recess Stenosis: A Comparative Study and Brief Literature Review

BACKGROUND

Lateral recess stenosis (LRS) represents a major etiology of pain and disability in recent years. The aim of the present study was to compare the clinical outcomes of full-endoscopic ventral facetectomy (FEVF) vs conventional open laminectomy (OL) for surgical treatment of lumbar LRS.

METHODS

Ninety individuals with diagnosed LRS according to clinical and radiological criteria were included in this study. Patients were appropriately classified into 2 distinct groups according to received treatment. Group A was constituted from 48 patients subjected to FEVF. Contrariwise, the 42 patients of Group B underwent OL. All patients were consecutively evaluated with particular clinical scores preoperatively and at 6 weeks, 3, months, 6 months, 12 months, and 2 years postoperatively. Clinical assessment was conducted with the visual analog scale for leg pain (VAS-LP) and back pain (VAS-BP) and with the Short-Form 36 (SF-36) medical questionnaire.

RESULTS

Values of all studied indices in both groups featured a major clinical improvement in 6 weeks with subsequent quantitatively minor albeit still statistically significant amelioration until the end of follow-up at 2 years. Comparative evaluation of recorded parameters between the 2 groups disclosed that VAS-BP, bodily pain, and role emotional indices of SF-36 were quantitatively and statistically differentiated in favor of Group A in 6 weeks, featuring an amelioration that persisted until the end of follow-up. Registered values of the other parameters were not found to demonstrate a quantitatively and clinically noteworthy differentiation between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

FEVF represents a feasible, safe, and beneficial alternative for surgical therapy of patients with LRS, featuring comparable outcomes with conventional OL.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Lumbar LRS represents a frequent entity with remarkable clinical sequelae. FEVF represents a novel, groundbreaking and minimally invasive technique that should be considered as a safe and efficacious alternative over conventional open surgery in specific patients with LRS.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3

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.