医学
外科
围手术期
腰椎管狭窄症
Oswestry残疾指数
腰椎
椎管狭窄
腰椎
脊柱融合术
回顾性队列研究
跛行
骨科手术
神经根
腰痛
血管疾病
替代医学
病理
动脉疾病
作者
Zuoran Fan,Xiaolin Wu,Zhu Guo,Nana Shen,Bohua Chen,Hongfei Xiang
标识
DOI:10.1186/s12891-024-07287-3
摘要
Abstract Objective This study aims to compare the clinical effects and imaging data of patients who underwent endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Endo-TLIF) with those who received unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (ULIF). Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of 69 patients presenting with typical intermittent claudication and signs and symptoms indicative of unilateral lower extremity nerve root compression, meeting inclusion criteria between April 2022 and June 2022. Among the cohort, 35 patients underwent ULIF group, while 34 patients underwent Endo-TLIF group. We compared perioperative parameters, including intraoperative blood loss, duration of hospital stay, and operation time between the two groups. Pre-operative and post-operative changes in the height and cross-sectional area of the target intervertebral space were also compared between the groups. Finally, we evaluated bone graft size and interbody fusion rates at 6 and 12 months post-surgery using the Brantigan scoring system. Results The ULIF group had significantly shorter operative times compared to the Endo-TLIF group ( P < 0.05). Conversely, the Endo-TLIF group exhibited significantly shorter hospital stays compared to the ULIF group ( P < 0.05). However, there were no significant differences in intraoperative bleeding between the two groups ( P > 0.05). Furthermore, both groups exhibited postoperative increases in vertebral canal volume compared to baseline ( P < 0.05), with no significant difference in the change in the cross-sectional area of the target intervertebral space between the two surgical methods ( P > 0.05). Interbody fusion rates were comparable between the two groups at both 6 and 12 months after surgery ( P > 0.05). Lastly, the ULIF group had a significantly larger area of bone graft than the Endo-TLIF group ( P < 0.05). Conclusion In summary, the ULIF technique, as a novel spinal endoscopy approach, is a safer and more effective minimally invasive surgical method for addressing lumbar spinal stenosis and intervertebral disc herniation in patients. Both surgical methods have their own advantages and drawbacks. With the development of technology and related instruments, the limitations of both techniques can be mitigated for to a certain extent, and they can be applied by more doctors in diverse medical fields in the future.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI