腰椎间盘切除术的显微和内窥镜技术:系统回顾

Q4 Medicine Coluna/ Columna Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1590/s1808-185120222101246193
Renato Teixeira Conceição Júnior, Rui Nei de Araújo Santana Júnior
{"title":"腰椎间盘切除术的显微和内窥镜技术:系统回顾","authors":"Renato Teixeira Conceição Júnior, Rui Nei de Araújo Santana Júnior","doi":"10.1590/s1808-185120222101246193","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Objectives: To compare microdiscectomy (MD) and endoscopic interlaminar discectomy (EID) as methods for the surgical treatment of lumbar disc herniation, describing their efficiency in reducing hospitalization time, pain, and neurological deficit, and comparing the findings and the quality of studies that used the microscopic and endoscopic techniques. Methods: A systematic literature review that used the PRISMA protocol as a methodology. The search was conducted in the PUBMED/MEDLINE and The Cochrane Library databases, using publications from the last 5 years in Portuguese and English. After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria and validating the qualified studies via STROBE and CONSORT, there were a total of 16 studies for data compilation. Results: A sample of 1004 patients who underwent lumbar discectomy was obtained, 62% of whom were male, and 493 of whom underwent EID (49%) and 511 MD (51%). The mean patient age was 38.7 years and the predominant vertebral level operated was L5-S1 (64.8%). The EID had shorter surgical time (66.38 min) and hospitalization time (3.3 days), in addition to greater variation in the VAS LLLL score (5.38), while the MD presented greater variation in the VAS LUMBAR score (3.14). Conclusion: EID demonstrated efficacy like that of MD, given the similarity in the results obtained, in addition to non-inferiority in the reduction of pain and neurological deficit, and superiority in surgical and hospitalization times. Level of Evidence I; Systematic review .","PeriodicalId":40025,"journal":{"name":"Coluna/ Columna","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"THE MICROSCOPIC AND ENDOSCOPIC TECHNIQUES IN LUMBAR DISCECTOMY: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW\",\"authors\":\"Renato Teixeira Conceição Júnior, Rui Nei de Araújo Santana Júnior\",\"doi\":\"10.1590/s1808-185120222101246193\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Objectives: To compare microdiscectomy (MD) and endoscopic interlaminar discectomy (EID) as methods for the surgical treatment of lumbar disc herniation, describing their efficiency in reducing hospitalization time, pain, and neurological deficit, and comparing the findings and the quality of studies that used the microscopic and endoscopic techniques. Methods: A systematic literature review that used the PRISMA protocol as a methodology. The search was conducted in the PUBMED/MEDLINE and The Cochrane Library databases, using publications from the last 5 years in Portuguese and English. After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria and validating the qualified studies via STROBE and CONSORT, there were a total of 16 studies for data compilation. Results: A sample of 1004 patients who underwent lumbar discectomy was obtained, 62% of whom were male, and 493 of whom underwent EID (49%) and 511 MD (51%). The mean patient age was 38.7 years and the predominant vertebral level operated was L5-S1 (64.8%). The EID had shorter surgical time (66.38 min) and hospitalization time (3.3 days), in addition to greater variation in the VAS LLLL score (5.38), while the MD presented greater variation in the VAS LUMBAR score (3.14). Conclusion: EID demonstrated efficacy like that of MD, given the similarity in the results obtained, in addition to non-inferiority in the reduction of pain and neurological deficit, and superiority in surgical and hospitalization times. Level of Evidence I; Systematic review .\",\"PeriodicalId\":40025,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Coluna/ Columna\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Coluna/ Columna\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1590/s1808-185120222101246193\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Coluna/ Columna","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/s1808-185120222101246193","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目的:比较显微椎间盘切除术(MD)和内窥镜椎间椎间盘切除术(EID)作为腰椎间盘突出症的手术治疗方法,描述它们在减少住院时间、疼痛和神经功能障碍方面的效率,并比较使用显微和内窥镜技术的研究结果和质量。方法:采用PRISMA方案作为方法学的系统文献综述。检索是在PUBMED/MEDLINE和Cochrane图书馆数据库中进行的,使用了近5年的葡萄牙语和英语出版物。应用纳入和排除标准,并通过STROBE和CONSORT对符合条件的研究进行验证后,共纳入16项研究进行数据整理。结果:1004例行腰椎间盘切除术的患者,62%为男性,其中493例(49%)行EID, 511例(51%)行MD。患者平均年龄38.7岁,主要手术椎段为L5-S1(64.8%)。EID组手术时间较短(66.38 min),住院时间较短(3.3天),VAS LLLL评分差异较大(5.38),而MD组VAS腰椎评分差异较大(3.14)。结论:EID的疗效与MD相似,不仅在减轻疼痛和神经功能障碍方面不具有劣势,而且在手术和住院时间方面具有优势。证据等级I;系统评价。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
THE MICROSCOPIC AND ENDOSCOPIC TECHNIQUES IN LUMBAR DISCECTOMY: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
ABSTRACT Objectives: To compare microdiscectomy (MD) and endoscopic interlaminar discectomy (EID) as methods for the surgical treatment of lumbar disc herniation, describing their efficiency in reducing hospitalization time, pain, and neurological deficit, and comparing the findings and the quality of studies that used the microscopic and endoscopic techniques. Methods: A systematic literature review that used the PRISMA protocol as a methodology. The search was conducted in the PUBMED/MEDLINE and The Cochrane Library databases, using publications from the last 5 years in Portuguese and English. After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria and validating the qualified studies via STROBE and CONSORT, there were a total of 16 studies for data compilation. Results: A sample of 1004 patients who underwent lumbar discectomy was obtained, 62% of whom were male, and 493 of whom underwent EID (49%) and 511 MD (51%). The mean patient age was 38.7 years and the predominant vertebral level operated was L5-S1 (64.8%). The EID had shorter surgical time (66.38 min) and hospitalization time (3.3 days), in addition to greater variation in the VAS LLLL score (5.38), while the MD presented greater variation in the VAS LUMBAR score (3.14). Conclusion: EID demonstrated efficacy like that of MD, given the similarity in the results obtained, in addition to non-inferiority in the reduction of pain and neurological deficit, and superiority in surgical and hospitalization times. Level of Evidence I; Systematic review .
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Coluna/ Columna
Coluna/ Columna Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
32
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
ADOLESCENT IDIOPATHIC SCOLIOSIS: PROGRESSION OF UNTREATED CASES FUNCTIONALITY OF INDIVIDUALS WITH LOW BACK PAIN: CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY WITH ICF CORE SET ANESTHETIC BLOCK OF THE INTERTRANSVERSE SEPTUM, A PROSPECTIVE OBSERVATIONAL STUDY LUMBAR LORDOSIS VARIATION ACCORDING THE TYPE OF POSITIONER USED IN LUMBAR ARTHRODESIS CLINICAL PHOTOGRAPHIC AND RADIOLOGICAL CORRELATION IN PATIENTS WITH SCOLIOSIS
×
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