1
|
Sheppard WL, Getachew K, Zelalem T, Anderson D, Park DY. Global utilization of biportal spinal endoscopy: Case series on management of lumbar pathology in Soddo, Ethiopia. Int J Surg Case Rep 2024; 122:110046. [PMID: 39047398 PMCID: PMC11320474 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijscr.2024.110046] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/12/2024] [Revised: 07/11/2024] [Accepted: 07/16/2024] [Indexed: 07/27/2024] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Biportal spinal endoscopy is a safe and cost-effective methodology for the management of lumbar pathology in rural underserved hospitals that have standard orthopaedic arthroscopic equipment, but lack access to microscopy. METHODS This is a case series noting 1-year outcomes from 5 patients managed with biportal spinal endoscopy during an 11-day mission trip to Soddo, Ethiopia in November 2022. Surgical complications, postoperative assessments, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were retrospectively collected and analyzed. Surgical techniques and equipment utilized were shared with residents and faculty at the hospital. RESULTS Five Ethiopian patients (4:1, female:male) with no prior spine surgery history elected to undergo biportal surgery for the diagnoses of lumbar stenosis and disc herniation, averaging 31 years of age with Body-Mass-Indices (BMI) <35. Two patients underwent endoscopic discectomy, and three patients underwent endoscopic unilateral laminotomy and bilateral decompression (ULBD). There were no complications. No postoperative functional deficits, infections, readmissions, revisions, or wound dehiscences were noted at 12 months follow-up. VAS-back and VAS-leg scores improved to <2/10 for 80 % of patients. All patients returned to work/activities of daily living. No patients required postoperative pain management beyond the 2-week post-operative follow-up. CONCLUSION With these five patients, we found that biportal spinal endoscopy can be safely applied in rural hospital settings with limited resources. This supports biportal spinal endoscopy as a viable minimally invasive modality for the management of lumbar pathology. For hospitals with limited resources, but access to arthroscopic equipment, biportal spinal endoscopy is a feasible option. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- William L Sheppard
- Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Neurological Institute, Cleveland, OH, USA.
| | - Kaleab Getachew
- Soddo Christian Hospital, Division of Spine Surgery, Soddo, Ethiopia
| | - Temesgen Zelalem
- Soddo Christian Hospital, Division of Spine Surgery, Soddo, Ethiopia
| | - Duane Anderson
- Soddo Christian Hospital, Division of Spine Surgery, Soddo, Ethiopia.
| | - Don Young Park
- UC Irvine Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, UC Irvine School of Medicine, Orange, CA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Hwang YH, Kim JS, Chough CK, Cho J, Kim HS, Jang JW, Park CK, Lee CW, Park MK, Son SK, Park JY. Prospective comparative analysis of three types of decompressive surgery for lumbar central stenosis: conventional, full-endoscopic, and biportal endoscopic laminectomy. Sci Rep 2024; 14:19853. [PMID: 39191792 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-65923-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/25/2024] [Accepted: 06/25/2024] [Indexed: 08/29/2024] Open
Abstract
Conventional open laminectomy has long been considered one of the important surgical options for lumbar central stenosis owing to its positive outcomes. However, newer approaches have emerged as alternatives, including full-endoscopic and biportal endoscopic laminectomy. Therefore, a comparison of the outcomes that are associated with each of these surgical methods is warranted. This prospective multicenter trial, initiated in February 2019, compared the outcomes of three lumbar central stenosis surgical approaches: open laminectomy (OPEN), uniportal endoscopy (UNIPORT), and biportal endoscopy (BIPORT). Among 115 participants from seven centers, one-year follow-ups assessed laboratory, radiological, and clinical outcomes. Despite all groups showing adequate decompression and clinical improvement, the OPEN group exhibited less improvement in Visual analog scale (VAS) for back pain scores (p < 0.05) and significant postoperative increases in most laboratory markers. Furthermore, the OPEN group experienced a significant decrease in multifidus muscle cross-sectional area compared to endoscopic groups (p < 0.001). Each surgical techniques produced similar clinical outcomes and dural space expansion. However, endoscopic surgery was associated with better muscle preservation and better relief of back pain. Endoscopic surgery is a reasonable alternative to conventional laminectomy for treating lumbar central stenosis.This trial was registered on CRIS (Clinical Research Information Service, KCT0004355).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yoon Ha Hwang
- Department of Neurosurgery, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
- Department of Neurosurgery, Harrison Spinartus Hospital Chungdam, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Jin-Sung Kim
- Department of Neurosurgery, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Chung-Kee Chough
- Department of Neurosurgery, Yeouido St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Junsoo Cho
- Department of Neurosurgery, Yeouido St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Hyeun-Sung Kim
- Department of Neurosurgery, Harrison Spinartus Hospital Chungdam, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Jae-Won Jang
- Department of Neurosurgery, The Leon Wiltse Memorial Hospital, Spine Center, Suwon, Republic of Korea
| | - Choon-Keun Park
- Department of Neurosurgery, The Leon Wiltse Memorial Hospital, Spine Center, Suwon, Republic of Korea
| | - Chul-Woo Lee
- Department of Neurosurgery, Saehim Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Man-Kyu Park
- Department of Neurosurgery, Good GangAn Hospital, Busan, Republic of Korea
| | - Sang-Kyu Son
- Department of Neurosurgery, Good Moonhwa Hospital, Busan, Republic of Korea
| | - Jeong-Yoon Park
- Department of Neurosurgery, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Van Isseldyk F, Padilla-Lichtenberger F, Guiroy A, Asghar J, Quillo-Olvera J, Quillo-Reséndiz J, Hagel V. Endoscopic Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Disc Disease: A Narrative Review of Full-Endoscopic and Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery. World Neurosurg 2024; 188:e93-e107. [PMID: 38754549 DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2024.05.047] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/08/2024] [Accepted: 05/09/2024] [Indexed: 05/18/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Degenerative lumbar spine disease is the leading cause of disability and work absenteeism worldwide. Lumbar microdiscectomy became the standard treatment for herniated discs and stenotic disease. With the evolution of different techniques, endoscopic spinal surgery emerged to minimize the surgical footprint while providing at least non-inferior results. Currently, two different types of endoscopic spine procedures are dominating the surgical scenario: "Full-Endoscopic" (FE) and Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic" (UBE) Spine Surgery. The aim of this study is to describe and analyze their indications, their technical characteristicswithitsadvantagesanddisadvantagesofbothtechniquesandtheirfuture trends. METHODS We performed a narrative review of the most relevant articles published up to August 2023 through a Pub Med search. The search terms " FE Spine Surgery" and " UBE Spine Surgery" were used. The articles selected, were independently reviewed by 3 authors and 55 full text articles were reviewed. RESULTS The FE and UBE Spine Surgery techniques were described. The FE technique is performed with a monoportal access under constant saline irrigation. The FE comprises the transforaminal and the interlaminar approaches, and the indication depends from the pathology to treat, and still remains controversial. UBE can approach also the spine from a posterior, postero lateral,and para spinal route. It uses two different ports addressed to a target with continuous irrigation. The process of establishing these two portals is called triangulation. CONCLUSIONS FE and UBE spine surgery have demonstrated outcomes comparable to open surgery, minimizing complications and surgical footprint.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Facundo Van Isseldyk
- Hospital Privado de Rosario, Universidad de Rosario, Rosario City, Santa Fe, Argentina
| | | | - Alfredo Guiroy
- Elite Spine Health and Wellness, Mendoza City, Mendoza, Argentina
| | - Jahangir Asghar
- Elite Spine Health and Wellness, Mendoza City, Mendoza, Argentina
| | - Javier Quillo-Olvera
- Hospital Angeles Centro Sur, Neurosurgery Unit, Spine Center, Queretaro City, Mexico
| | | | - Vincent Hagel
- University Spine Center Zurich, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland; Spine Center, Asklepios Hospital Lindau, Lindau, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Lv S, Lv H, He Y, Xia X. Efficacy of Biportal Endoscopic Decompression for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Meta-Analysis With Single-Arm Analysis and Comparative Analysis With Microscopic Decompression and Uniportal Endoscopic Decompression. Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown) 2024; 27:158-173. [PMID: 38511959 DOI: 10.1227/ons.0000000000001097] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/13/2023] [Accepted: 12/26/2023] [Indexed: 03/22/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE Biportal endoscopic decompression is a minimally invasive surgical technique for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of biportal endoscopic decompression through both a single-arm analysis and a comparative analysis. METHODS A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify eligible studies reporting the outcomes of biportal endoscopic decompression for LSS. Single-arm analysis and comparisons with microscopic and uniportal endoscopic decompression were performed. Evaluated outcomes included visual analog scale (VAS) scores for back pain and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, operation time, estimated blood loss, duration of hospital stay, and adverse events. RESULTS Single-arm analysis demonstrated significant improvements in VAS back pain, VAS leg pain, and ODI scores after biportal endoscopic decompression at postoperative 1-day to 36-month follow-up (all P < .001), compared with preoperative levels. The pooled mean single-level operation time was 71.44 min, and the pooled mean hospital stay was 3.63 days. The overall adverse event rate was 4.0%, with dural tear being the most common complication (3.0%). Compared with microscopic decompression, biportal endoscopic decompression showed significantly lower VAS back pain at 1-month ( P < .001) and 6-month ( P < .001) follow-up; lower VAS leg pain at 1-month ( P = .045) follow-up; lower ODI scores at 3-month ( P < .001), 12-month ( P = .017), and >12-month ( P = .007) follow-up; lower estimated blood loss ( P = .003); and shorter hospital stay ( P < .001). Adverse event rates did not differ between the techniques. No significant differences were observed between biportal endoscopic and uniportal endoscopic decompression groups for most efficacy and safety outcomes. CONCLUSION Biportal endoscopic decompression emerges as a safe and effective alternative for LSS, presenting potential advantages over the microscopic technique and comparable efficacy with the uniportal endoscopic technique.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shuangwen Lv
- Department of Orthopedic Ward One, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Henan University of Science and Technology, Luoyang , Henan , China
| | - Haiwen Lv
- Department of Orthopedic Ward One, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Henan University of Science and Technology, Luoyang , Henan , China
| | - Yupeng He
- Department of Orthopedic Ward One, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Henan University of Science and Technology, Luoyang , Henan , China
| | - Xiansheng Xia
- Department of Orthopaedics, Dongguan Children's Hospital, Dongguan , Guangdong , China
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Kim JH, Kim YJ, Ryu KS, Kim JS. Comparison of the Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of Full-Endoscopic Laminotomy and Conventional Subtotal Laminectomy for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Global Spine J 2024; 14:1760-1770. [PMID: 36757395 PMCID: PMC11268293 DOI: 10.1177/21925682231155846] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/10/2023] Open
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN Randomized controlled trial. OBJECTIVE The primary objective of this study was to compare the short-term clinical and radiological outcomes of full-endoscopic lumbar laminotomy (FEL) with those of subtotal lumbar laminectomy (STL) for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). METHODS In this prospective randomized trial a total of 52 patients were enrolled from May 2016 to September 2021 after providing written informed consent. The authors investigated 45 patients who were followed up for more than 6 months. RESULTS There were significant improvements in visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores after the operation in both groups. The FEL group tended to have significantly shorter hospital stay. Interestingly, a statistically significant increase in postoperative lumbar lordosis and segmental angle was observed in the FEL group and both groups, respectively. Spondylolisthesis was exacerbated or newly developed in five of the 21 patients (24%) in the STL group. In contrast, improvement in spondylolisthesis was observed in two of the 24 patients (8%) in the FEL group. There were no complications that resulted in fatal sequelae and no significant difference in the complication rate. CONCLUSIONS The clinical results of FEL were similar to those of STL. In addition, the results of FEL were superior to those of STL in terms of a decrease in the postoperative length of stay and radiologic instability, such as iatrogenic spondylolisthesis. The results of this study indicate that FEL is a comparable surgical method to STL for LSS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jung-Hoon Kim
- Department of Neurosurgery, Seoul St. Mary’s Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Young-Jin Kim
- Department of Neurosurgery, Seoul St. Mary’s Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Kyeong-Sik Ryu
- Department of Neurosurgery, Seoul St. Mary’s Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Jin-Sung Kim
- Department of Neurosurgery, Seoul St. Mary’s Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Chen Z, Pei F. Learning Curve of Biportal Endoscopic Spinal Surgery: A Retrospective 2-Center Study. World Neurosurg 2024; 187:e543-e550. [PMID: 38679379 DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2024.04.123] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/27/2023] [Revised: 04/18/2024] [Accepted: 04/19/2024] [Indexed: 05/01/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (BESS) technique is a novel, useful, and minimally invasive therapeutic strategy for lumbar degenerative diseases, which has advantages over other surgical techniques. However, the degree of technical difficulty in learning BESS is controversial and not well established. This study aims to determine the learning curve of BESS technique through cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis. METHODS A total of 144 consecutive patients who underwent BESS with lumbar decompressive discectomy between 2017 and 2023 were included. A retrospective bicenter study was performed. RESULTS Three doctors with endoscopy experience employed the BESS technique for 51, 42, and 46 procedures, respectively. The CUSUM test of the 3 doctors showed adequate technical ability at the 45th, 41st, and 44th operations respectively. Two doctors without endoscopy experience gave up further use of BESS technique due to technical difficulties after initial attempt. The overall complication rates of the 3 surgeons using the BESS technique were 3.92% (n = 2), 6.82% (n = 3), and 2.17% (n = 1), respectively. CONCLUSIONS Our study demonstrated that BESS is an effective treatment, and the learning curves of BESS for lumbar discectomy using CUSUM analysis were 41 ∼ 45 cases in trainees with endoscopic experience. Endoscopic experience contributes to the learning curve of the BESS technique.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zhe Chen
- Department of Joint Surgery, Xi'an Aerospace General Hospital, Xi'an, China
| | - Fuqiang Pei
- Department of Joint Surgery, Xi'an Aerospace General Hospital, Xi'an, China.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Olson TE, Upfill-Brown A, Adejuyigbe B, Bhatia N, Lee YP, Hashmi S, Wu HH, Bow H, Park CW, Heo DH, Park DY. Does obesity and varying body mass index affect the clinical outcomes and safety of biportal endoscopic lumbar decompression? A comparative cohort study. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2024; 166:246. [PMID: 38831229 PMCID: PMC11147858 DOI: 10.1007/s00701-024-06110-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/15/2024] [Accepted: 05/02/2024] [Indexed: 06/05/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Endoscopic spine surgery has recently grown in popularity due to the potential benefits of reduced pain and faster recovery time as compared to open surgery. Biportal spinal endoscopy has been successfully applied to lumbar disc herniations and lumbar spinal stenosis. Obesity is associated with increased risk of complications in spine surgery. Few prior studies have investigated the impact of obesity and associated medical comorbidities with biportal spinal endoscopy. METHODS This study was a prospectively collected, retrospectively analyzed comparative cohort design. Patients were divided into cohorts of normal body weight (Bone Mass Index (BMI)18.0-24.9), overweight (BMI 25.0-29.9) and obese (BMI > 30.0) as defined by the World Health Organization (WHO). Patients underwent biportal spinal endoscopy by a single surgeon at a single institution for treatment of lumbar disc herniations and lumbar spinal stenosis. Demographic data, surgical complications, and patient-reported outcomes were analyzed. Statistics were calculated amongst treatment groups using analysis of variance and chi square where appropriate. Statistical significance was determined as p < 0.05. RESULTS Eighty-four patients were followed. 26 (30.1%) were normal BMI, 35 (41.7%) were overweight and 23 (27.4%) were obese. Patients with increasing BMI had correspondingly greater American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) scores. There were no significant differences in VAS Back, VAS Leg, and ODI scores, or postoperative complications among the cohorts. There were no cases of surgical site infections in the cohort. All cohorts demonstrated significant improvement up to 1 year postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrates that obesity is not a risk factor for increased perioperative complications with biportal spinal endoscopy and has similar clinical outcomes and safety profile as compared to patients with normal BMI. Biportal spinal endoscopy is a promising alternative to traditional techniques to treat common lumbar pathology.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas E Olson
- UCLA Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Alexander Upfill-Brown
- UCLA Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Babapelumi Adejuyigbe
- UCLA Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Nitin Bhatia
- UC Irvine Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, UC Irvine School of Medicine, 101 The City Drive South, Pavillion III, Building 29A, Orange, CA, 92868, USA
| | - Yu-Po Lee
- UC Irvine Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, UC Irvine School of Medicine, 101 The City Drive South, Pavillion III, Building 29A, Orange, CA, 92868, USA
| | - Sohaib Hashmi
- UC Irvine Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, UC Irvine School of Medicine, 101 The City Drive South, Pavillion III, Building 29A, Orange, CA, 92868, USA
| | - Hao-Hua Wu
- UC Irvine Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, UC Irvine School of Medicine, 101 The City Drive South, Pavillion III, Building 29A, Orange, CA, 92868, USA
| | - Hansen Bow
- UC Irvine Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, UC Irvine School of Medicine, 101 The City Drive South, Pavillion III, Building 29A, Orange, CA, 92868, USA
| | - Cheol Wung Park
- Department of Neurosurgery, Woori Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Dong Hwa Heo
- Department of Neurosurgery, Harrison Spinartus Hospital Chungdam, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Don Young Park
- UC Irvine Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, UC Irvine School of Medicine, 101 The City Drive South, Pavillion III, Building 29A, Orange, CA, 92868, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Feng Z, Zhao Z, Cui W, Meng X, Hai Y. Unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy versus microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL : OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE EUROPEAN SPINE SOCIETY, THE EUROPEAN SPINAL DEFORMITY SOCIETY, AND THE EUROPEAN SECTION OF THE CERVICAL SPINE RESEARCH SOCIETY 2024; 33:2139-2153. [PMID: 38388729 DOI: 10.1007/s00586-023-08116-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/03/2023] [Revised: 11/16/2023] [Accepted: 12/21/2023] [Indexed: 02/24/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE This study aimed to compare unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy (UBED) with microdiscectomy (MD) for treating lumbar disk herniation (LDH). METHODS A comprehensive literature search was conducted in the Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, CNKI, and Web of Science databases from database inception to April 2023 to identify studies comparing UBED and MD for treating LDH. This study evaluated the visual analog scale (VAS) score, Oswestry disability index (ODI), Macnab scores, operation time, estimated blood loss, hospital stay, and complications, estimated blood loss, visual analog scale (VAS) score, Oswestry disability index (ODI), and Macnab scores at various pre- and post-surgery stages. The meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software. RESULTS The meta-analysis included 9 distinct studies with a total of 1001 patients. The VAS scores for low back pain showed no significant differences between the groups at postoperative 1-3 months (P = 0.09) and final follow-up (P = 0.13); however, the UBED group had lower VAS scores at postoperative 1-3 days (P = 0.02). There were no significant differences in leg pain VAS scores at baseline (P = 0.05), postoperative 1-3 days (P = 0.24), postoperative 1-3 months (P = 0.78), or at the final follow-up (P = 0.43). ODI comparisons revealed no significant differences preoperatively (P = 0.83), at postoperative 1 week (P = 0.47), or postoperative 1-3 months (P = 0.13), and the UBED group demonstrated better ODI at the final follow-up (P = 0.03). The UBED group also exhibited a shorter mean operative time (P = 0.03), significantly shorter hospital stay (P < 0.00001), and less estimated blood loss (P = 0.0002). Complications and modified MacNab scores showed no significant differences between the groups (P = 0.56 and P = 0.05, respectively). CONCLUSION The evidence revealed no significant differences in efficacy between UBED and MD for LDH treatment. However, UBED may offer potential benefits such as shorter hospital stays, lower estimated blood loss, and comparable complication rates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zihe Feng
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Gongti South Rd, No. 8, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100020, China
| | - Zhiheng Zhao
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Gongti South Rd, No. 8, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100020, China
| | - Wei Cui
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Gongti South Rd, No. 8, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100020, China
| | - Xianglong Meng
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Gongti South Rd, No. 8, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100020, China.
| | - Yong Hai
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Gongti South Rd, No. 8, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100020, China.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Chin BZ, Yong JH, Wang E, Sim SI, Lin S, Wu PH, Hey HWD. Full-endoscopic versus microscopic spinal decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review & meta-analysis. Spine J 2024; 24:1022-1033. [PMID: 38190892 DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2023.12.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/26/2023] [Revised: 11/22/2023] [Accepted: 12/27/2023] [Indexed: 01/10/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND CONTEXT Symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis is routinely treated with spinal decompression surgery, with an increasing trend towards minimally invasive techniques. Endoscopic decompression has emerged as a technique which minimizes approach-related morbidity while achieving similar clinical outcomes to conventional open or microscopic approaches. PURPOSE To assess the safety and efficacy of endoscopic versus microscopic decompression for treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. STUDY DESIGN Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS A systematic review on randomized and nonrandomized studies comparing endoscopic versus microscopic decompression was conducted, in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Treatment effects were computed using pairwise random-effects meta-analysis. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk-of-bias and ROBINS-I tools for randomized and nonrandomized trials respectively. Quality of the overall body of evidence was appraised using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. RESULTS A total of 19 primary references comprising 1,997 patients and 2,132 spinal levels were included. Endoscopic decompression was associated with significantly reduced intraoperative blood-loss (weighted mean differences [WMD]=-33.29 mL, 95% CI:-51.80 to -14.78, p=.0032), shorter duration of hospital stay (WMD=-1.79 days, 95% CI: -2.63 to 0.95, p=.001), rates of incidental durotomy (RR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.43 to 0.91, p=.0184) and surgical site infections (RR=0.23, 95% CI: 0.10 to-0.51, p=.001), and a nonsignificant trend towards less back pain, leg pain, and better functional outcomes compared to its microscopic counterpart up to 2-year follow up. CONCLUSIONS Endoscopic and microscopic decompression are safe and effective techniques for treatment of symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis. Prospective studies of larger power considering medium to long-term outcomes and rates of iatrogenic instability are warranted to compare potential alignment changes and destabilization from either techniques.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brian Zhaojie Chin
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, National University Hospital, 1E Kent Ridge Rd, 119228, Singapore; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, NUHS Tower Block Level 10, 1E Kent Ridge Rd, 119228, Singapore.
| | - Jung Hahn Yong
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, NUHS Tower Block Level 10, 1E Kent Ridge Rd, 119228, Singapore
| | - Eugene Wang
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, NUHS Tower Block Level 10, 1E Kent Ridge Rd, 119228, Singapore
| | - Seth Ian Sim
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, National University Hospital, 1E Kent Ridge Rd, 119228, Singapore
| | - Shuxun Lin
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Ng Teng Fong General Hospital, 1 Jurong East St 21, 609606, Singapore; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, NUHS Tower Block Level 10, 1E Kent Ridge Rd, 119228, Singapore
| | - Pang Hung Wu
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Ng Teng Fong General Hospital, 1 Jurong East St 21, 609606, Singapore
| | - Hwee Weng Dennis Hey
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, National University Hospital, 1E Kent Ridge Rd, 119228, Singapore; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, NUHS Tower Block Level 10, 1E Kent Ridge Rd, 119228, Singapore
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Zhang J, Yan R, Xu S, Shao B, Dou Y. Short-term lumbar disc and lumbar stability changes of one-hole split endoscope technique treatment of spinal stenosis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2024; 25:325. [PMID: 38659005 PMCID: PMC11040931 DOI: 10.1186/s12891-024-07443-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/26/2023] [Accepted: 04/15/2024] [Indexed: 04/26/2024] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Investigating the early biomechanical effects of the one-hole split endoscope (OSE) technique on lumbar spine after decompression surgery. METHODS A retrospective analysis was conducted on 66 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) who underwent OSE technique surgery at the affiliated hospital of Binzhou Medical University from September 2021 to September 2022. The patients had complete postoperative follow-up records. The mean age was (51.73 ± 12.42) years, including 33 males and 33 females. The preoperative and postoperative imaging data were analyzed, including disc height (DH), foraminal height (FH), lumbar lordosis angle (LLA), changes in disc angle, anterior-posterior translation distance, and lumbar intervertebral disc Pfirrmann grading. The visual analogue scale (VAS) was applied to evaluate the severity of preoperative, postoperative day 1, postoperative 3 months, and final follow-up for back and leg pain. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) was applied to assess the functionality at all the listed time points. The modified MacNab criteria were applied to evaluate the clinical efficacy at the final follow-up. RESULTS In 66 patients, there were statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) in DH and FH at the affected segments compared to preoperative values, whereas no significant differences (p > 0.05) were found in DH and FH at the adjacent upper segments compared to preoperative values. There was no statistically significant difference in the LLA compared to preoperative values (p > 0.05). Both the affected segments and adjacent upper segments showed statistically significant differences in Pfirrmann grading compared to preoperative values (p < 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in the changes in disc angle or anterior-posterior translation distance in the affected or adjacent segments compared to preoperative values (p > 0.05). The VAS scores for back and leg pain, as well as the ODI, significantly improved at all postoperative time points compared to preoperative values. Among the comparisons at different time points, the differences were statistically significant (p < 0.05). The clinical efficacy was evaluated at the final follow-up using the modified MacNab criteria, with 51 cases rated as excellent, 8 cases as good, and 7 cases as fair, resulting in an excellent-good rate of 89.39%. CONCLUSIONS The OSE technique, as a surgical option for decompression in the treatment of LSS, has no significant impact on lumbar spine stability in the early postoperative period. However, it does have some effects on the lumbar intervertebral discs, which may lead to a certain degree of degeneration.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jinghe Zhang
- Department of Spine Surgery, Binzhou Medical University Hospital, No. 661, Huanghe Er Road, Binzhou, Shandong, 256603, China
| | - Ruqi Yan
- Department of Spine Surgery, Binzhou Medical University Hospital, No. 661, Huanghe Er Road, Binzhou, Shandong, 256603, China
| | - Shidong Xu
- Department of Spine Surgery, Central Hospital of Zibo, No.54, Communist Youth League West Road, Zibo, Shandong, 255020, China
| | - Bin Shao
- Department of Spine Surgery, Binzhou Medical University Hospital, No. 661, Huanghe Er Road, Binzhou, Shandong, 256603, China
| | - Yongfeng Dou
