Posterior endoscopic discectomy: Results in 300 patients

Background:

Posterior endoscopic discectomy is an established method for treatment of lumbar disc herniation. Many studies have not been reported in literature for lumbar discectomy by Destandau Endospine System. We report a series of 300 patients operated for lumbar dissectomy by Destandau Endospine system.

Materials and Methods:

A total of 300 patients suffering from lumbar disc herniations were operated between January 2002 and December 2008. All patients were operated as day care procedure. Technique comprised localization of symptomatic level followed by insertion of an endospine system devise through a 15 mm skin and fascial incision. Endoscopic discectomy is then carried out by conventional micro disc surgery instruments by minimal invasive route. The results were evaluated by Macnab''s criteria after a minimum followup of 12 months and maximum up to 24 months.

Results:

Based on modified Macnab''s criteria, 90% patients had excellent to good, 8% had fair, and 2% had poor results. The complications observed were discitis and dural tear in five patients each and nerve root injury in two patients. 90% patients were able to return to light and sedentary work with an average delay of 3 weeks and normal physical activities after 2 months.

Conclusion:

Edoscopic discectomy provides a safe and minimal access corridor for lumbar discectomy. The technique also allows early postoperative mobilization and faster return to work.     

后路经皮内镜下颈椎间盘摘除术治疗外侧型颈椎间盘突出症

目的分析后路经皮内镜下颈椎间盘摘除术治疗外侧型颈椎间盘突出症的临床疗效。方法回顾性分析自2015-10—2018-01采用后路经皮内镜下颈椎间盘摘除术治疗的27例外侧型颈椎间盘突出症,比较术前与术后1、6、12个月疼痛VAS评分及NDI指数。结果 27例均顺利完成手术,随访时间24~41个月,平均29个月。手术时间67~210 min,平均80 min,住院时间2~10 d,平均3 d。1例术中出现硬脊膜撕裂,1例术后出现切口渗液,轻度红肿,发热,分泌物细菌培养阴性,对症处理后治愈。27例术后1 d上肢疼痛和颈部疼痛症状均有明显改善,25例术后1 d疼痛消失或者明显减轻,24例术后第1 d肌力得到明显改善。末次随访时5例手术节段椎间盘突出加重。27例术后1、6、12个月疼痛VAS评分与NDI评分较术前明显改善,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),但术后1、6、12个月间疼痛VAS评分与NDI评分比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论后路经皮内镜下颈椎间盘摘除术治疗外侧型颈椎间盘突出症安全有效,术后恢复快,值得临床推广。     

Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD)

Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) is a new technique for the decompression of the lumbar disc space and removal of nucleus pulposus via a posterolateral approach. The technique was introduced in Germany by the authors in April 1987. The method is indicated in patients with non-equestrated lumbar disc herniation with an intact lorsal longitudinal ligament. In local anesthesia, a working cannula (OD 5 mm) is placed at the dorsal lateral border of the disc. The disc space is opened with anulus trephines and the nucleus pulposus is removed with rigid and flexible forceps as well as with automated shaver systems under intermittent endoscopic control (discoscopy). The procedure is performed in local anesthesia. The results of the first thirty patients with a follow-up time between 6 months and 17 months could be graded as excellent in 13 cases, as good in 9 cases, as fair in 6 cases, and as bad in 2 cases. The relief of symptoms as judged by the patients was between 70–100 percent in the majority of the cases. Three patients had to be reoperated at the same level and site, because of either persistent or recurrent sciatica. The performance in local anesthesia, the atraumatic extraspinal approach, the reduced time of hospitalization and post-operative morbidity as well as the reduced time of work incapability are the main advantages of this new method.     

Posterior endoscopic discectomy for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation

The procedure of posterior endoscopic discectomy (PED) is an attempt to allow for a standard familiar microsurgical discectomy to be performed using standard microsurgical techniques via a minimally invasive approach. The aim of this study was to evaluate our results with PED for lumbar disc herniation and to assess the advantages, disadvantages and clinical outcomes of the technique. Between February 2002 and August 2004, 71 patients with a mean age of 44 years (range : 24 to 73) underwent PED. The operated disc levels were L5-S1 in 37 patients, L4-L5 in 26 patients and L3-L4 in 8 patients. Mean operative time was 84 min. (41-135 min.). All patients experienced substantial relief of their leg pain immediately after the operation, mobilised very early after recovery from the anaesthesia and were discharged home within 24 hours of surgery with only oral NSAID +/- myorelaxants. PED has advantages like better illumination, better magnification, and better visualisation through the rotation of the 25 degrees lens, minimal bone resection and minimal epidural fibrosis, less postoperative pain, better cosmesis, shorter hospitalisation, early mobilisation and shorter recovery. On the other hand, PED has a longer learning curve than open discectomy, the operative time is usually longer than with open procedures and bidimensional vision may cause loss of depth sensation, and it entails a longer anaesthesia time due to the preparation period of the system.     

后路经皮内窥镜下颈椎椎间盘切除术治疗神经根型颈椎病

目的探讨后路经皮内窥镜下颈椎椎间盘切除术(PECD)治疗神经根型颈椎病(CSR)的中期临床疗效。方法回顾性分析2016年1月-2017年12月采用后路PECD治疗的31例CSR患者的临床资料,采用疼痛视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分评估上肢及颈部疼痛情况,采用日本骨科学会(JOA)评分评估神经系统功能,记录颈椎曲度及手术节段活动度(ROM)变化。结果所有手术顺利完成,手术时间41~76(57.9±8.6)min,术中出血量12~30(19.7±4.0)mL,住院时间3~6(3.6±0.6)d,术后随访(33.9±8.1)个月。术中均无神经根损伤、硬膜囊破裂等并发症发生。术后上肢VAS评分及JOA评分均较术前明显改善,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),术后颈椎曲度、手术节段ROM与术前相比无明显改变,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论后路PECD治疗CSR安全、有效,术中对关节突部分骨质的切除不会影响术后颈椎曲度。     

Posterior endoscopic lumbar discectomy using a thoracoport as a tubular retractor.

OBJECTIVE: To make lumbar discectomy simple and feasible, we developed an endoscopic surgical technique that uses a Thoracoport as a tubular retractor. SURGICAL TECHNIQUE: The patient was placed in a 60-degree forwardly inclined lateral position with the side of the lesion on the top. After radiological confirmation of the index level, a Thoracoport was inserted through a 2-cm paramedian transverse skin incision. A 0-degree rod lens endoscope was mounted to a scope holder and placed into the retractor for magnification and illumination. Laminotomy was performed with a high-speed drill to reach the insertion of the yellow ligament to the upper lamina. A 2-mm undercutting of the upper facet was performed with a punch to expose the lateral edge of the nerve root. Surgical instruments were inserted next to the endoscope for manipulation. The herniated disc was identified and removed with pituitary rongeurs as in a standard microdiscectomy. With this technique, a sufficient amount of bone is resected to expose the disc lateral to the nerve root; hemostasis is easily achieved and the incidence of nerve root injury is reduced. CONCLUSION: We have successfully performed an endoscopic lumbar discectomy in 20 patients by using a Thoracoport as a tubular retractor. No specially designed instruments were required. This technique was a safe and effective minimally invasive approach to treating lumbar disc disease according to our preliminary experience.     

