RESUMEN
【Objective】 To compare the perioperative blood loss between interlaminar and transforaminal approaches by percutaneous endoscopic discectomy in order to provide more reference for guiding the proper choice of surgical methods clinically. 【Methods】 We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 160 patients who underwent percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy from June 2019 to November 2020， with 80 patients in interlaminar approach group and 80 in transforaminal approach group. The blood loss was calculated according to Gross formula. 【Results】 The perioperative total blood loss （mL）， hidden blood loss （mL） and hemoglobin loss （g/L） were significantly lower in interlaminar approach group than in transforaminal approach group （119.73±179.26 vs. 158.6±190.65， 109.73±179.53 vs. 148.78±190.19， 3.76±8.12 vs. 4.31±7.62） （P<0.05）. However， there was no significant difference in visible blood loss between the two groups. 【Conclusion】 The perioperative hidden blood loss accounts for a large proportion in percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy. In addition， the interlaminar approach causes less blood loss than the transforaminal approach.
RESUMEN
<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>To evaluate the operative characteristic, safety, clinical effect of percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy (PEID) in treating displacement-type lumbar intervertebral disc protrusion on L₂-L₅.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>Form November 2015 to October 2016, 15 patients with displacement-type lumbar intervertebral disc protrusion were treated with percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy. There were 9 males and 6 females, aged from 19 to 63 years old with an average of 42 years. All the patients with single-segment displacement-type lumbar intervertebral disc protrusion were diagnosed by clinical and iconography data, and complicated with low back pain and single lower limbs radioactivity pain. Lesion occurred in L₄,₅ of 8 cases, L₃,₄ of 4 cases, L₂,₃ of 3 cases. The patients were divided into 4 regions according to Lee standard (displaced nucleus pulposus location on spinal canal), I region was 2 cases, II region was 3 cases, III region was 5 cases, IV region was 5 cases.Preoperative, postoperative 3 months, final follow-up, lumbago-leg pain and lumbar function were assessed by VAS, JOA scores;at final follow-up, MacNab was used to evaluate the clinical effect;postoperative 3 months, rechecked lumbar MRI to observe discectomy condition.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>All the operations were successfully complete under local anesthesia, and no complications such as injuries of nerve root and dural sac, postoperative hemorrhage, local infection were found. Operative time was 45 to 90 min with an average of 54.8 min;and hospitalization time was 3 to 4 days with an average of 3 days. All 15 cases were followed up for 12 to 13 months with an average of 12.2 months, no recurrence was found. Preoperation, postoperative 3, 12 months, VAS scores were 8.2±1.4, 3.0±0.6, 1.7±0.5, JOA scores were 8.76±3.32, 23.61±2.14, 24.82±3.43, respectively. Postoperative VAS, JOA scores were obviously improved(<0.05). According to MacNab standard to evaluate the clinical effect, 9 cases obtained excellent results, 5 good, 1 fair.</p><p><b>CONCLUSIONS</b>PEID is a micro-trauma surgical method and has advantage of safe and effective in treating displacement-type lumbar intervertebral disc protrusion on L₂-L₅, but requires laminoplasty during operation, and under local anesthesia to operation maybe can induce neurostimulation.</p>
RESUMEN
Objective: To investigate the clinical effect and treatment strategy of percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy (PEID) in the treatment of calcified L5S1 lumbar disc herniation. Methods: A total of 15 patients with calcified L5S1 lumbar disc herniation were selected and treated with PEID combined with variable power system. The Visual Analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry dysfunction index (ODD scores of the patients were evaluated before operation, and Id, 1 week, 3 months, 6 months after operation. Macnab score was used to evaluate the curative effect of the patients 6 months after operation. Results: The scores of VAS and ODI of the patients Id, 1 week, 3 months, and 6 months after operation were significantly lower than those before operation (P<0. 05); the modified Macnab score showed that the excellent and good rate was 86. 67%; the postoperative image results showed that the calcification area of intervertebral disc was removed, the nerve root was decompressed effectively, and there were no nerve root injury, cerebrospinal fluid leakage and infection. Conclusion: PEID combined with variable power system can effectively treat the calcified L5S1 lumbar disc herniation with the advantages of less trauma, short operation time and short recovery period.
RESUMEN
STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective study. PURPOSE: To determine the feasibility and effectiveness of revisional percutaneous full endoscopic discectomy for recurrent herniation after conventional open disc surgery. OVERVIEW OF THE LITERATURE: Repeated open discectomy with or without fusion has been the most common procedure for recurrent lumbar disc herniation. Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy for recurrent herniation has been thought of as an impossible procedure. Despite good results with open revisional surgery, major problems may be caused by injuries to the posterior stabilized structures. Our team did revisional full endoscopic lumbar disc surgery on the basis of our experience doing primary full endoscopic disc surgery. METHODS: Between February 2004 and August 2009 a total of 41 patients in our hospital underwent revisional percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy using a YESS endoscopic system and a micro-osteotome (designed by the authors). Indications for surgery were recurrent disc herniation following conventional open discectomy; with compression of the nerve root revealed by Gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging; corresponding radiating pain which was not alleviated after conservative management over 6 weeks. Patients with severe neurologic deficits and isolated back pain were excluded. RESULTS: The mean follow-up period was 16 months (range, 13 to 42 months). The visual analog scale for pain in the leg and back showed significant post-treatment improvement (p < 0.001). Based on a modified version of MacNab's criteria, 90.2% showed excellent or good outcomes. There was no measurable blood loss. There were two cases of recurrence of and four cases with complications. CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous full-endoscopic revisional disc surgery without additional structural damage is feasible and effective in terms of there being less chance of fusion and bleeding. This technique can be an alternative to conventional repeated discectomy.