- Department of Spine Surgery, Binzhou Medical University Hospital, No. 661, Huanghe Er Road, Binzhou, Shandong, 256603, China.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Patel K, Harikar MM, Venkataram T, Chavda V, Montemurro N, Assefi M, Hussain N, Yamamoto V, Kateb B, Lewandrowski KU, Umana GE. Is Minimally Invasive Spinal Surgery Superior to Endoscopic Spine Surgery in Postoperative Radiologic Outcomes of Lumbar Spine Degenerative Disease? A Systematic Review. J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg 2024; 85:182-191. [PMID: 36746397 DOI: 10.1055/a-2029-2694] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Minimally invasive spinal surgery (ESS) are both well-established surgical techniques for lumbar spinal stenosis; however, there is limited literature comparing the efficacy of the two techniques with respect to radiologic decompression data. METHODS In this review, PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scopus databases were systematically searched from inception until July 2022 for studies that reported the radiologic outcomes of endoscopic and minimally invasive approaches for decompressive spinal surgery, namely, the spinal canal area, neural foraminal area, and neural foraminal heights. RESULTS Of the 378 articles initially retrieved using MeSH and keyword search, 9 studies reporting preoperative and postoperative spinal areas and foraminal areas and heights were finally included in our review. Of the total 581 patients, 391 (67.30%) underwent MISS and 190 (32.70%) underwent ESS. The weighted mean difference between the spinal canal diameter in pre- and postoperative conditions was 56.64 ± 7.11 and 79.52 ± 21.31 mm2 in the MISS and ESS groups, respectively. ESS was also associated with a higher mean difference in the foraminal area postoperatively (72 ± 1 vs. 35.81 ± 11.3 mm2 in the MISS and ESS groups, respectively), but it was comparable to MISS in terms of the foraminal height (0.32 ± 0.037 vs. 0.29 ± 0.03 cm in the MISS and endoscopic groups, respectively). CONCLUSIONS Compared with MISS, ESS was associated with improved radiologic parameters, including spinal canal area and neural foraminal area in the lumbar spinal segments. Both techniques led to the same endpoint of neural decompression when starting with a more severe compression. However, the present data do not allow the correlation of the radiographic results with the related clinical outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kashyap Patel
- Baroda Medical College, India, Vadodara, Gujarat, India
- Society for Brain Mapping & Therapeutics (SBMT), Los Angeles, California, United States
| | | | - Tejas Venkataram
- Society for Brain Mapping & Therapeutics (SBMT), Los Angeles, California, United States
- Department of Neurosurgery, Cannizzaro Hospital, Trauma Center, Gamma Knife Center, Catania, Italy
| | - Vishal Chavda
- Department of Pathology, Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford University Medical Center, San Francisco, California, United States
- Department of Medicine, Multispeciality, Trauma and ICCU Center, Sardar Hospital, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India
| | - Nicola Montemurro
- Department of Neurosurgery, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Pisana (AOUP), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Marjan Assefi
- University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Greensboro, North Carolina, United States
| | - Namath Hussain
- Department of Neurosurgery, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, California, United States
| | - Vicky Yamamoto
- University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine, The University of Southern California Caruso Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Los Angeles, California, United States
- University of Southern California-Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, California, United States
- Brain Mapping Foundation (BMF), Los Angeles, California, United States
| | - Babak Kateb
- Brain Mapping Foundation (BMF), Los Angeles, California, United States
- Brain Technology and Innovation Park, Los Angeles, California, United States
| | - Kai-Uwe Lewandrowski
- Center for Advanced Spine Care of Southern Arizona and Surgical Institute of Tucson, Tucson, Arizona, United States
| | - Giuseppe E Umana
- Department of Neurosurgery, Cannizzaro Hospital, Trauma Center, Gamma Knife Center, Catania, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Burkett D, Brooks N. Advances and Challenges of Endoscopic Spine Surgery. J Clin Med 2024; 13:1439. [PMID: 38592293 PMCID: PMC10932008 DOI: 10.3390/jcm13051439] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2024] [Revised: 02/24/2024] [Accepted: 02/29/2024] [Indexed: 04/10/2024] Open
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to review the data supporting current endoscopic surgical techniques for the spine and the potential challenges and future of the field. The origins of endoscopic spine surgery can be traced back many decades, with many important innovations throughout its development. It can be applied to all levels of the spine, with many robust trials supporting its clinical outcomes. Continued clinical research is needed to explore its expanding indications. Although the limitations of starting an endoscopic program can be justified by its cost effectiveness and positive societal impact, challenges facing its widespread adoption are still present. As more residency and fellowship programs include endoscopy as part of their spine training, it will become more prevalent in hospitals in the United States. Technological advancements in spine surgery will further propel and enhance endoscopic techniques as they become an integral part of a spine surgeon's repertoire.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Nathaniel Brooks
- Neurosurgery Department, University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics, Madison, WI 53792, USA;
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Wu T, Liu D, Meng F, Lu JH, Chen YF, Fan Z. Awake Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Decompression Under Local Anesthesia for Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis in the Elderly: A Feasibility Study with Technique Note. Clin Interv Aging 2024; 19:41-50. [PMID: 38204961 PMCID: PMC10778199 DOI: 10.2147/cia.s443792] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/09/2023] [Accepted: 01/02/2024] [Indexed: 01/12/2024] Open
Abstract
Purpose Here, we introduce a novel strategy of awake unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) decompression, which applies conscious sedation combined with stepwise local anesthesia (LA) as an alternative to general anesthesia (GA). The study aims to evaluate the feasibility of awake UBE decompression for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS) in elderly patients. Patients and Methods This retrospective study included 31 consecutive patients who received awake UBE decompression for DLSS in our institution from January 2021 to March 2022. Clinical results were evaluated using patient-reported outcomes measures (PROM) including visual analog scale for leg pain (VAS-LP), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and modified MacNab criteria. The anesthesia effectiveness and intraoperative experience were evaluated by intraoperative VAS and satisfaction rating system. Results UBE decompression was successfully performed in all patients under LA combined with conscious sedation. 26 (83.9%) patients rated the intraoperative experience as satisfactory (excellent or good) and 5 (16.1%) as fair. The mean intraoperative VAS was 3.41±1.26. The VAS and ODI at each follow-up stage after surgery were significantly improved compared to preoperative scores (p < 0.01). At the last follow-up, 28 patients (90.3%) classified the surgical outcome as good or excellent, and 3 (9.7%) as fair. There were no serious complications or adverse reactions observed in the study. Conclusion Our preliminary results suggest that awake UBE decompression is a feasible and promising alternative for elderly patients with DLSS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tong Wu
- Department of Orthopedics, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, People’s Republic of China
| | - Da Liu
- Department of Orthopedics, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, People’s Republic of China
| | - Fanhe Meng
- Department of Orthopedics, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, People’s Republic of China
| | - Jing-han Lu
- Department of Orthopedics, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, People’s Republic of China
| | - Yi-feng Chen
- Department of Orthopedics, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, People’s Republic of China
| | - Zheng Fan
- Department of Orthopedics, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, People’s Republic of China
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Sang D, Guo J, Meng H, Zhang L, Sang H. Global Trends and Hotspots of Minimally Invasive Surgery in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Bibliometric Analysis. J Pain Res 2024; 17:117-132. [PMID: 38196967 PMCID: PMC10775802 DOI: 10.2147/jpr.s440723] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/20/2023] [Accepted: 12/18/2023] [Indexed: 01/11/2024] Open
Abstract
Objective The popularity of minimally invasive surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) has been steadily increasing worldwide. This study aims to conduct a comprehensive bibliometric analysis to identify global trends and hotspots in the research related to this surgical approach. Methods Select articles related to the field that were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) between January 1, 1993 and December 31, 2022. Visualization of networks and in-depth bibliometric analyses, including the number of publications, countries/regions, institutions, journals, authors, keywords, and references, were conducted using VOSviewer and CiteSpace software. Results A total of 1197 papers were identified over a three-decade period, with the highest production year being 2022, which saw 171 papers published. The most prolific countries/regions were the United States (279) and Harvard Medical School (59). Among journals, Spine (3289 citations) was the most cited, while World Neurosurgery (98 publications) had the highest number of publications. Lewandrowski, Kai-Uwe (29 publications) wrote the most articles, and Ahn, Y (239 citations) ranked first among cited authors. The most frequently used keyword was "discectomy", but recent years have shown a strong emergence of keywords such as "microendoscopic decompressive laminotomy", "foraminotomy" and "classification". Conclusion The United States and China have emerged as leaders in the field of minimally invasive surgery for LSS. Endoscopic spinal surgery is recognized as a critical approach, with ongoing research focused on indications, potential complications, minimally invasive anatomical approaches, and outcomes. Furthermore, there is a strong emphasis on optimizing the surgical process, which has become a trending and hot spot in current research. The improvement of surgical techniques is at the forefront of advancements in this field.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dacheng Sang
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Wannan Medical College (Yijishan Hospital of Wannan Medical College), Wannan Medical College, Wuhu, Anhui, 241001, People’s Republic of China
| | - Jinyang Guo
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Chifeng Clinical Medical College of Inner Mongolia Minzu University, Chifeng, Inner Mongolia, 024000, People’s Republic of China
| | - Hanlu Meng
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Chifeng Clinical Medical College of Inner Mongolia Minzu University, Chifeng, Inner Mongolia, 024000, People’s Republic of China
| | - Luofei Zhang
- Department of Clinical Pharmacology, College of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100000, People’s Republic of China
| | - Hongpeng Sang
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Chifeng University, Chifeng, Inner Mongolia, 024000, People’s Republic of China
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Lee KH, Kim GL, Park J, Lee HB, Hong SY, Kim TH. Retinal hemorrhage and transient consciousness disturbance after biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomy: A case report and literature review. J Orthop Sci 2023; 28:1450-1455. [PMID: 34083088 DOI: 10.1016/j.jos.2021.04.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/10/2020] [Revised: 04/05/2021] [Accepted: 04/20/2021] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Keun-Ho Lee
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, College of Medicine, Hallym University, Kangdong Sacred Heart Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
| | - Gab-Lae Kim
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, College of Medicine, Hallym University, Kangdong Sacred Heart Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Jin Park
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, College of Medicine, Hallym University, Kangdong Sacred Heart Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Hyo Beom Lee
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, College of Medicine, Hallym University, Kangdong Sacred Heart Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Sung Yup Hong
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, College of Medicine, Hallym University, Kangdong Sacred Heart Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Tae Ho Kim
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, College of Medicine, Hallym University, Kangdong Sacred Heart Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Meng H, Su N, Lin J, Fei Q. Comparative efficacy of unilateral biportal endoscopy and micro-endoscopic discectomy in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Orthop Surg Res 2023; 18:814. [PMID: 37907922 PMCID: PMC10619222 DOI: 10.1186/s13018-023-04322-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/14/2023] [Accepted: 10/25/2023] [Indexed: 11/02/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Given the inconclusive literature on operative time, pain relief, functional outcomes, and complications, this meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopy (UBE) and Micro-Endoscopic Discectomy (MED) in treating Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis (DLSS). METHODS A thorough literature search was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines and based on the PICO framework. The study interrogated four primary databases-PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library-on August 16, 2023, without time restrictions. The search employed a strategic selection of keywords and was devoid of language barriers. Studies were included based on strict criteria, such as the diagnosis, surgical intervention types, and specific outcome measures. Quality assessment was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and statistical analysis was executed through Stata version 17. RESULTS The meta-analysis incorporated 9 articles out of an initial yield of 1,136 potential studies. Considerable heterogeneity was observed in surgical duration, but no statistically significant difference was identified (MD = - 2.11, P = 0.56). For VAS scores assessing lumbar and leg pain, UBE was statistically superior to MED (MD = - 0.18, P = 0.013; MD = - 0.15, P = 0.006, respectively). ODI scores demonstrated no significant difference between the two surgical methods (MD = - 0.57, P = 0.26). UBE had a lower incidence of complications compared to those receiving MED (OR = 0.54, P = 0.036). CONCLUSIONS UBE and MED exhibited comparable surgical durations and disability outcomes as measured by ODI. However, UBE demonstrated superior efficacy in alleviating lumbar and leg pain based on VAS scores. The findings present an intricate evaluation of the two surgical interventions for DLSS, lending valuable insights for clinical decision-making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hai Meng
- Department of Orthopedics, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, No 95, Yong'an Road, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100050, People's Republic of China
| | - Nan Su
- Department of Orthopedics, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, No 95, Yong'an Road, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100050, People's Republic of China
| | - Jisheng Lin
- Department of Orthopedics, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, No 95, Yong'an Road, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100050, People's Republic of China
| | - Qi Fei
- Department of Orthopedics, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, No 95, Yong'an Road, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100050, People's Republic of China.