Percutaneous endoscopic laser discectomy

BACKGROUND: The aim of the present paper was to systematically review the literature on percutaneous endoscopic laser discectomy (PELD) with respect to the safety and efficacy of the procedure. Where possible the procedure was compared with open discectomy. METHODS: Studies on PELD were identified using MEDLINE (1984 to December 1999), EMBASE (1974 to December 1999) and Current Contents (1993 to Week 1, 2000). A number of search terms were used: PELD; PLDD (percutaneous laser disc decompression); and laser and (spine or lumbar) and (disc* or disk*). The Cochrane Library was searched from 1966 to issue 4, 1999, using the search terms 'discectomy' or 'discotomy'. Live human studies of patients with lumbar disc prolapses for whom surgery was appropriate were included. Cadaver studies were also included. A surgeon and reviewer independently assessed the retrieved articles for their inclusion in the review. RESULTS: Only 12 papers were identified that related to PELD. The level of evidence for safety and efficacy was low; there were no controlled, blinded or randomized studies. The highest level of evidence came from time series studies. No quantitative analysis could be undertaken for the present review. CONCLUSIONS: Given the extremely low level of evidence available for this procedure it was recommended that the procedure be regarded as experimental until results are available from a controlled clinical trial, ideally with random allocation to an intervention and control group.     

经皮内镜下腰椎间盘切除术

近年来,经皮内镜下腰椎间盘切除术(PELD)已由非直视下切除椎间盘中央髓核的间接减压术,发展为内镜直视下切除压迫神经根髓核的直接减压术.PELD适应证与腰椎板开窗髓核切除术适应证相似,随着外科技术和设备的发展,也适用于椎间孔狭窄、侧隐窝狭窄和高髂嵴的L5～S1中央型椎间盘突出症患者.PELD设备种类很多,但外科技术基本一致.手术中可能会受到高髂嵴或L5横突的阻挡,但近来报道显示L5～S1经皮入路其实并不十分困难.PELD术后满意率与腰椎板开窗髓核切除术相当,且具有创伤小、并发症少、术后复发率低等优点,是治疗部分腰椎间盘突出症的理想选择.     

Video-assisted endoscopic lumbar discectomy

Background: The optimal management of symptomatic lumbar disc herniations (LDH) remains controversial. This study examines the feasibility and safety of a video-assisted endoscopic intracanalicular technique for managing symptomatic LDH. Methods: From September 1999 to June 2000, we used the current technique, the Vertebroscope System, on 11 patients (six men, five women), aged from 18 to 61 years (mean, 45), who had suffered symptomatic LDH. The disc levels involved were at L4-L5 (n = 8), and L5-S1 (n = 3). The Vertebroscope, which has a 30° viewing angle and a working channel 1.7 cm in diameter, was used for the minimally invasive endoscopic procedures. The mean follow-up period was 12 months (range, 6-15). Results: The operating time ranged from 60 to 335 min (mean, 136.5), and the estimated blood loss during operation was minimal to 200 ml. The mean length of the paramedian skin incisions was 2 cm. No drainage tube was used postoperatively. The mean hospital stay was 3 days (range, 2-5), with five patients discharged on the 1st postoperative day. Complications included one superficial wound infection, one conversion to an open procedure when muscle herniation into the working channel created a technical difficulty in approaching the ligamatum flavum, and one minor tear of the nerve root sleeve that did not require further surgery. In the first five patients studied herein, the mean operating time was significantly longer than that for the later five patients (201 vs 72 min, p <0.001). conclusions: the advantages of the current endoscopic disectomy technique include its minimally invasive character, with less paraspinal muscle trauma, direct address to the lesion site that resembles the open technique, and enhanced operative field visualization with a paramedian skin incision of just 2 cm. practice is needed to perfect such an endoscopic approach for lumbar disc excision, so the operating time decreased significantly as the surgeons became more familiar with this endoscopic technique. it has proved to be safe and effective for treating patients with symptomatic ldh.     

Posterolateral percutane endoscopic lumbar discectomy

The technique and equipment for performing posterolateral percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy underwent a slow evolution in the past 30 years. The current level of proficiency was reached about 5 years ago. As a result, the endoscopic capabilities closely overlapped that of conventional transcanal open operations for herniated lumbar disc. Endoscopic technique has the unique ability to visualized and treat certain intradiscal pathology. Intradiscal visualization is enhanced by staining with 10% to 20% indigocarmine dye. This blue dye differentially stains degenerated nucleus and granulation tissue in annular defects. Biplane c-arm images are used for percutaneous guidance. The approach trajectory starts from an optimally located skin window entering the disc through the foraminal annular window. Normally there are limited endoscopic workspaces. A working tunnel, working cavity must be created for viewing and manipulating operating tools. Currently available equipment includes a high-resolution rod lens operating endoscope, bevel cannula, bipolar radiofrequency electrode, and a side-firing Holmium-yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser. Each has a unique role in performing special tasks. The learning curve is steep but once mastered, the surgeon is able to extract contained and noncontained disc herniations. Granulation tissue in annular defects is ablated using radiofrequency electrode. Holmium-yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser has a unique ability in dividing thick collagenous tissue and ablating cortical bone.     

