Minimally invasive surgical techniques for the therapy of far lateral disc herniation in middle-aged and elderly patients.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY Computer Assisted Surgery Pub Date : 2019-10-01 Epub Date: 2019-01-28 DOI:10.1080/24699322.2018.1557897
Weijian Ren, Yu Chen, Liangbi Xiang
{"title":"Minimally invasive surgical techniques for the therapy of far lateral disc herniation in middle-aged and elderly patients.","authors":"Weijian Ren, Yu Chen, Liangbi Xiang","doi":"10.1080/24699322.2018.1557897","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To examine the clinical results of different minimally invasive techniques for the therapy of far lateral disc herniation in middle-aged and elderly patients. An endoscopic approach (percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy; PELD), MIS-TLIF combined with contralateral translaminar screw (MIS-TLIF CTS), and MIS-TLIF combined with bilateral pedicle screws (MIS-TLIF BPS) were evaluated via a retrospective chart review. Data from 74 consecutive middle-aged and elderly patients with far lateral disc herniation were analyzed. All patients underwent surgery; 19 with PELD, 24 with MIS-TLIF CTS, and 31 with MIS-TLIF BPS. Clinical data included the length of the incision, duration of the operation, estimated blood loss, hospitalization time, operation cost, recurrence rate, and fusion rate. Preoperative and postoperative patient outcomes including the VAS, ODI scores and MacNab criteria were assessed and recorded. The mean follow-up time was 26.4 months (range from 14 to 46 months). Compared with the internal fixation groups, the length of the incision, duration of operation, estimated blood loss, and hospitalization time were obviously lower in the PELD group. The difference in operation cost among the three methods was statistically significant. The postoperative VAS scores for LBP and LP decreased significantly as compared with those recorded preoperatively. The postoperative ODI scores were lower than those recorded preoperatively. MacNab criteria rating excellent, good and fair results were in 27, 37 and 10 patients, respectively. Conclusion: PELD, MIS-TLIF CTS, and MIS-TLIF BPS are all effective minimally invasive techniques for the therapy of single segment far lateral lumbar disc herniation in middle-aged and elderly patients. PELD had a shorter operation time and less surgical trauma, being a less invasive and more economical method; however, there was no recurrence of disc herniation after fixation. Compared with MIS-TLIF BPS, MIS-TLIF CTS obtained a similar clinical effect and certain costs were saved.</p>","PeriodicalId":56051,"journal":{"name":"Computer Assisted Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computer Assisted Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24699322.2018.1557897","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2019/1/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

To examine the clinical results of different minimally invasive techniques for the therapy of far lateral disc herniation in middle-aged and elderly patients. An endoscopic approach (percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy; PELD), MIS-TLIF combined with contralateral translaminar screw (MIS-TLIF CTS), and MIS-TLIF combined with bilateral pedicle screws (MIS-TLIF BPS) were evaluated via a retrospective chart review. Data from 74 consecutive middle-aged and elderly patients with far lateral disc herniation were analyzed. All patients underwent surgery; 19 with PELD, 24 with MIS-TLIF CTS, and 31 with MIS-TLIF BPS. Clinical data included the length of the incision, duration of the operation, estimated blood loss, hospitalization time, operation cost, recurrence rate, and fusion rate. Preoperative and postoperative patient outcomes including the VAS, ODI scores and MacNab criteria were assessed and recorded. The mean follow-up time was 26.4 months (range from 14 to 46 months). Compared with the internal fixation groups, the length of the incision, duration of operation, estimated blood loss, and hospitalization time were obviously lower in the PELD group. The difference in operation cost among the three methods was statistically significant. The postoperative VAS scores for LBP and LP decreased significantly as compared with those recorded preoperatively. The postoperative ODI scores were lower than those recorded preoperatively. MacNab criteria rating excellent, good and fair results were in 27, 37 and 10 patients, respectively. Conclusion: PELD, MIS-TLIF CTS, and MIS-TLIF BPS are all effective minimally invasive techniques for the therapy of single segment far lateral lumbar disc herniation in middle-aged and elderly patients. PELD had a shorter operation time and less surgical trauma, being a less invasive and more economical method; however, there was no recurrence of disc herniation after fixation. Compared with MIS-TLIF BPS, MIS-TLIF CTS obtained a similar clinical effect and certain costs were saved.

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
治疗中老年远外侧椎间盘突出症的微创手术技术。
研究不同微创技术治疗中老年远外侧椎间盘突出症的临床效果。通过回顾性病历审查评估了内窥镜方法(经皮内窥镜腰椎间盘切除术;PELD)、MIS-TLIF 联合对侧椎板间螺钉术(MIS-TLIF CTS)和 MIS-TLIF 联合双侧椎弓根螺钉术(MIS-TLIF BPS)。研究分析了 74 名连续的远外侧椎间盘突出症中老年患者的数据。所有患者都接受了手术,其中19人接受了PELD手术,24人接受了MIS-TLIF CTS手术,31人接受了MIS-TLIF BPS手术。临床数据包括切口长度、手术时间、估计失血量、住院时间、手术费用、复发率和融合率。对患者术前和术后的结果进行了评估和记录,包括 VAS、ODI 评分和 MacNab 标准。平均随访时间为 26.4 个月(14 至 46 个月)。与内固定组相比,PELD 组的切口长度、手术时间、估计失血量和住院时间明显更短。三种方法的手术费用差异具有统计学意义。与术前相比,术后 LBP 和 LP 的 VAS 评分明显下降。术后 ODI 评分低于术前记录。按照 MacNab 标准评定,结果为优、良和一般的患者分别为 27、37 和 10 人。结论PELD、MIS-TLIF CTS和MIS-TLIF BPS都是治疗中老年单节段远外侧腰椎间盘突出症的有效微创技术。PELD 的手术时间更短,手术创伤更小,是一种创伤更小、更经济的方法;但固定后椎间盘突出症没有复发。与 MIS-TLIF BPS 相比,MIS-TLIF CTS 取得了相似的临床效果,并节省了一定的费用。
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
Computer Assisted Surgery
Computer Assisted Surgery Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: omputer Assisted Surgery aims to improve patient care by advancing the utilization of computers during treatment; to evaluate the benefits and risks associated with the integration of advanced digital technologies into surgical practice; to disseminate clinical and basic research relevant to stereotactic surgery, minimal access surgery, endoscopy, and surgical robotics; to encourage interdisciplinary collaboration between engineers and physicians in developing new concepts and applications; to educate clinicians about the principles and techniques of computer assisted surgery and therapeutics; and to serve the international scientific community as a medium for the transfer of new information relating to theory, research, and practice in biomedical imaging and the surgical specialties. The scope of Computer Assisted Surgery encompasses all fields within surgery, as well as biomedical imaging and instrumentation, and digital technology employed as an adjunct to imaging in diagnosis, therapeutics, and surgery. Topics featured include frameless as well as conventional stereotactic procedures, surgery guided by intraoperative ultrasound or magnetic resonance imaging, image guided focused irradiation, robotic surgery, and any therapeutic interventions performed with the use of digital imaging technology.
期刊最新文献
Ultrasound-based 3D bone modelling in computer assisted orthopedic surgery - a review and future challenges. Augmented reality technology shortens aneurysm surgery learning curve for residents. Feasibility of proton dosimetry overriding planning CT with daily CBCT elaborated through generative artificial intelligence tools. SwinD-Net: a lightweight segmentation network for laparoscopic liver segmentation. Risk prediction and analysis of gallbladder polyps with deep neural network.
×
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