Delta large-channel endoscopy versus unilateral biportal endoscopy decompressive laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis: a prospective randomized controlled trial.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research Pub Date : 2025-01-04 DOI:10.1186/s13018-024-05409-0
Rushuo Wei, Weiqiang Liu, Mingdong Yu, Yushan Zhu, Ruzhan Yao, Bingwu Wang, Jesse Li-Ling
{"title":"Delta large-channel endoscopy versus unilateral biportal endoscopy decompressive laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis: a prospective randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Rushuo Wei, Weiqiang Liu, Mingdong Yu, Yushan Zhu, Ruzhan Yao, Bingwu Wang, Jesse Li-Ling","doi":"10.1186/s13018-024-05409-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Delta large-channel endoscopy and unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) are prominent minimally invasive techniques for treating lumbar spinal stenosis, known for minimal tissue damage, clear visualization, and quick recovery. However, rigorous controlled research comparing these procedures is scarce, necessitating further investigation into their respective complications and long-term effectiveness. This randomized controlled trial aims to compare their perioperative outcomes, focusing on postoperative recovery and complications over time.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In total, 101 participants were randomly assigned to Delta large-channel endoscopy group (n = 50) or UBE group (n = 51). Primary measures were Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores and operation time. Secondary measures included VAS, EQ-5D, JOA scores, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay duration, and costs. Perioperative complications such as dural tears, incision infections, hematomas, thrombosis, and reoperation rates were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Delta group consistently showed lower mean ODI scores throughout the follow-up than UBE group, with significant differences at 2 weeks postoperative (P = 0.048), though they were not significant by 1 month (P = 0.124), 2 months (P = 0.821) and 3 months (P = 0.350). Operation times were shorter in the Delta group (P < 0.001). Hospitalization costs and intraoperative blood loss were slightly higher in the UBE group (P < 0.001). No significant differences were noted in the other secondary outcomes at various post-surgery intervals, such as VAS, EQ-5D, JOA scores, hospital stay duration and complications.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both techniques are safe and effective when performed by experienced surgeons. Compared to UBE, Delta large-channel endoscopy can shorten surgery time and reduce blood loss, and more importantly, it promotes faster recovery of lumbar function in the early postoperative period.</p><p><strong>Research registration unique identifying number (uin): </strong>Name of the registry: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry chictr.org.cn. ( http://www.chictr.org.cn/index.aspx ). Unique Identifying number or registration ID: ChiCTR2300076237. Hyperlink to your specific registration (must be publicly accessible and will be checked): https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=207 ,844.</p>","PeriodicalId":16629,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research","volume":"20 1","pages":"10"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11699819/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-024-05409-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Delta large-channel endoscopy and unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) are prominent minimally invasive techniques for treating lumbar spinal stenosis, known for minimal tissue damage, clear visualization, and quick recovery. However, rigorous controlled research comparing these procedures is scarce, necessitating further investigation into their respective complications and long-term effectiveness. This randomized controlled trial aims to compare their perioperative outcomes, focusing on postoperative recovery and complications over time.

Methods: In total, 101 participants were randomly assigned to Delta large-channel endoscopy group (n = 50) or UBE group (n = 51). Primary measures were Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores and operation time. Secondary measures included VAS, EQ-5D, JOA scores, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay duration, and costs. Perioperative complications such as dural tears, incision infections, hematomas, thrombosis, and reoperation rates were recorded.

Results: The Delta group consistently showed lower mean ODI scores throughout the follow-up than UBE group, with significant differences at 2 weeks postoperative (P = 0.048), though they were not significant by 1 month (P = 0.124), 2 months (P = 0.821) and 3 months (P = 0.350). Operation times were shorter in the Delta group (P < 0.001). Hospitalization costs and intraoperative blood loss were slightly higher in the UBE group (P < 0.001). No significant differences were noted in the other secondary outcomes at various post-surgery intervals, such as VAS, EQ-5D, JOA scores, hospital stay duration and complications.

Conclusion: Both techniques are safe and effective when performed by experienced surgeons. Compared to UBE, Delta large-channel endoscopy can shorten surgery time and reduce blood loss, and more importantly, it promotes faster recovery of lumbar function in the early postoperative period.

Research registration unique identifying number (uin): Name of the registry: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry chictr.org.cn. ( http://www.chictr.org.cn/index.aspx ). Unique Identifying number or registration ID: ChiCTR2300076237. Hyperlink to your specific registration (must be publicly accessible and will be checked): https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=207 ,844.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Delta大通道内窥镜与单侧双门静脉内窥镜减压椎板切除术治疗腰椎管狭窄:一项前瞻性随机对照试验。
背景:Delta大通道内窥镜和单侧双门静脉内窥镜(UBE)是治疗腰椎管狭窄的重要微创技术,以其最小的组织损伤、清晰的显示和快速的恢复而闻名。然而,比较这些手术的严格对照研究很少,需要进一步研究各自的并发症和长期疗效。这项随机对照试验旨在比较他们的围手术期结果,重点关注术后恢复和并发症。方法:101例受试者随机分为Delta大通道内镜组(n = 50)和UBE组(n = 51)。主要指标为Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)评分和手术时间。次要指标包括VAS、EQ-5D、JOA评分、术中出血量、住院时间和费用。记录围手术期并发症,如硬脑膜撕裂、切口感染、血肿、血栓形成及再手术率。结果:Delta组在整个随访过程中ODI平均得分均低于UBE组,术后2周差异有统计学意义(P = 0.048), 1个月(P = 0.124)、2个月(P = 0.821)、3个月(P = 0.350)差异无统计学意义。结论:在经验丰富的外科医生的指导下,两种技术都是安全有效的。与UBE相比,Delta大通道内窥镜可以缩短手术时间,减少出血量,更重要的是促进术后早期腰椎功能更快恢复。研究注册唯一识别码:注册中心名称:中国临床试验注册中心chictr.org.cn。(http://www.chictr.org.cn/index.aspx)。唯一标识号或注册ID: ChiCTR2300076237。超链接到您的具体注册(必须公开访问,并将被检查):https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=207,844。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
7.70%
发文量
494
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research is an open access journal that encompasses all aspects of clinical and basic research studies related to musculoskeletal issues. Orthopaedic research is conducted at clinical and basic science levels. With the advancement of new technologies and the increasing expectation and demand from doctors and patients, we are witnessing an enormous growth in clinical orthopaedic research, particularly in the fields of traumatology, spinal surgery, joint replacement, sports medicine, musculoskeletal tumour management, hand microsurgery, foot and ankle surgery, paediatric orthopaedic, and orthopaedic rehabilitation. The involvement of basic science ranges from molecular, cellular, structural and functional perspectives to tissue engineering, gait analysis, automation and robotic surgery. Implant and biomaterial designs are new disciplines that complement clinical applications. JOSR encourages the publication of multidisciplinary research with collaboration amongst clinicians and scientists from different disciplines, which will be the trend in the coming decades.
期刊最新文献
Risk factors for mechanical complications in degenerative lumbar scoliosis with concomitant thoracolumbar kyphosis: does the selection of the upper instrumented vertebra matter? Current developments in robotic assistance technology for total knee arthroplasty: a comprehensive overview. Mechanism of hyperbaric oxygen therapy downregulating H-type angiogenesis in subchondral bone of knee osteoarthritis through the PHD2/HIF-1α pathway. Radiography may not be accurate in assessing acute ankle sprains in children. The patellar compression angle: a new, accurate diagnostic angle for lateral patellar compression syndrome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1