Efficacy of Endoscopic Surgery in Management of Patients with Lumbar Canal Stenosis

A. Elwany, I. Zidan, A. Sultan
{"title":"Efficacy of Endoscopic Surgery in Management of Patients with Lumbar Canal Stenosis","authors":"A. Elwany, I. Zidan, A. Sultan","doi":"10.21608/ESJ.2018.18292","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Data: The treatment of lumbar stenosis has originally included extensive resections of posterior neural arch components. Moreover, wide muscular dissection and retraction is generally used to accomplish sufficient visualization. With the advancing noninvasive neuro-imaging modalities; the major component of neurological pressure typically occurs at the level of the interlaminar window. Microendoscopic decompressive laminotomies (MEDL) have now increased popularity among spine specialists for the treatment of lumbar canal stenosis. It has been developed from the unilateral hemilaminotomy technique.Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy of lumbar endoscopic decompression in patients of segmental lumbar canal stenosis from a unilateral skin incision.Study Design: A prospective clinical case study.Patients and Methods: A total of 30 patients 10 males and 20 females were operated in Alexandria Main University Hospital, during the period from January 2013 to June 2015. The degree of pain and disability were assessed pre-operatively using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), both for radicular pain and back pain (if present), and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). The length of the incision, the duration of surgery, the operative blood loss, and duration of hospital stay were calculated. Mean follow up period for patients was 38.5±18.2 months (Range, 36-48).Results: The mean age was 62.7±6.9 years. All patients had claudicating sciatica; 57% had bilateral sciatica, while 43 % had unilateral sciatica. 60% had low back pain. Only 3 patients (10%) had motor weakness preoperatively. 24 patients (80%) had single level affection, while 6 patients (20%) had double level affection. We operated totally on 36 segmental levels. There was a statistically significant reduction for the mean values of VAS both for radicular pain and back pain in the follow up period (P<0.001). Also, there was a statistically significant reduction for the ODI mean value in the follow up period (P<0.001). Operative blood loss was 109.5±63.2 ML. Mean operative time was 103.8±32.7 minutes. Mean duration of hospital stay was 1.5±0.6 days (Range, 1-3 days). We had two patients of intraoperative dural tears (7%) with no postoperative CSF leak occurred, two patients (7%) had superficial wound infection, no patients had deep wound infection or discitis, and no patients encountered of postoperative instability in the follow up period. Conclusion: Endoscopic surgery for bilateral decompression through a unilateral approach is a useful and effective procedure for treating patients with lumbar canal stenosis with encouraging results. (2018ESJ161)","PeriodicalId":11610,"journal":{"name":"Egyptian Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Egyptian Spine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21608/ESJ.2018.18292","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background Data: The treatment of lumbar stenosis has originally included extensive resections of posterior neural arch components. Moreover, wide muscular dissection and retraction is generally used to accomplish sufficient visualization. With the advancing noninvasive neuro-imaging modalities; the major component of neurological pressure typically occurs at the level of the interlaminar window. Microendoscopic decompressive laminotomies (MEDL) have now increased popularity among spine specialists for the treatment of lumbar canal stenosis. It has been developed from the unilateral hemilaminotomy technique.Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy of lumbar endoscopic decompression in patients of segmental lumbar canal stenosis from a unilateral skin incision.Study Design: A prospective clinical case study.Patients and Methods: A total of 30 patients 10 males and 20 females were operated in Alexandria Main University Hospital, during the period from January 2013 to June 2015. The degree of pain and disability were assessed pre-operatively using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), both for radicular pain and back pain (if present), and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). The length of the incision, the duration of surgery, the operative blood loss, and duration of hospital stay were calculated. Mean follow up period for patients was 38.5±18.2 months (Range, 36-48).Results: The mean age was 62.7±6.9 years. All patients had claudicating sciatica; 57% had bilateral sciatica, while 43 % had unilateral sciatica. 60% had low back pain. Only 3 patients (10%) had motor weakness preoperatively. 24 patients (80%) had single level affection, while 6 patients (20%) had double level affection. We operated totally on 36 segmental levels. There was a statistically significant reduction for the mean values of VAS both for radicular pain and back pain in the follow up period (P<0.001). Also, there was a statistically significant reduction for the ODI mean value in the follow up period (P<0.001). Operative blood loss was 109.5±63.2 ML. Mean operative time was 103.8±32.7 minutes. Mean duration of hospital stay was 1.5±0.6 days (Range, 1-3 days). We had two patients of intraoperative dural tears (7%) with no postoperative CSF leak occurred, two patients (7%) had superficial wound infection, no patients had deep wound infection or discitis, and no patients encountered of postoperative instability in the follow up period. Conclusion: Endoscopic surgery for bilateral decompression through a unilateral approach is a useful and effective procedure for treating patients with lumbar canal stenosis with encouraging results. (2018ESJ161)
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
内镜手术治疗腰椎管狭窄的疗效观察
背景资料:腰椎管狭窄症的治疗最初包括广泛切除后神经弓部件。此外,广泛的肌肉剥离和回缩通常用于实现充分的可视化。随着无创神经成像技术的发展;神经压力的主要成分通常发生在层间窗的水平上。显微内镜减压椎板切除术(MEDL)在脊椎专家中越来越受欢迎,用于治疗腰椎管狭窄症。它是由单侧半椎板切开术发展而来的。目的:评价单侧皮肤切口行腰椎内镜减压治疗节段性椎管狭窄的疗效。研究设计:前瞻性临床病例研究。患者和方法:2013年1月至2015年6月,共有30名患者在亚历山大主大学医院接受了手术,其中10名男性,20名女性。术前使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)评估疼痛和残疾程度,包括神经根疼痛和背痛(如果存在),以及奥斯韦斯特里残疾指数(ODI)。计算切口长度、手术时间、手术失血量和住院时间。患者的平均随访期为38.5±18.2个月(范围36-48)。结果:平均年龄62.7±6.9岁。所有患者均患有坐骨神经痛;57%患有双侧坐骨神经痛,43%患有单侧坐骨神经炎。60%的患者有腰痛。术前仅有3例(10%)患者出现运动无力。24例(80%)为单级情感,6例(20%)为双级情感。我们总共在36个分段层面上进行了手术。在随访期间,根痛和背痛的VAS平均值均有统计学意义的降低(P<0.001)。此外,在随访期间ODI平均值也有统计学意义的减少(P<001)。手术失血量为109.5±63.2 ML.平均手术时间为103.8±32.7分钟。平均住院时间为1.5±0.6天(1-3天)。我们有两名患者(7%)在术中硬膜撕裂,没有发生术后脑脊液泄漏,两名患者有浅表伤口感染,没有患者有深部伤口感染或椎间盘炎,也没有患者在随访期间遇到术后不稳定。结论:内镜下经单侧入路双侧减压是治疗腰椎管狭窄症的有效方法,效果令人鼓舞。(2018ESJ161)
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
3 weeks
期刊最新文献
Extremity Peripheral Nerve Injuries: Is There Any Role of Specialized Field Hospital in the Management of Low-Velocity Penetrating Peripheral Nerve Injuries? Short-Segment Posterior Fixation with Index Level Screws versus Long-Segment Posterior Fixation in Thoracolumbar Burst Fracture Awake Spine Surgery: Fad or Future? Pedicle Screw/Sublaminar Hook Fixation versus Pedicle Screw/Infraspinous Wire Fixation for Spondylolysis Repair: A Retrospective Comparative Study with MSCT Assessment Absence of the Musculocutaneous Nerve While Performing Nerve Transfer Surgery in a Patient with Brachial Plexus Injury, Rare Variant, and Review of Literature
×
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