Comparison of full-endoscopic foraminoplasty and lumbar discectomy (FEFLD), unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) discectomy,and microdiscectomy (MD) for symptomatic lumbar disc herniation

Purpose

This study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of full-endoscopic foraminoplasty and lumbar discectomy (FEFLD), unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) discectomy, and microdiscectomy (MD) in the treatment of symptomatic lumbar disc herniation (LDH).

Methods

From January 2020 and May 2021, 128 patients with single-level LDH at L4-5 or L5-S1 received FEFLD, UBE discectomy or MD. Patients were divided into three groups according to surgical method: the FEFLD group (n = 43), the UBE group (n = 42), and the MD group (n = 43). Operative time, fluoroscopy frequency, in-bed time, length of hospital stays, total expenses, complications, visual analogue scale (VAS, 0–10), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI, 0–100%) were assessed and compared among three groups.

Results

There were no significant differences in VAS or ODI scores at 12 months after surgery among three groups. In comparison with the MD group, the FEFLD and UBE group yield better VAS scores for back pain on the first day following surgery (P < 0.05). The FEFLD group was superior to the UBE group or MD group with less time in bed and shorter hospital stay (P < 0.05). The operation time and total expenses in the UBE group were significantly longer and higher than those in the FEFLD group or MD group (P < 0.05).

Conclusions

FEFLD and UBE discectomy yield comparable results to conventional MD concerning pain relief and functional outcomes. In addition, FEFLD and UBE discectomy enable less back pain in the immediate postoperative period. FEFLD offers advantages in rapid recovery. Conventional MD is still an efficient and cost-effective surgical procedure.

     

经皮内窥镜下腰椎椎间盘切除术与显微内窥镜下椎间盘切除术治疗腰椎椎间盘突出症的荟萃分析

目的 系统分析并比较经皮内窥镜下腰椎椎间盘切除术(PELD)与显微内窥镜下椎间盘切除术(MED)治疗腰椎椎间盘突出症(LDH)的疗效.方法 利用中国知网、万方数据、维普网、中国生物医学数据库、PubMed、Embase、Cochrane Library、Ovid等数据库,检索国内外公开发表的治疗单节段LDH的中英文文献...     

内窥镜技术在颈椎前路手术中的应用

目的：探讨内窥镜下颈椎前路减压植骨融合术的手术技巧与疗效。方法：2002年8月～2005年3月应用内窥镜下颈椎前路减压植骨融合术治疗20例颈椎疾患患者，均应用自制不同型号椎间旋转撑开器及特制不同角度、不同大小的网形与方形刮匙行前路椎间盘切除，单纯PEEK cage植骨融合8例，PEEK cage植骨融合加钛板内同定2例，单纯钛cage植骨融合3例，钛cage植骨融合加钛板内同定2例，椎间植骨融合加钛板内同定5例，随访观察治疗效果。结果：术后随访3～12个月，平均7个月。患者症状体征及神经功能均明显改善。术后影像学检查手术部位减压彻底。1例发生钛cage松动，其余椎间高度无丢失，维持颈椎正常生理曲度。结论：通过对椎间盘镜部分器械和技术的改进，将其应用于颈椎前路椎间盘切除、椎间融合内同定术治疗颈椎病及颈椎间盘突出症可取得满意的效果。     