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Zhu C, Zhang Y, Sun S, Shao R, Liang J, Cheng W, Pan H, Zhang W. A case report: Unilateral biportal endoscopic revision for adjacent segmental disease: Case presentations and literature review. Medicine (Baltimore) 2023; 102:e35466. [PMID: 37800800 PMCID: PMC10552958 DOI: 10.1097/md.0000000000035466] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/15/2023] [Accepted: 09/13/2023] [Indexed: 10/07/2023] Open
Abstract
RATIONALE Biportal endoscopic revision surgery for adjacent segmental disease (ASD) after lumbar arthrodesis is seldomly reported. Herein, we present 3 cases of ASD with radiculopathy wherein satisfactory results were obtained using unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) decompression. PATIENT CONCERNS Case 1 was of a 56-year-old male who presented with a chief complaint of Intermittent claudication since 2-year. Case 2 involved a 78-year-old female who was admitted to the hospital with a chief complaint of radiating pain and weakness in the left leg for at least 1 year. Case 3 was a 67-year-old woman who visited our hospital because of radiating leg pain for 5 months. All the cases had a history of L4 to L5 lumbar interbody fusion surgery. DIAGNOSES Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging showed the spinal epidural lipomatosis at the L3 to L4 level in case 1, the up-migrated lumbar disc herniation at L3 to L4 level in case 2 and unilateral foraminal stenosis at the L5 to S1 level in case 3. INTERVENTIONS Under UBE guidance, the ipsilateral approach was used to treat adjacent lumbar stenosis caused by spinal epidural lipomatosis. The contralateral approach was used to remove the up-migrated herniated disc. The paraspinal approach was applied to decompress the foraminal stenosis. OUTCOMES Postoperative parameters were improved clinically, and nerve roots were decompressed radiologically. No complications were developed. LESSONS UBE revision surgery showed a favorable clinical and radiological result without complications and may be a safe and effective alternative technique for ASD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chengyue Zhu
- Department of Orthopaedics, Hangzhou Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital Affiliated to Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, China
| | - Yujun Zhang
- Hangzhou School of Clinical Medicine, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, China
| | - Susu Sun
- Department of Orthopaedics, Hangzhou Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital Affiliated to Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, China
| | - Rongxue Shao
- Department of Orthopaedics, Hangzhou Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital Affiliated to Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, China
| | - Jiaming Liang
- Department of Orthopaedics, Hangzhou Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital Affiliated to Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, China
| | - Wei Cheng
- Department of Orthopaedics, Hangzhou Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital Affiliated to Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, China
| | - Hao Pan
- Department of Orthopaedics, Hangzhou Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital Affiliated to Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, China
| | - Wei Zhang
- Department of Orthopaedics, Hangzhou Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital Affiliated to Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, China
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Lee J, Ham DW, Song KS. A Beginner's Perspective on Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery in Single-Level Lumbar Decompression: A Comparative Study with a Microscopic Surgery. Clin Orthop Surg 2023; 15:793-799. [PMID: 37811519 PMCID: PMC10551688 DOI: 10.4055/cios22331] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/13/2022] [Revised: 01/29/2023] [Accepted: 03/01/2023] [Indexed: 10/10/2023] Open
Abstract
Background The application of biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (BESS) in spine surgery is increasing. However, the clinical results of related studies have been inconsistent. In this study, the perioperative and clinical outcomes of two techniques in single-level lumbar decompression surgery were compared using the perspective of a spine surgeon experienced in microscopic surgery but inexperienced in BESS. Methods This is a retrospective study performed with prospectively collected data. From April 2019, 50 consecutive patients who underwent a single-level lumbar decompression surgery with BESS were evaluated. Additionally, the data of 150 consecutive patients who underwent the same microscopic surgery before April 2019 were collected. We performed 1 : 1 ratio propensity score matching for these two groups to adjust for baseline variables. The postoperative patient-reported outcome measures included the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and numeric rating scale for the back and leg preoperatively and at 6 months after surgery. The laboratory data (C-reactive protein [CRP, mg/L] and hemoglobin [Hb, g/dL]) were measured preoperatively and 3 times (1, 2, and 3 or 4 days) postoperatively. In these periods, the peak and lowest CRP and Hb concentrations were evaluated. The perioperative outcomes, operation time (from skin incision to dressing), length of hospital stay, drainage (for 24 hours after surgery), and surgery-related complications were also evaluated. Results Forty-seven patients (27 men and 20 women) were included in each group. The postoperative 6-month ODI was significantly lower in the BESS group than in the microscope group (6.90 ± 5.98 vs. 11.54 ± 9.70). The peak CRP concentration (16.63 ± 19.41 vs. 42.40 ± 37.73, p < 0.001) and CRP increment (peak CRP minus preoperative CRP, 14.69 ± 19.47 vs. 40.71 ± 37.32, p < 0.001) were significantly higher in the microscope group. Operation time (83.72 ± 35.71 vs. 70.27 ± 23.24, p = 0.047) was significantly longer in the BESS group. Surgery-related complications were found in 6 and 3 cases in the BESS group (3 revisions, 2 dural tears, and 1 conversion to open surgery) and microscope group (2 revisions and 1 hematoma), respectively. Conclusions BESS as a new technique resulted in satisfying short-term outcomes. It was a well-tolerated option for surgical treatment of single-level lumbar degenerative disease. The relatively high incidence of recurrence at the index level and incidental dural tears should be considered for surgeons new to BESS; however, these were manageable complications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jeongik Lee
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Chung-Ang University Gwangmyeong Hospital, Chung-Ang University College of Medicine, Gwangmyeong, Korea
| | - Dae-Woong Ham
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Chung-Ang University Hospital, Chung-Ang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Kwang-Sup Song
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Chung-Ang University Hospital, Chung-Ang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Kang TH, Kim WJ, Lee JH. Efficacy of the erector spinae plane block with sedation for unilateral biportal endoscopic spine surgery and comparison with other anesthetic methods. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2023; 165:2651-2663. [PMID: 37278922 DOI: 10.1007/s00701-023-05643-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2023] [Accepted: 05/13/2023] [Indexed: 06/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is a new regional anesthesia. Unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) spine surgery, a minimal invasive technique, has been performed under not only general anesthesia (GA) but regional anesthesia including spinal anesthesia (SA). The aims of this study were to evaluate the efficacy of ESPB with sedation for UBE lumbar decompression and compare it with GA and SA. METHOD A retrospective age matched case-control study design was performed. Three groups (20 patients in each group) of patients who underwent UBE lumbar decompressions under each anesthetic method (GA, SA, or ESPB) were formed. The total anesthesia time excluding operation time, postoperative analgesia effects, hospital days, and complications related to anesthetic methods were evaluated. RESULTS In the ESPB group, all the operations were performed without change of anesthetic methods and without anesthetic complications. But there were no anesthetic effects in the epidural space, which resulted in additional intravenous fentanyl usage. The mean of time from initiation of anesthesia to completion of surgical preparation was 23.3 ± 4.7 min in the ESPB group, which was shorter than 32.3 ± 10.8 min in the GA (p value = 0.001) or 33.3 ± 6.7 min in the SA group (p < 0.001). The proportion of patients requiring first rescue analgesia within 30 min was 30% in the ESPB group, which was lower than 85% in the GA (p < 0.001), but no significant different with 10% in the SA (p = 0.11). The mean of total hospital days in the ESPB was 3.0 ± 0.8, shorter than 3.7 ± 1.8 in the GA (p = 0.02) or 3.8 ± 1.1 in the SA group (p = 0.01). There was no case of postoperative nausea and vomiting in the ESBB even without prophylactic antiemesis. CONCLUSION ESPB with sedation is a viable anesthetic option for UBE lumbar decompression.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tae Hoon Kang
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, SMG-SNU Boramae Medical Center, 20 Boramae-Ro 5-Gil, Dongjak-Gu, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Won Joong Kim
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Synergy Orthopedic Clinic, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
| | - Jae Hyup Lee
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, SMG-SNU Boramae Medical Center, 20 Boramae-Ro 5-Gil, Dongjak-Gu, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Seoul National University, College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Choi JY, Park HJ, Park SM, You KH, Kang MS, Hwang JY, Yoon JH, Kim HJ, Yeom JS. Biportal endoscopic discectomy versus tubular microscopic discectomy for treating single-level lumbar disc herniation in obese patients: a multicenter, retrospective analysis. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2023; 165:2641-2650. [PMID: 37393400 DOI: 10.1007/s00701-023-05686-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/12/2023] [Accepted: 06/11/2023] [Indexed: 07/03/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE In microscopic lumbar discectomy in obese patients, a correlation is found between the operation time and increase in estimated blood loss according to the increase in body mass index; however, no studies have investigated the outcomes of biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomy in obese patients. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of microscopic and endoscopic discectomy in obese patients with lumbar herniated discs. METHODS In this multicenter, retrospective study, clinical and radiological data were compared and analyzed in 73 obese patients with a body mass index of > 30 kg/m2 who underwent microscopic or biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomy. Clinical data on the visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), and EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) scores were measured, and radiological data were obtained using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). RESULTS This study enrolled 43 patients who underwent microscopic discectomy and 30 who underwent biportal endoscopic discectomy. The VAS, ODI, and EQ-5D scores in both groups improved after surgery compared with those before surgery, although there was no difference between the two groups. Although there was a difference in the incidence of recurrent disc herniation confirmed by MRI after surgery, no difference was found in the number of patients requiring surgery between the two groups. CONCLUSION In obese patients with lumbar disc herniation that was not improved with conservative treatment, no significant clinical or radiological differences in outcomes were noted between microscopic and biportal endoscopic surgery methods. In contrast, minor complications were less common in the biportal group.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jun-Young Choi
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Dongguk University Ilsan Hospital, Goyang-Si, Gyeonggi-Do, Republic of Korea
| | - Hyun-Jin Park
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Spine Center, Hallym University College of Medicine, Kangnam Sacred Heart Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Sang-Min Park
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Spine Center, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, 82, Gumi-Ro 173 Beon-Gil, Bundang-Gu, Seongnam-Si, Gyeonggi-Do, 13620, Republic of Korea.
| | - Ki-Han You
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Spine Center, Hallym University College of Medicine, Kangnam Sacred Heart Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Min-Seok Kang
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Korea University College of Medicine, Anam Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Jae-Yeon Hwang
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Spine Center, Hallym University College of Medicine, Kangnam Sacred Heart Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Joon-Hyeok Yoon
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Spine Center, Hallym University College of Medicine, Kangnam Sacred Heart Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Ho-Joong Kim
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Spine Center, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, 82, Gumi-Ro 173 Beon-Gil, Bundang-Gu, Seongnam-Si, Gyeonggi-Do, 13620, Republic of Korea
| | - Jin S Yeom
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Spine Center, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, 82, Gumi-Ro 173 Beon-Gil, Bundang-Gu, Seongnam-Si, Gyeonggi-Do, 13620, Republic of Korea
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Kaen A, Park MK, Son SK. Clinical outcomes of uniportal compared with biportal endoscopic decompression for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL : OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE EUROPEAN SPINE SOCIETY, THE EUROPEAN SPINAL DEFORMITY SOCIETY, AND THE EUROPEAN SECTION OF THE CERVICAL SPINE RESEARCH SOCIETY 2023; 32:2717-2725. [PMID: 36991184 DOI: 10.1007/s00586-023-07660-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/11/2022] [Revised: 03/12/2023] [Accepted: 03/19/2023] [Indexed: 03/31/2023]
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN Systematic review and meta-analysis. OBJECTIVES Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) treatment has evolved with the introduction of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques. Endoscopic methods take the concepts applied to MIS a step further, with multiple studies showing that endoscopic techniques have outcomes that are similar to those of more traditional approaches. The aim of this study was to perform an updated meta-analysis and systematic review of studies comparing the outcomes between both available endoscopic techniques (uni and biportal) for the treatment of LSS. METHODS Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic literature search and compared the randomized controlled trials and retrospective studies of uniportal and biportal endoscopy in the treatment of LSS from several databases. Bias was assessed using quality assessment criteria and funnel plots. Meta-analysis using a random-effects model was used to synthesize the metadata. The authors used Review Manager 5.4 to manage the date and perform the review. RESULTS After a preliminary selection of 388 studies from electronic databases, the full inclusion criteria were applied; three studies were found to be eligible for inclusion. There were 184 patients from three unique studies. Meta-analysis of visual analog scale score for low back pain and leg pain showed no significant difference at the final follow-up (P = 0.51 and P = 0.66). ODI score after biportal surgery was lower than uniportal surgery [SMD = 0.34, 95% CI (0.04, 0.63), P = 0.02]. The mean operation time was similar in the unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) and uniportal groups (P = 0.53). The UBE group was associated with a shorter length of hospital stay (P = 0.05). Complications were similar in both groups (P = 0.89). CONCLUSIONS Current evidence shows no significant differences in most clinical outcomes between uniportal and biportal surgery. UBE may have a better ODI score at the end of the follow-up compared to uniportal. Further studies are required before drawing a definite conclusion. STUDY REGISTRATION PROSPERO prospective register of systematic reviews: Registration Nº. CRD42022339078, Available from: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/displayrecord.php?ID=CRD42022339078.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ariel Kaen
- Servicio de Neurocirugía, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, Av. Siurot S/N, 41013, Seville, Spain.
| | - Man Kyu Park
- Neurosurgery department, GOOD MOONHWA HOSPITAL, Busan, Korea
| | - Sang-Kyu Son
- Neurosurgery department, GOOD MOONHWA HOSPITAL, Busan, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Hagel V, Wagner R, Waschke A, Hofstetter CP, Telfeian AE, Shen J, Lewandrowski KU. Surgeon reported practice patterns related to full endoscopic cervical decompression procedures. EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL : OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE EUROPEAN SPINE SOCIETY, THE EUROPEAN SPINAL DEFORMITY SOCIETY, AND THE EUROPEAN SECTION OF THE CERVICAL SPINE RESEARCH SOCIETY 2023; 32:2662-2669. [PMID: 37020150 DOI: 10.1007/s00586-023-07675-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/17/2022] [Accepted: 03/21/2023] [Indexed: 04/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The microsurgical anterior approach to the cervical spine is commonplace. Fewer surgeons perform posterior cervical microsurgical procedures on a routine basis for lack of indication, more bleeding, persistent postoperative neck pain, and risk of progressive misalignment. In comparison, the endoscopic technique is preferentially performed through the posterior approach. Many spine surgeons and even surgeons versed in lumbar endoscopy are often reluctant to consider endoscopic procedures in the cervical spine. We report the results of a surgeon survey to find out why. METHODS A questionnaire of 10 questions was sent to spine surgeons by email and chat groups in social media networks including Facebook, WeChat, WhatsApp, and LinkedIn to collect practice pattern data about microscopic and endoscopic spine surgery in the lumbar and cervical spine. The responses were cross-tabulated by surgeons' demographic data. Pearson Chi-Square measures, Kappa statistics, and linear regression analysis of agreement or disagreement were performed by analyzing the distribution of variances using the statistical package SPSS Version 27.0. RESULTS The survey response rate was 39.7%, with 50 of the 126 surgeons who started the survey submitting a completed questionnaire. Of the 50 surgeons, 56.2% were orthopedic, and 42% neurological surgeons. Most surgeons worked in private practice (42%). Another 26% were university-employed, 18% were in private practice affiliated with a university, and the remaining 14% were hospital employed. The majority of surgeons (55.1%) were autodidacts. The largest responding surgeon groups were between 35-44 years (38%) and between 45-54 years of age (34%). Half of the responding surgeons were routinely performing endoscopic cervical spine surgery. The other half did not perform it for the main hurdle of fear of complications (50%). Lack of appropriate mentorship was listed as second most reason (25.4%). More concerns for not performing cervical endoscopic approaches were the perception of lack of technology (20.8%) and suitable surgical indication (12.5%). Only 4.2% considered cervical endoscopy too risky. Nearly a third (30.6%) of the spine surgeons treated over 80% of their cervical spine patients with endoscopic surgeries. Most commonly performed were posterior endoscopic cervical discectomy (PECD; 52%), posterior endoscopic cervical foraminotomy (PECF; 48%), anterior endoscopic cervical discectomy (AECD; 32%), cervical endoscopic unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (CE-ULBD; 30%), respectively. CONCLUSION Cervical endoscopic spine surgery is gaining traction among spine surgeons. However, by far most surgeons performing cervical endoscopic spine surgery work in private practice and are autodidacts. This lack of a teacher to shorten the learning curve as well as fear of complications are two of the major impediments to the successful implementation of cervical endoscopic procedures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vincent Hagel
- University Spine Center Zürich, Balgrist University Hospital, Zurich, Switzerland.
- Asklepios Hospital Lindau, Spine Center, Lindau, Germany.
| | - Ralf Wagner
- Ligamenta Spine Center, Frankfurt Am Main, Germany
| | - Albrecht Waschke
- Rhön-Klinikum, Campus Bad Neustadt, Bad Neustadt a. d. Saale, Germany
| | | | - Albert E Telfeian
- Department of Neurosurgery, Rhode Island Hospital, The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA
| | - Jian Shen
- enVISION Spine Surgery, New York, NY, USA
| | - Kai-Uwe Lewandrowski
- Center for Advanced Spine Care of Southern Arizona, Surgical Institute of Tucson, Tucson, AZ, USA
- Department of Orthopaedics, Fundación Universitaria Sanitas, Bogotá, D.C, Colombia
- Department of Orthopedics at Hospital, Universitário Gaffre e Guinle, Universidade Federal do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Park DY, Upfill-Brown A, Curtin N, Hamad CD, Shah A, Kwon B, Kim YH, Heo DH, Park CW, Sheppard WL. Clinical outcomes and complications after biportal endoscopic spine surgery: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of 3673 cases. EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL : OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE EUROPEAN SPINE SOCIETY, THE EUROPEAN SPINAL DEFORMITY SOCIETY, AND THE EUROPEAN SECTION OF THE CERVICAL SPINE RESEARCH SOCIETY 2023; 32:2637-2646. [PMID: 37079079 DOI: 10.1007/s00586-023-07701-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/07/2022] [Revised: 12/07/2022] [Accepted: 04/04/2023] [Indexed: 04/21/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Current literature suggests that biportal spinal endoscopy is safe and effective in treating lumbar spine pathology such as lumbar disc herniation, lumbar stenosis, and degenerative spondylolisthesis. No prior study has investigated the postoperative outcomes or complication profile of the technique as a whole. This study serves as the first comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of biportal spinal endoscopy in the lumbar spine. METHODS A PubMed literature search provided over 100 studies. 42 papers were reviewed and 3673 cases were identified with average follow-up time of 12.5 months. Preoperative diagnoses consisted of acute disc herniation (1098), lumbar stenosis (2432), and degenerative spondylolisthesis (229). Demographics, operative details, complications, and perioperative outcome and satisfaction scores were analyzed. RESULTS Average age was 61.32 years, 48% male. 2402 decompressions, 1056 discectomies, and 261 transforaminal lumbar Interbody fusions (TLIFs) were performed. Surgery was performed on 4376 lumbar levels, with L4-5 being most common(61.3%). 290 total complications occurred, 2.23% durotomies, 1.29% inadequate decompressions, 3.79% epidural hematomas, and < 1% transient nerve root injuries, infections, and iatrogenic instability. Significant improvement in VAS-Back, VAS-Leg, ODI, and Macnab Scores were seen across the cohort. CONCLUSION Biportal spinal endoscopy is a novel method to address pathology in the lumbar spine with direct visualization through an endoscopic approach. Complications are comparable to previously published rates. Clinical outcomes demonstrate effectiveness. Prospective studies are required to assess the efficacy of the technique as compared to traditional techniques. This study demonstrates that the technique can be successful in the lumbar spine.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Don Y Park
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California Los Angeles, 16th Street, Suite 3142, Los Angeles, Santa Monica, CA, 90404, USA.
| | - Alexander Upfill-Brown
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California Los Angeles, 16th Street, Suite 3142, Los Angeles, Santa Monica, CA, 90404, USA
| | - Nora Curtin
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California Los Angeles, 16th Street, Suite 3142, Los Angeles, Santa Monica, CA, 90404, USA
| | - Christopher D Hamad
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California Los Angeles, 16th Street, Suite 3142, Los Angeles, Santa Monica, CA, 90404, USA
| | - Akash Shah
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California Los Angeles, 16th Street, Suite 3142, Los Angeles, Santa Monica, CA, 90404, USA
| | - Brian Kwon
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, New England Baptist Hospital, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, 02120, USA
| | - Yong H Kim
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, 10016, USA
| | - Dong Hwa Heo
- Department of Neurosurgery, Champodonamu Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
| | | | - William L Sheppard
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California Los Angeles, 16th Street, Suite 3142, Los Angeles, Santa Monica, CA, 90404, USA
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Stone BK, Paradkar R, Anderson GM, Daniels A, Iyer S, Derman PB, Telfeian AE, Basques B. Development of an Endoscopic Spine Surgery Program: Overview and Basic Considerations for Implementation. JB JS Open Access 2023; 8:e22.00152. [PMID: 37731772 PMCID: PMC10508372 DOI: 10.2106/jbjs.oa.22.00152] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/22/2023] Open
Abstract
Endoscopic spine surgery (ESS) is an innovative technique allowing for minimally invasive, direct visualization of spinal abnormalities. The growth of ESS in the United States has been stunted by high start-up costs, low reimbursement rates, and the steep learning curve associated with mastering endoscopic techniques. Hergrae, we describe the current state and future direction of ESS and provide key action items for ESS program implementation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benjamin K. Stone
- Warren Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island
| | | | - George M. Anderson
- Warren Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island
| | - Alan Daniels
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Warren Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island
| | | | | | - Albert E. Telfeian
- Department of Neurosurgery, Warren Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island
| | - Bryce Basques
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Warren Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Wang YP, Qin SL, Yang S, Xu YF, Han PF. Efficacy and safety of unilateral biportal endoscopy compared with microscopic decompression in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis: A systematic review and updated meta‑analysis. Exp Ther Med 2023; 26:309. [PMID: 37273751 PMCID: PMC10236128 DOI: 10.3892/etm.2023.12008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/31/2023] [Accepted: 04/24/2023] [Indexed: 06/06/2023] Open
Abstract
The incidence of lumbar spinal stenosis is increasing annually, and with an ever-aging population and longer life expectancies, this trend will further continue. It is hoped that a more effective treatment can be found so that the patients can be relieved of their pain. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of unilateral biportal endoscopic surgery (UBE) and microscopic decompression surgery (MD) for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. A literature search of related studies published until April 2022 was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, Google Scholar, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and other databases. After filtering of references, 12 eligible studies were identified that compared UBE with MD as a treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis. Data were extracted and analysed using R. A total of 12 articles (four randomized controlled and eight cohort studies) were included, with a total of 1,067 patients: 250 men and 249 women in the UBE group and 290 men and 278 women in the MD group. The meta-analysis showed that the mean intraoperative blood loss in the UBE group [standardized mean difference (SMD)=-2.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) (-3.97, -0.23), P=0.03] was lower than that in the MD group. The postoperative Visual analogue scale (VAS) score for back pain [SMD=-0.52, 95% CI (-0.76, -0.27), P<0.01], leg pain [SMD=-0.30, 95% CI (-0.51, -0.08), P<0.01], postoperative Oswestry disability index [(ODI); SMD=-0.25, 95% CI (-0.48, -0.03), P=0.03], and postoperative C-reactive protein [(CRP); odds ratio (OR)=-0.92, 95% CI (-1.80, 0.03), P=0.04] were lower than those in the MD group. Complications (OR=0.60, 95% CI (0.37, 0.98), P=0.04) and hospital stay (SMD=-1.84, 95% CI (-2.85, 0.83), P <0.01] were also lesser in the UBE group than in the MD group. UBE was preferable to that in the MD group according to the modified MacNab score [OR=2.28, 95% CI (1.28, 4.06), P<0.01]. No significant differences were observed in the operation times between the groups. UBE surgery was found to be a better option for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis than MD surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yue-Peng Wang
- Department of Orthopaedics, Heping Hospital Affiliated to Changzhi Medical College, Changzhi, Shanxi 046000, P.R. China
- Department of Orthopaedics, Pinggu Hospital of Beijing Friendship Hospital Affiliated to Capital Medical University, Beijing 101200, P.R. China
| | - Shi-Lei Qin
- Department of Orthopaedics, Changzhi Yunfeng Hospital, Changzhi, Shanxi 046000, P.R. China
| | - Su Yang
- Department of Orthopaedics, Heping Hospital Affiliated to Changzhi Medical College, Changzhi, Shanxi 046000, P.R. China
| | - Yun-Feng Xu
- Department of Orthopaedics, Changzhi Yunfeng Hospital, Changzhi, Shanxi 046000, P.R. China
| | - Peng-Fei Han
- Department of Orthopaedics, Heping Hospital Affiliated to Changzhi Medical College, Changzhi, Shanxi 046000, P.R. China
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Ahn Y, Lee S. Uniportal versus biportal endoscopic spine surgery: a comprehensive review. Expert Rev Med Devices 2023:1-8. [PMID: 37183715 DOI: 10.1080/17434440.2023.2214678] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/16/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Endoscopic spine surgery techniques are minimally invasive alternatives to conventional open surgery for degenerative spinal diseases. Clinical studies and meta-analyses have proven the usefulness of uniportal full-endoscopic spine procedures. However, a steep learning curve is a critical barrier for endoscopic procedures. Recently, biportal endoscopic spine surgeries have been developed to make it easier for spine surgeons to learn and perform. Consequently, the biportal approach has gained popularity among aspiring endoscopic spine surgeons. This review compared the characteristics of uniportal and biportal surgeries to help spine surgeons perform endoscopic procedures more effectively. AREA COVERED The review analyzed English-language clinical literature in Core databases and compared uniportal and biportal endoscopic spine surgery techniques. Clinical studies have compared the technical principles of both techniques, and the authors suggested appropriate strategies for learning and practicing endoscopic procedures. EXPERT OPINION Uniportal, full-endoscopic spine surgery is a minimally invasive procedure that preserves muscles and uses a keyhole approach under local anesthesia. In contrast, biportal surgery is more familiar to a surgeon and can be performed more widely, although the keyhole approach is limited. Aspiring endoscopic spine surgeons can learn either method according to the surgeon's preference and the clinical situation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yong Ahn
- Department of Neurosurgery, Gil Medical Center, Gachon University College of Medicine, Incheon, South Korea
| | - Semin Lee
- Department of Neurosurgery, Wooridul Spine Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Park DK, Weng C, Zakko P, Choi DJ. Unilateral Biportal Endoscopy for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and Lumbar Disc Herniation. JBJS Essent Surg Tech 2023; 13:e22.00020. [PMID: 38274147 PMCID: PMC10807897 DOI: 10.2106/jbjs.st.22.00020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/27/2024] Open
Abstract
Background Unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) is a novel minimally invasive technique for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis and lumbar disc herniations. Uniportal endoscopy was utilized prior to the advent of UBE and has been considered the workhorse of endoscopic spine surgery (ESS) for lumbar discectomy and decompressive laminectomy. However, there are theoretical advantages to UBE compared with traditional uniportal endoscopy, including that the procedure utilizes typical spinal equipment that should be readily available, requires less capital cost and optical instrumentation, and provides greater operative flexibility as a result of utilizing both a working and a viewing portal7,8. Description A 0-degree arthroscope is typically utilized for discectomy and lumbar laminectomies. The use of a radiofrequency ablator is critical to help coagulate osseous and muscle bleeders. For irrigation, gravity or a low-pressure pump, typically <40 mm Hg, can be utilized9,10. Further details regarding irrigation pressure are provided in "Important Tips." The use of a standard powered burr is typical to help osseous decompression, and Kerrison ronguers, pituitaries, osteotomes, and probes utilized in open or tubular cases suffice. Two incisions are made approximately 1 cm lateral to the midline. If working from the left side for a right-handed surgeon, the working portal is typically made at the lower laminar margin of the target level. The camera portal is then made typically 2 to 3 cm cephalad. A lateral radiograph is then utilized to confirm the portal placements. From the right side, the working portal is cephalad and the camera portal is caudal. Because of the switch, the portals may be shifted more distally.The first step is creating a working space because there is no true joint space in the spine. With use of radiofrequency ablation, a working space is created in the interlaminar space. Next, with use of a powered burr or a chiseled osteotomy, the base of the cephalad spinous process is thinned until the insertion of the ligamentum flavum is found. Next, the ipsilateral and contralateral laminae are thinned in a similar fashion. Once the osseous elements are removed, the ligamentum flavum is removed en bloc. The traversing nerve roots are checked under direct high-magnification visualization to ensure that they are decompressed. If a discectomy is necessary, standard nerve-root retractors can be utilized to retract the neural elements. With use of a blunt-tip elevator, the anular defect can be incised and the herniated disc can be removed under direct high-power visualization. In