两种术式治疗腰椎间盘突出症的临床对比研究

[目的]研究椎间孔镜TESSYS术与椎板开窗椎间盘切除术治疗腰椎间盘突出症伴或不伴腰椎神经根管狭窄的疗效对比。[方法]回顾性分析本院2017~2018年治疗的腰椎间盘突出症伴或不伴腰椎神经根管狭窄64例患者临床资料。根据治疗手术方式分为两组,采用经皮椎间孔镜TESSYS术的为TESSYS组,共34例,采用椎板开窗椎间盘切除术的为开放组,共30例,术后随访12个月,观察两组手术时间、术中出血量、术后住院时间、术后并发症,进行VAS评分、ODI评分和改良MacNa评分评价临床疗效,采用独立样本t检验对比分析数据。[结果]两组患者均顺利完成手术,TESSYS组在手术时间、出血量、切口长度、术后下地时间和术后住院时间方面均低于开放组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。TESSYS组早期并发症1例,开放组早期并发症3例。两组患者随访6~18个月,随时间推移,两组患者VAS和ODI评分均显著减少,不同时间点间差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。术前两组间VAS和ODI评分的差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),术后24h、术后3个月,TESSYS组VAS和ODI评分均显著低于开放组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05);但术后6、12个月,两组间VAS和ODI评分的差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。末次随访时根据改良MacNab评价标准,TESSYS组优良率94.12%;而开放组优良率83.33%;两组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。[结论]经皮椎间孔镜TESSYS术与椎板开窗椎间盘切除术均能有效的治疗腰椎间盘突出症,但TESSYS术在术后短期内恢复更快。     

单侧双通道内镜下椎间盘切除术与经皮内镜下经椎间孔入路椎间盘切除术治疗腰椎间盘突出症的临床疗效对比

【摘要】 目的：比较单侧双通道内镜下椎间盘切除术（unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy,UBED）与经皮内镜下经椎间孔入路椎间盘切除术（percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy,PETD）治疗单节段腰椎间盘突出症（lumbar disc herniation,LDH）的短期临床疗效。方法：回顾性分析2020年3月～2020年6月我院分别应用UBED（UBED组）和PETD（PETD组）治疗单节段LDH患者56例,UBED组29例,其中男17例,女12例,年龄59.6±10.5岁,随访时间13.5±2.7个月。PETD组27例,其中男14例,女13例,年龄60.3±12.3岁,随访时间13.8±2.9个月。两组患者的年龄、性别、BMI、随访时间等一般资料均无统计学差异（P＞0.05）。记录并比较两组患者手术时间、术中透视次数、出血量、手术前后血红蛋白值和术后并发症等。使用视觉模拟量表（visual analogue scale,VAS）评分及Oswestry功能障碍指数（Oswestry disability index,ODI）评价两组患者术前、术后3天、术后3个月及术后1年的生活质量,术后1年通过改良MacNab标准评价疗效,比较两组间是否存在差异。结果：所有患者均顺利完成手术。UBED组患者术中出血量较PETD组多（49.6±15.6ml vs 25.3±9.7ml,P<0.05）,术中透视次数少（3.35±0.81次 vs 7.71±1.73次,P<0.05）。两组手术时间、术后并发症无统计学差异（P>0.05）。两组患者术前、术后血红蛋白值和血红蛋白减少值均无统计学差异（P>0.05）。两组患者术后3天、术后3个月及术后1年腰腿痛VAS评分和ODI较术前均明显下降（P<0.05）,两组患者各时间点腰腿痛VAS评分及ODI均无统计学差异（P>0.05）。术后两组优良率差异无统计学差异（89.7% vs 88.9%,P>0.05）。结论：UBED与PETD治疗LDH均安全有效,与PETD相比,UBED可获得相似的疼痛缓解,改善患者的生活质量。UBED术中出血较PETD增加,但手术前后血红蛋白变化相当,UBED可有效减少术中透视次数。     