addition, a small curet can be utilized to create a defect in the weakened anulus or membrane covering the extruded disc material in order to help deliver the herniated disc material. Epidural veins are coagulated typically with use of a fine-point bipolar radiofrequency device. Alternatives Nonoperative treatments include oral anti-inflammatory drugs, physical therapy, and epidural injections; if these fail, alternative surgical treatments include open lumbar laminectomy and/or discectomy, tubular lumbar laminectomy and/or discectomy, and other minimally invasive techniques, such as microendoscopy, uniportal endoscopy, and microscopy-assisted decompression. Rationale UBE is a minimally invasive surgical procedure that better preserves osseous and muscular structure compared with open and tubular techniques. Conventional lumbar laminectomy involves dissection and retraction of the multifidus muscle from the spinous process to the facet joint. This exposure can damage the delicate posterior dorsal rami. Long retraction time can also lead to pressure-induced muscle atrophy and potentially increased chronic low back pain. Alternatively, smaller incisions and shorter hospital stays are possible with UBE.Similar to UBE, tubular surgery can minimize soft-tissue damage compared with open techniques; however, in a randomized trial assessing techniques for spinal stenosis surgery, Kang et al. found that UBE and tubular surgery had similarly favorable clinical outcomes at 6 months postoperatively but UBE resulted in decreased operative time, drain output, opiate use, and length of hospital stay5.Furthermore, the use of an endoscope in the biportal technique allows ultra-high magnification of the spinal pathology, decreased capital costs, and the ability to use 2 hands with freedom of movement. UBE provides clear visualization of the neural elements while keeping maximal ergonomic efficiency with the surgeon's head looking straight forward, the shoulders relaxed, and the elbows bent to 90°. Continuous irrigation through the endoscope also helps with bleeding and decreasing the risk of infection. Expected Outcomes Long-term outcomes do not differ substantially between discectomies performed with use of the presently described technique and procedures done with more traditional minimally invasive (i.e., tubular) techniques; however, visual analogue scale scores for back pain may be better in the short term, and there is evidence of a shorter hospital stay with UBE2. Complication rates did not differ from other minimally invasive techniques. When comparing UBE and stenosis, Aygun and Abdulshafi found that UBE was associated with decreased hospital stays, operative time, and blood loss and better clinical outcomes up to 2 years postoperatively compared with tubular laminectomy12. Important Tips The optimal hydrostatic pressure is 30 to 50 mm Hg. Pressure is determined by the distance between the fluid source and the working space. Because the working space does not change, the height of the bag decides pressure. A simple formula for pressure is calculated by dividing the distance from the working field to the irrigation source by 1.36. A rule of thumb is that if the bag is 50 to 70 cm above the patient's back, the pressure should be adequate. The advantages of using gravity rather than a pressure pump are that excessive fluid solution pressure in the epidural space can cause neurological issues such as nuchal pain, headache, and seizure11. Additionally, if the intertransverse membrane or the lateral margins of the disc are violated, hydroperitoneum can occur unknowingly due to the high-pressure system.Gravity or pump pressure of >40 mm Hg may elevate epidural pressure and mask operative bleeding. When the pump is turned off at the end of the surgical procedure, a postoperative epidural hematoma may occur because the bleeding source may not have been recognized while the pump pressure was on.Excessive pump pressure may lead to an increase in intracranial pressure, causing headache or delayed recovery from general anesthesia with stiff posture and hyperventilation.Make sure fluid is emerging from the working portal and the muscle area is not swelling to prevent soft-tissue fluid extravasation.Epidural veins are coagulated typically with a fine-point bipolar radiofrequency device.Osseous bleeding can be controlled with bone wax or a high-speed burr. Acronyms and Abbreviations MRI = magnetic resonance imagingRF = radiofrequencyAP = anteroposterior.
Collapse
|
28
|
Indications for and Outcomes of Three Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Approaches for the Decompression of Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Systematic Review. Diagnostics (Basel) 2023; 13:diagnostics13061092. [PMID: 36980400 PMCID: PMC10047819 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics13061092] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/23/2023] [Revised: 03/10/2023] [Accepted: 03/12/2023] [Indexed: 03/17/2023] Open
Abstract
Objective: In this systematic review, we summarized the indications for and outcomes of three main unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) approaches for the decompression of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS). Methods: A comprehensive search of the literature was performed using Ovid Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and Ovid’s Cochrane Library. The following information was collected: surgical data; patients’ scores on the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Macnab criteria; and surgical complications. Results: In total, 23 articles comprising 7 retrospective comparative studies, 2 prospective comparative studies, 12 retrospectives case series, and 2 randomized controlled trials were selected for quantitative analysis. The interlaminar approach for central and bilateral lateral recess stenoses, contralateral approach for isolated lateral recess stenosis, and paraspinal approach for foraminal stenosis were used in 16, 2, and 4 studies, respectively. In one study, both interlaminar and contralateral approaches were used. L4-5 was the most common level decompressed using the interlaminar and contralateral approaches, whereas L5-S1 was the most common level decompressed using the paraspinal approach. All three approaches provided favorable clinical outcomes at the final follow-up, with considerable improvements in patients’ VAS scores for leg pain (63.6–73.5%) and ODI scores (67.2–71%). The overall complication rate was <6%. Conclusions: The three approaches of UBE surgery are effective and safe for the decompression of various types of DLSS. In the future, long-term prospective studies and randomized control trials are warranted to explore this new technique further and to compare it with conventional surgical techniques.
Collapse
|
29
|
The Use of Ultrasonic Bone Scalpel (UBS) in Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery (UBESS): Technical Notes and Outcomes. J Clin Med 2023; 12:jcm12031180. [PMID: 36769829 PMCID: PMC9917882 DOI: 10.3390/jcm12031180] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/16/2022] [Revised: 01/26/2023] [Accepted: 01/28/2023] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN Case Series and Technical Note, Objective: UBS has been extensively used in open surgery. However, the use of UBS during UBESS has not been reported in the literature. The aim of this study was to describe a new spinal surgical technique using an ultrasonic bone scalpel (UBS) during unilateral biportal endoscopic spine surgery (UBESS) and to report the preliminary results of this technique. METHODS We enrolled patients diagnosed with lumbar spinal stenosis who underwent single-level UBESS. All patients were followed up for more than 12 months. A unilateral laminotomy was performed after bilateral decompression under endoscopy. We used the UBS system after direct visualization of the target for a bone cut. We evaluated the demographic characteristics, diagnosis, operative time, and estimated blood loss of the patients. Clinical outcomes included the visual analog scale (VAS), the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), the modified MacNab criteria, and postoperative complications. RESULTS A total of twenty patients (five males and fifteen females) were enrolled in this study. The mean follow-up period was 13.2 months (range 12-17 months). The VAS score, ODI, and modified MacNab criteria classification improved after the surgery. A minimal mean blood loss of 22.1 mL was noted during the operation. Only one patient experienced neuropraxia, which resolved within 2 weeks. There was no durotomy, iatrogenic pars fracture, or infection. CONCLUSIONS In conclusion, our study represents the first report of the use of UBS during UBESS. Our findings demonstrate that this technique is safe and efficient, with improved clinical outcomes and minimal complications. These preliminary results warrant further investigation through larger clinical studies with longer follow-up periods to confirm the effectiveness of this technique in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis.
Collapse
|
30
|
Kirker K, Masaracchio MF, Loghmani P, Torres-Panchame RE, Mattia M, States R. Management of lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of rehabilitation, surgical, injection, and medication interventions. Physiother Theory Pract 2023; 39:241-286. [PMID: 34978252 DOI: 10.1080/09593985.2021.2012860] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/19/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) has a substantial impact on mobility, autonomy, and quality of life. Previous reviews have demonstrated inconsistent results and/or have not delineated between specific nonsurgical interventions. OBJECTIVE The purpose of this systematic review is to assess the effectiveness of interventions in the management of LSS. METHODS Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or prospective studies, included patients with LSS, assessed the effectiveness of any interventions (rehabilitation, surgical, injection, medication), included at least two intervention groups, and included at least one measure of pain, disability, ambulation assessment, or LSS-specific symptoms. Eighty-five articles met inclusion criteria. Meta-analyses were conducted across outcomes. Effect sizes were calculated using Hedge's g and reported descriptively. Formal grading of evidence was conducted. RESULTS Meta-analysis comparing rehabilitation to no treatment/placebo demonstrated significant effects on pain favoring rehabilitation (mean difference, MD -1.63; 95% CI: -2.68, -0.57; I2 = 71%; p = .002). All other comparisons to no treatment/placebo revealed nonsignificant findings. The level of evidence ranged from very low to high for rehabilitation and medication versus no treatment/placebo for pain, disability, ambulation ability, and LSS symptoms. CONCLUSIONS Although the findings of this review are inconclusive regarding superiority of interventions, this accentuates the value of multimodal patient-centered care in the management of patients with LSS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kaitlin Kirker
- Department of Physical Therapy, Long Island University, Brooklyn, NY, USA
| | | | - Parisa Loghmani
- Department of Physical Therapy, Long Island University, Brooklyn, NY, USA
| | | | - Michael Mattia
- Department of Allied Health, Kingsborough Community College, Brooklyn, NY, USA
| | - Rebecca States
- Department of Physical Therapy, Long Island University, Brooklyn, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Clinical outcomes of unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (ULIF) compared with conventional posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). Spine J 2023; 23:271-280. [PMID: 36252809 DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2022.10.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/18/2022] [Revised: 09/29/2022] [Accepted: 10/04/2022] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND CONTEXT In recent years, unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (ULIF) has been more and more favored by spinal surgeons because of its advantages of low trauma, rapid recovery, high fusion rate and fewer complications. PURPOSE To compare the clinical effects of ULIF with those of conventional open posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). STUDY DESIGN Prospective case control study. PATIENT SAMPLE Twenty-seven patients treated by ULIF and thirty-three patients treated by PLIF. OUTCOME MEASURES The preoperative baseline and surgical technique-related outcomes (mean operation time, blood loss during operation, postoperative drainage, and postoperative hospital stay) were compared between the two groups. The clinical status of the two groups before and after surgery were also compared: visual analogue scale (VAS) score of the legs and back, Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). The clinical laboratory indexes of the two groups before and after the operation were compared: C-reactive protein (CRP), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), creatine phosphokinase (CPK), interleukin-6 (IL-6), tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), as well as the incidence of complications, such as dural tear, nerve root injury and infection. METHODS Adult patients who underwent L3-S1 single level lumbar interbody fusion were included in the study. They were divided into a PLIF group and a ULIF group according to the type of surgery. This study comprised 60 cases: 27 cases in the ULIF group and thirty-three cases in the PLIF group. RESULTS There was no significant difference in preoperative baseline between the two groups. The ULIF group experienced less blood loss, postoperative drainage and a shorter postoperative hospital stay than the PLIF group; however the ULIF group required a longer operation time than the PLIF group (p<.05). CRP, ESR, CPK, IL-6, and TNF-α levels of the PLIF group were all significantly higher than those of the ULIF group 5 days after surgery (p<.05). The improvements in the VAS scores for back pain, VAS scores for leg pain and JOA score in the ULIF group were all significantly better than those in the PLIF group at 5 days after surgery (p<.05). There was no significant difference in fusion rate at 6 months between the 2 groups (p>.05). CONCLUSIONS This study showed that ULIF and PLIF were both effective surgical techniques for lumbar interbody fusion. However, ULIF caused less bleeding, reduced inflammatory reaction, less tissue damage and faster postoperative recovery compared with PLIF. Both long-term follow-up and larger clinical studies are needed to validate the clinical and radiological results of this surgery.
Collapse
|
32
|
Park SM, Lee HJ, Park HJ, Choi JY, Kwon O, Lee S, Kim HJ, Yeom JS. Biportal endoscopic versus microscopic discectomy for lumbar herniated disc: a randomized controlled trial. Spine J 2023; 23:18-26. [PMID: 36155241 DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2022.09.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/12/2022] [Revised: 08/11/2022] [Accepted: 09/13/2022] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND CONTEXT Biportal endoscopic discectomy has been frequently performed in recent years and has shown acceptable clinical outcomes. However, evidence regarding its efficacy and safety remains limited. PURPOSE This study aimed to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of biportal endoscopic with that of open microscopic discectomy in patients with single-level herniated lumbar discs. STUDY DESIGN Prospective, randomized, multicenter, open-label, assessor-blind, non-inferiority controlled trial. PATIENT SAMPLE Sixty-four participants suffering from low back and leg pain with a single-level herniated lumbar disc and required discectomy. OUTCOME MEASURES Outcomes were assessed with the use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), visual analog scale (VAS) pain score for surgical site, low back and lower extremity, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) for lumbar disabilities, European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions value for quality of life, and painDETECT for neuropathic pain. Surgery-related outcomes such as hospital stay, operation time, and opioid usage were collected. Adverse events occurring during the follow-up period were also noted. METHODS All participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to undergo biportal endoscopic (biportal group) or microscopic discectomy (microscopy group). The primary outcome was the difference in ODI scores at 12-months post surgically based on a modified intention-to-treat strategy, with a non-inferiority margin of 12.8 points. The secondary outcomes included PROMs, surgery-related outcomes, and adverse events. RESULTS The ODI score at the 12-month follow-up was 11.97 in the microscopy group and 13.89 in the biportal group (mean difference, 1.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], -3.50 to 7.34), showing the non-inferiority of biportal group. The results for the secondary outcomes were similar to those for the primary outcome. Creatinine phosphokinase ratios were low in the biportal group. Early surgical site pain was slightly lower in the biportal group (mean difference of VAS pain score at 48-hr, -0.98; 95% CI, -1.77 to -0.19). Adverse events including reoperation showed no significant difference between the groups. CONCLUSION Biportal endoscopic discectomy was non-inferior to microscopic discectomy over a 12 month period. Biportal endoscopic discectomy is suggested to be a relatively safe and effective surgical technique with the slight advantage of reduced muscle damage. However, the clinical implications of surgical site pain should be carefully considered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sang-Min Park
- Spine Center and Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine and Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Korea
| | - Ho-Jin Lee
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Chungnam National University School of Medicine, Daejeon, Korea
| | - Hyun-Jin Park
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Spine Center, Kangnam Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Jun-Young Choi
- Spine Center and Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine and Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Korea
| | - Ohsang Kwon
- Spine Center and Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine and Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Korea
| | - Sanghoon Lee
- Spine Center and Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine and Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Korea
| | - Ho-Joong Kim
- Spine Center and Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine and Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Korea.
| | - Jin S Yeom
- Spine Center and Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine and Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Park HJ, Choi JY, You KH, Kang MS, Lee WM, Hyun JT, Park SM. Clinical and radiologic outcomes of biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomy in obese patients: a retrospective case-control study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2022; 23:1117. [PMID: 36544180 PMCID: PMC9773495 DOI: 10.1186/s12891-022-06082-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/08/2022] [Accepted: 12/12/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Obese patients have a higher risk of complications during spinal surgery than non-obese patients. To the best of our knowledge, no studies have examined the differences in clinical and radiological outcomes after biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomy (BELD) between obese and non-obese patients. The study evaluated the association between obesity and outcomes after BELD in patients with lumbar disc herniation. METHODS This was a retrospective case-control study conducted from March 2017 to March 2021 at two hospitals with 360 patients who underwent BELD after showing no improvement with conservative treatment. Clinical and radiologic outcomes were retrospectively analyzed after BELD in the non-obese (body mass index [BMI] < 30 kg/m2) and obese (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) groups. Demographic data and surgery-related factors were compared between the two groups. Clinical outcomes were followed up for 12 months after surgery and analyzed for differences. RESULTS A total of 211 patients were enrolled in this study, and through case-control matching, the data of 115 patients (29, obese group; 86, non-obese group) were analyzed. The two groups showed no significant differences in Oswestry Disability Index, European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D), and visual analog scale scores measured immediately after BELD and 12 months after surgery. After surgery, back pain, radiating leg pain, and EQ-5D scores improved. However, there was no significant difference in improvement, residual herniated disc, hematoma, or recurrence between the groups. CONCLUSIONS Obese patients who underwent BELD for lumbar disc herniation showed no significant difference in clinical and radiologic outcomes compared with non-obese patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hyun-Jin Park
- grid.464606.60000 0004 0647 432XDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Spine Center, Hallym University College of Medicine, Kangnam Sacred Heart Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Jun-Young Choi
- grid.412480.b0000 0004 0647 3378Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, South Korea
| | - Ki-Han You
- grid.464606.60000 0004 0647 432XDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Spine Center, Hallym University College of Medicine, Kangnam Sacred Heart Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Min-Seok Kang
- grid.222754.40000 0001 0840 2678Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Korea University College of Medicine, Anam Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Woo-Myung Lee
- grid.464606.60000 0004 0647 432XDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Spine Center, Hallym University College of Medicine, Kangnam Sacred Heart Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Jin-Tak Hyun
- grid.464606.60000 0004 0647 432XDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Spine Center, Hallym University College of Medicine, Kangnam Sacred Heart Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Sang-Min Park
- grid.412480.b0000 0004 0647 3378Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, South Korea
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Xie YZ, Shi Y, Zhou Q, Feng CQ, Zhou Y, Li T, Yu Y, Fan XH. Comparison of the safety and efficacy of unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion and uniportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion: a 1-year follow-up. J Orthop Surg Res 2022; 17:360. [PMID: 35870934 PMCID: PMC9308319 DOI: 10.1186/s13018-022-03249-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/01/2022] [Accepted: 07/12/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Objectives To compare the short-term outcomes of unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (BLIF) and uniportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (ULIF). Methods Sixty patients diagnosed with L4/5 spinal stenosis who underwent BLIF and ULIF were included (30 in each group). Clinical evaluation was performed preoperatively and postoperatively in the 1st week, 1st month, and 1st year. Factors such as the visual analogue score (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), operative time, surgical complications, and radiological outcomes (fusion rate, screw loosening, and cage subsidence) were compared between the two groups. Results All patients showed improved mean VAS and ODI at all three postoperative follow-ups, and no statistically significant differences were detected between the BLIF and ULIF groups. The mean operative time in the BLIF group was shorter than that in the ULIF group. Nerve root injury occurred in two patients in the BLIF group, while leakage of cerebrospinal fluid occurred in one patient in the ULIF group. All adverse events were treated adequately prior to discharge. The fusion rates with definite and probable grades were significantly higher in the BLIF group than that in the ULIF group. One case of cage subsidence with no screw loosening occurred in each group. Conclusion Both BLIF and ULIF are safe and effective surgical techniques. Compared with ULIF, BLIF has the advantages of shorter operative time and a higher fusion rate. Other merits of BLIF include a wider surgical field, greater maneuverability of instruments, visibility during cage implantation, and transverse orientation of the cage.
Collapse
|
35
|
Yang Z, Wang H, Li W, Hu W. Comparative Effects and Safety of Full-Endoscopic Versus Microscopic Spinal Decompression for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Meta-Analysis and Statistical Power Analysis of 6 Randomized Controlled Trials. Neurospine 2022; 19:996-1005. [PMID: 36597637 PMCID: PMC9816578 DOI: 10.14245/ns.2244600.300] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/12/2022] [Accepted: 11/05/2022] [Indexed: 01/02/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This meta-analysis with statistical power analysis aimed to evaluate the difference between full-endoscopic and microscopic spinal decompression in treating spinal stenosis. METHODS We searched PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), and CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure) for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) regarding the comparison of full-endoscopic versus microscopic spinal decompression in treating lumbar spinal stenosis through February 28, 2022. Two independent investigators selected studies, extracted information, and appraised methodological quality. Meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4 and STATA 14.0, and statistical power analysis was performed using G*Power 3.1. RESULTS Six RCTs involving 646 patients met selection criteria. Meta-analysis suggested that, compared with microscopic decompression, full-endoscopic spinal decompression achieved more leg pain improvement (mean difference [MD], -0.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.30 to -0.10; p = 0.001), shortened operative time (MD, -12.71; 95% CI, -18.27 to -7.15; p < 0.001), and decreased the incidence of complications (risk ratio, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.22-0.82; p = 0.01), which was supported by a statistical power of 98.57%, 99.97%, and 81.88%, respectively. CONCLUSION Full-endoscopic spinal decompression is a better treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis, showing more effective leg pain improvement, shorter operative time, and fewer complications than microscopic decompression.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zechuan Yang
- Department of Orthopedics, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| | - Huan Wang
- Department of Orthopedics, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| | - Wenkai Li
- Department of Orthopedics, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| | - Weihua Hu
- Department of Orthopedics, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China,Corresponding Author Weihua Hu Department of Orthopedics, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Indications, Contraindications, and Complications of Biportal Endoscopic Decompressive Surgery for the Treatment of Lumbar Stenosis: A Systematic Review. World Neurosurg 2022; 168:411-420. [DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2022.09.023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/06/2022] [Revised: 09/03/2022] [Accepted: 09/05/2022] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
|
37
|
Choi JY, Park SM, Kim HJ, Yeom JS. Recent Updates on Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery: Techniques, Technologies, and Indications. Asian Spine J 2022; 16:1013-1021. [PMID: 36573300 PMCID: PMC9827213 DOI: 10.31616/asj.2022.0436] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2022] [Accepted: 12/02/2022] [Indexed: 12/28/2022] Open
Abstract
A number of minimally invasive spine surgeries (MISSs) have been developed to address the drawbacks of open spine surgery. Their advantages include small skin incisions, reduction in tissue damage, quick recovery, and short hospital stay. However, the clinical outcomes are comparable to open surgery. There was a cap on the number of indications that could be set for all spinal illnesses. The indications for MISSs have been expanding owing to mechanical and technological advances in medical equipment. Thus, this review presents the various MISSs developed to date, surgical indications, surgical techniques, and their advantages and disadvantages.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jun-Young Choi
- Spine Center and Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seongnam, Korea
| | - Sang-Min Park
- Spine Center and Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seongnam, Korea,Corresponding author: Sang-Min Park Spine Center and Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, 82 Gumi-ro 173beon-gil, Bundang-gu, Seongnam 13620, Korea Tel: +82-31-787-7208, Fax: +82-31-787-4056, E-mail:
| | - Ho-Joong Kim
- Spine Center and Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seongnam, Korea
| | - Jin S. Yeom
- Spine Center and Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seongnam, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Wang B, He P, Liu X, Wu Z, Xu B. Complications of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Spinal Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Systematic Review of the Literature and Meta-analysis of Single-arm Studies. Orthop Surg 2022; 15:3-15. [PMID: 36394088 PMCID: PMC9837251 DOI: 10.1111/os.13437] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/09/2021] [Revised: 06/18/2022] [Accepted: 07/06/2022] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE This article aims to summarize the incidence of these complications through a meta-analysis, analyze the causes of complications and provide clinical promotion and recommendations. METHODS Databases and retrieval platform including PubMed, Web of science, Springer link, Cochrane clinical trials, ProQuest, ScienceDirect, Europe PMC, Wiley online, OVID, Clinical trials, CNKI and WanFang, and supplement the literature through Google Scholar, collect all the unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) controlled trials and non-controlled trials of UBE in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). The search time limit is from January 1, 2000 to December 25, 2021. After two reviewers independently screened the literature, extracted data and evaluated the risk of bias in the included studies, meta-analysis was performed using Stata 15.1 software. RESULTS Finally, 24 studies were included, including 999 patients. The results of a single-arm rate meta-analysis showed that the overall complication rate of UBE treatment of LSS was 6.27% [95% CI (0.0412, 0.0876)], and the incidence of dural tear was 2.49% [95% CI (0.0133, 0.0390)], the incidence of transient paresthesia was 0.14% [95% CI (0.0000, 0.0072)], the incidence of postoperative spinal epidural hematoma was 0.27% [95% CI (0.0000, 0.0096)], the incidence of postop headache, inadequate decompression, root injury and infection was 0.00%. CONCLUSION Current evidence shows that the complication rate of UBE in the treatment of LSS is low, mainly due to dural tears. Limited by the number and quality of included studies, the above conclusions still need to be confirmed by more studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bin Wang
- Department of OrthopedicsJingling Hospital, Medicine College, Nanjing UniversityNanjingChina
| | - Peng He
- Department of OrthopedicsJingling Hospital, Medicine College, Nanjing UniversityNanjingChina
| | - Xiowei Liu
- Department of OrthopedicsJingling Hospital, Medicine College, Nanjing UniversityNanjingChina
| | - Zhengfang Wu
- Department of OrthopedicsJingling Hospital, Medicine College, Nanjing UniversityNanjingChina
| | - Bin Xu
- Department of OrthopedicsJingling Hospital, Medicine College, Nanjing UniversityNanjingChina
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Dai J, Liu XF, Wang QL, Peng YJ, Zhang QZY, Jiang FX, Yan J. A new method for establishing operative channels in unilateral biportal endoscopic surgery: Technical notes and preliminary results. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil 2022; 36:367-375. [PMID: 36278335 DOI: 10.3233/bmr-220005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/05/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) technique has been widely used in spine surgery. At present, a traditional rigid working channel is available for the UBE system. A metal semicircular canal is located in the working channel. However, due to the metal material of the working channel, arthroscopy and instruments are constrained from moving in UBE surgery. Additionally, an assistant is needed during the procedure to hold the traditional working channel. OBJECTIVE For simplicity of operation and convenient movement of the arthroscopy and instrument, we describe a new method for establishing operative channels in UBE surgery. METHODS We retrospectively reviewed 50 patients who underwent unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy (UBED) from February 2020 to August 2020 via our new method. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and visual analogue scale (VAS) score were measured preoperatively and 1 month, 3 months, 6 months and 12 months postoperatively. Statistical comparisons were made using analysis of covariance and paired t tests. RESULTS The VAS scores for back pain at the five time points were 5.20 ± 2.57, 1.96 ± 0.95, 1.50 ± 0.84, 1.64 ± 1.08 and 1.18 ± 0.39. The leg pain VAS scores were 7.02 ± 2.25, 2.02 ± 1.27, 1.48 ± 0.89, 1.32 ± 0.79 and 0.88 ± 0.52. The ODI values were 51.08 ± 19.97, 19.62 ± 15.51, 8.26 ± 7.40, and 7.54 ± 6.42 to 3.24 ± 1.10. The postoperative ODIs and VAS scores of low back pain and leg pain were significantly lower than those before surgery, and differences were statistically significant (all p< 0.05). The pressure of the closed outflow was significantly higher than that of the open outflow (37.35 ± 13.11 mm Hg vs. 24.55 ± 12.64 mm Hg p= 0.003). After we tightened the infusion strap to open the outflow, the pressure decreased significantly (26.4 ± 14.08 mm Hg vs. 37.35 ± 13.11 mm Hg p= 0.015). There were 2 cases of complications, including 1 case of postoperative recurrence and 1 case of dural tears. CONCLUSION This study demonstrates the technical feasibility, safety, and efficacy of modified channel establishment in UBE surgery.