颈椎后路内窥镜下椎间盘切除术治疗单节段神经根型颈椎病

目的:探讨颈椎后路内窥镜下椎间盘切除术(microendoscopic discectomv,MED)治疗单节段神经根型颈椎病(cervical spondylotic radiculopathy,CSR)的临床疗效.方法:2010年9月～2012年8月,我科采用颈椎后路MED治疗单节段神经根型颈椎病患者16例,其中男11例,女5例;年龄31～56岁,平均41.7岁;C4/5 4例,C5/6 9例,C6/7 3例;均为一侧根性症状,CT 、MRI等影像学检查提示单节段外侧突出或/和关节突增生致椎间孔狭窄,神经受压节段与临床症状体征相符,经系统保守治疗6周以上无效,颈椎动力位X线片未见颈椎不稳.随访观察患者的颈痛VAS评分、JOA评分、颈椎生理曲度、颈椎病变节段稳定性和椎间高度的变化,并进行统计学分析.结果:平均手术时间89min (75～1 15min);术中平均出血量85ml(30～160ml);术后平均住院时间4.1d(3～7d);出院时患者神经根性症状缓解11例,明显改善5例;16例均获随访,平均随访时间12.7个月(6～25个月),VAS评分由术前的7.13±1.15分降至术后的3.00±0.63分,末次随访时为1.94±0.85分;JOA评分由术前12.63±1.09分提高至15.63±0.50分,末次随访时为16.13±0.62分;术前、术后与术次随访时两两比较均有统计学意义(P＜0.05) 颈椎生理曲度D值从术前7.66±0.99mm提高到末次随访时10.99±0.95mm,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05) 术前和末次随访时病变节段椎间高度分别为5.56±0.54mm和5.54±0.52mm,差异无统计学意义(p＞0.05).过伸过屈位X线片未显示明显颈椎失稳结论:在严格选择适应证的前提下,颈椎后路MED治疗单节段神经根型颈椎病可取得较满意的临床疗效.     

Abandoned endoscopic procedures

Intraoperatively, it may be prudent at times to abandon or defer the intended therapeutic procedure due to adverse prevailing conditions. A decision to abandon or defer an endoscopic procedure would necessarily result in less morbidity compared with conventional open surgery. A retrospective review of endoscopic procedures that were abandoned or deferred and subsequent patient outcomes were noted. Between January 1998 to May 2003, 48 procedures out of a total of 11,550 endoscopic surgical procedures had to be abandoned. Previously unsuspected intraabdominal malignancy was the cause in 32 patients. Anesthesia-related problems led to the decision in 6 patients. Coincidental tuberculosis and failure in accessing the target organ were the cause in two patients each. An ectopic gallbladder, an absent gallbladder, a pancreatic phlegmon, and a failure to achieve proper single-lung ventilation led to the decision in one patient each. In two patients, presence of dense intraabdominal adhesions that precluded further progress led the surgeon to abandon the surgery. The patients with intraabdominal malignancy were staged for their disease and treated accordingly. Nine patients without malignancy who had their operation deferred due to diverse reasons were operated on a later date, whereas 4 patients were lost to follow-up. The 9 patients who underwent operation at a later date are well on follow-up. Four patients with intraabdominal malignancy died, whereas the others are well in follow-up after being treated according to the stage of their disease. Certain adverse situation encountered intraoperatively may lead the surgeon to change the approach to surgery and abandon the procedure. He may consider operation at a suitable time later or consider a different treatment altogether. The morbidity consequent to such a decision is much less if the operative approach is an endoscopic one.     

经皮内窥镜下颈椎椎间盘切除术的应用进展

正随着对颈椎疾病研究的深入和微创理念在骨科领域的广泛运用,包括经皮内窥镜下颈椎椎间盘切除术(PECD)在内的多项脊柱微创外科技术正受到关注并被用于颈椎等脊柱疾病的治疗。PECD是治疗颈椎椎间盘突出症的手术方法之一,其具有医源性损伤小、出血量少、住院时间短及术后康复快等优点~([1]),因此备受关注并得到广泛应用。20世纪90年代,Bonaldi等~([2])首次应用经皮椎间盘切除术治疗颈椎椎间盘突出症,之后逐渐扩大