Collapse
|
40
|
Lin GX, Yao ZK, Xin C, Kim JS, Chen CM, Hu BS. A meta-analysis of clinical effects of microscopic unilateral laminectomy bilateral decompression (ULBD) versus biportal endoscopic ULBD for lumbar canal stenosis. Front Surg 2022; 9:1002100. [PMID: 36211279 PMCID: PMC9537863 DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.1002100] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/24/2022] [Accepted: 08/31/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Osbjective Several studies have shown that both microscopic unilateral laminotomy bilateral decompression (ULBD) and unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) ULBD are effective for treating lumbar canal stenosis (LCS). However, there are different viewpoints as to which surgical technique is superior. Therefore, this meta-analysis investigated the clinical efficacy and side effects of microscopic ULBD and UBE ULBD for treating LCS. Methods To identify relevant studies describing the clinical outcomes and complication rates of microscopic ULBD and UBE ULBD for LCS, several databases were systematically searched in the Internet. The visual analog scale score for back and leg pain and the Oswestry Disability Index were used to assess clinical outcomes. Furthermore, data about perioperative outcomes and complications were documented. Results In total, six studies with 450 participants were included in this meta-analysis. The UBE ULBD was found to be superior to microscopic ULBD in terms of efficacy against early postoperative back and leg pain. However, there was no significant difference between the two procedures in terms of final clinical outcomes and complications. In addition, compared with microscopic ULBD, UBE ULBD was associated with a significant reduction in the length of hospital stay and C-reactive protein levels 2 days after surgery. Conclusion UBE ULBD and microscopic ULBD for the treatment of LCS were similar in terms of final clinical outcomes and complications. However, UBE ULBD has several advantages over microscopic ULBE, including a shorter hospital stay and faster alleviation of postoperative back and leg pain.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Guang-Xun Lin
- Department of Orthopedics, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University, School of Medicine, Xiamen University, Xiamen, China
- The Third Clinical Medical College, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China
| | - Zhi-Kang Yao
- Department of Orthopedics, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
| | - Chen Xin
- Department of Orthopedics, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University, School of Medicine, Xiamen University, Xiamen, China
| | - Jin-Sung Kim
- Department of Neurosurgery, Seoul St. Mary’s Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, South Korea
- Correspondence: Chien-Min Chen Jin-Sung Kim Bao-Shan Hu
| | - Chien-Min Chen
- Division of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery, Changhua Christian Hospital, Changhua, Taiwan
- College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Dayeh University, Changhua, Taiwan
- School of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
- Correspondence: Chien-Min Chen Jin-Sung Kim Bao-Shan Hu
| | - Bao-Shan Hu
- Department of Orthopedics, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University, School of Medicine, Xiamen University, Xiamen, China
- The Third Clinical Medical College, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China
- Correspondence: Chien-Min Chen Jin-Sung Kim Bao-Shan Hu
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Discectomy versus Microendoscopic Discectomy for the Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. COMPUTATIONAL AND MATHEMATICAL METHODS IN MEDICINE 2022; 2022:7667463. [PMID: 36188105 PMCID: PMC9519329 DOI: 10.1155/2022/7667463] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/19/2022] [Revised: 08/12/2022] [Accepted: 08/26/2022] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
Objective In minimally invasive spinal surgery, the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis with microendoscopic discectomy (MED) or unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy (UBED) shows effective results, but which is more effective is controversial. Our study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of UBED versus MED in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis by a systematic review and meta-analysis, so as to provide reference for the promotion of UBED in clinical practice. Methods The multiple databases like PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Chinese National Knowledge Databases, Chinese BioMedical Database, and Wanfang Database were used to search for the relevant studies. Review Manager 5.4 was adopted to estimate the effects of the results among selected articles. Odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to estimate the overall pooled effect. Subgroup analysis, forest plots, funnel plots and Egger's test for the articles included were also conducted. Results Three randomized clinical trials and seven cohort studies were finally retrieved, these studies included 685 and 829 patients in the UBED and MED groups, respectively. There were no differences in terms of operation time (MD = -0.92, P =0.72), estimated blood loss (MD = -26.31, P =0.08), complications (MD =0.81, P =0.38) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score (P >0.05 in four subgroup) between the two groups. The visual analog scale (VAS) score of back pain in the UBED group was better than MED group only at 6 months (MD = -0.23, P =0.006) after operation, the VAS score of leg pain in the UBED group was better than that of MED group at 3 mouths (MD = -0.22, P =0.002) and 6 months (MD = -0.24, P =0.006) after operation, the UBED group had a less postoperative length of stay than the MED group (MD = -1.85, P <0.001). The bias analysis showed that there was no potential publication bias in the included literature. Conclusion This study showed that compared with MED, UBED has the advantages of short hospital stay and good short-term curative effect, but there is no significant difference in long-term efficacy and safety, they can be replaced by each other in clinical application.
Collapse
|
42
|
Zhu MT, Li K, Hu BS, Chen CM, Lin GX. Mapping knowledge structure and themes trends in unilateral biportal endoscopic spine surgery: A bibliometric analysis. Front Surg 2022; 9:976708. [PMID: 36157413 PMCID: PMC9489928 DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.976708] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/23/2022] [Accepted: 08/22/2022] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The numerous benefits of unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) spine surgery have attracted the attention of many researchers, and a considerable number of relevant clinical studies have been published. However, global research trends in the field of UBE have received little attention. The purpose of this study was to apply bibliometric method to analyze the UBE-related publications to obtain an overview of the research trends in the field of UBE, as well as research hotspots and trends. Methods Web of Science database was searched for articles published until January 31, 2022. CiteSpace was used to analyze the data, which provided graphical knowledge maps. The following factors were applied to all literature: number of publications, distribution, h-index, institutions, journals, authors, and keywords. Results Seventy-three articles were identified. Since 2019, there has been a significant increase in the number of UBE-related publications. The country with the largest number of articles was South Korea (72.6%), followed by China (9.6%), Japan (4.1%), and Egypt (4.1%). South Korea had the highest h-index (16), followed by China (2), Japan (1), and Egypt (1). Leon Wiltse Memorial Hospital was the organization that produced the most papers (12 publications). Heo DH was the most productive author (16 papers) and was the most cited author (35 times). World Neurosurgery published the most papers on UBE (23.3%). The main research hotspots were spinal diseases, decompression, complications, learning curve, and interbody fusion. In addition, the recent concerns were “learning curve,” “interbody fusion,” “management,” and “dural tear.” Conclusions The quantity of publications on UBE research will increase, and South Korea being the major contributor and most prominent country in this field. The findings of our study will provide researchers with practical information on the field of UBE, and identification of mainstream research directions and recent hotspots.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ming-Tao Zhu
- Department of Neurosurgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University, School of Medicine, Xiamen University, Xiamen, China
| | - Kunrong Li
- Department of Neurosurgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University, School of Medicine, Xiamen University, Xiamen, China
| | - Bao-Shan Hu
- Department of Orthopedics, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University, School of Medicine, Xiamen University, Xiamen, China
| | - Chien-Min Chen
- Division of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery, Changhua Christian Hospital, Changhua, Taiwan
- Department of Leisure Industry Management, National Chin-Yi University of Technology, Taichung, Taiwan
- School of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
| | - Guang-Xun Lin
- Department of Orthopedics, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University, School of Medicine, Xiamen University, Xiamen, China
- The Third Clinical Medical College, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China
- Correspondence: Guang-Xun Lin
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Liu J, Zhu B, Chen L, Jing J, Tian D. Clinical effects of unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression for lumbar posterior apophyseal ring separation. Front Surg 2022; 9:948417. [PMID: 35965860 PMCID: PMC9367217 DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.948417] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/19/2022] [Accepted: 06/29/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective The purpose of the study was to investigate the feasibility and effects of unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression for lumbar posterior apophyseal ring separation (PARS). Methods Patients with lumbar PARS who received unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression from June 2020 to September 2021 were analyzed, including 11 females and 15 males. The clinical symptoms were consistent with the imaging findings. Operation time, length of postoperative hospital stay and complications were recorded, and the clinical efficacy was evaluated by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and modified Macnab scale at preoperative, postoperative 1, 3, 6 months and the last follow-up. Results Preoperative VAS scores of low back pain were (5.04 ± 1.37) and respectively decreased to (2.81 ± 0.75), (2.35 ± 0.98), (1.65 ± 0.69) and (1.15 ± 0.68) at postoperative 1, 3, 6 months and at the last follow-up, and the difference was statistically significant (F = 127.317, P = 0.000). Preoperative VAS scores of lower limb pain were (6.92 ± 1.38) and respectively decreased to (2.88 ± 1.07), (2.54 ± 1.03), (1.81 ± 0.80) and (1.00 ± 0.69) at postoperative 1, 3, 6 months and at the last follow-up, and the difference was statistically significant (F = 285.289, P = 0.000). Preoperative ODI scores were (60.47 ± 8.89) and respectively decreased to (34.72 ± 4.13), (25.80 ± 3.65), (17.71 ± 3.41) and (5.65 ± 2.22) at postoperative 1, 3, 6 months and at the last follow-up, and the difference was statistically significant (F = 725.255, P = 0.000). According to the modified Macnab criteria, the final outcome was excellent in 22 cases, good in 3 cases, fair in 1 cases. 26 patients could return to work or normal activities within 3 weeks. Conclusions Unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression has the advantages of clear and wide field of vision, large operating space, relatively simple need of surgical instrument and convenient and flexible operation procedure. It can achieve excellent clinical results with favorable efficacy and safety and may become a new minimally invasive endoscopic treatment for lumbar PARS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jianjun Liu
- The Department of Orthopedics, The Second Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei, China
| | - Bin Zhu
- The Department of Orthopedics, The Second Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei, China
| | - Lei Chen
- The Department of Orthopedics, The Second Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei, China
| | - Juehua Jing
- The Department of Orthopedics, The Second Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei, China
| | - Dasheng Tian
- The Department of Orthopedics, The Second Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei, China
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Zheng B, Xu S, Guo C, Jin L, Liu C, Liu H. Efficacy and safety of unilateral biportal endoscopy versus other spine surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Surg 2022; 9:911914. [PMID: 35959116 PMCID: PMC9357908 DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.911914] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/03/2022] [Accepted: 07/04/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Background This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) versus other forms of spine surgery. Methods Electronic databases were systematically searched up to February 2022. The authors used Review Manager 5.3 to manage the data and perform the review. Results After the preliminary selection of 239 studies from electronic databases, the full inclusion criteria were applied; 16 studies were found to be eligible for inclusion. These 16 studies enrolled 1,488 patients: 653 patients in the UBE group, 570 in the microendoscopic discectomy group, 153 in the percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy group, and 70 in the posterior lumbar interbody fusion group. UBE was superior to microendoscopic discectomy regarding 1-day Visual Analog Scale(VAS) back pain scores (P < 0.00001). No difference was found between UBE and microendoscopic discectomy regarding 1-day Visual Analog Scale leg pain scores (P = 0.25), long-term VAS back pain scores (P = 0.06), long-term VAS leg pain scores (P = 0.05), Oswestry Disability Index scores (P = 0.09) or complications (P = 0.19). Pooled analysis indicated that UBE was similar to percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy regarding 1-day VAS back pain scores (P = 0.71), 1-day VAS leg pain scores (P = 0.37), long-term VAS back pain scores (P = 0.75), long-term VAS leg pain scores (P = 0.41), Oswestry Disability Index scores (P = 0.07) and complications (P = 0.88). One study reported no difference between UBE and posterior lumbar interbody fusion regarding long-term VAS back pain, long-term VAS leg pain, or Oswestry Disability Index scores. Conclusions UBE is superior to microendoscopic discectomy to relieve back pain 1 day postoperatively. However, these two procedures are similar regarding 1-day leg pain relief, long-term effects, and safety. UBE and percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy are similar regarding 1-day pain relief, long-term effects and safety. More evidence is needed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of UBE versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion.
Collapse
|
45
|
Wang WL, Liu Z, Wu SJ. Case Report: Five-Level Unilateral Laminectomy Bilateral Decompression (ULBD) by Two-Stage Unilateral Biportal Endoscopy (UBE). Front Surg 2022; 9:944509. [PMID: 35865041 PMCID: PMC9294320 DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.944509] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/15/2022] [Accepted: 06/13/2022] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction Unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) is a relatively new yet common minimally invasive procedure in spine surgery, capable of achieving adequate decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis through unilateral laminectomy bilateral decompression (ULBD). Neither additional fusion nor rigid fixation is required, as UBE-ULBD rarely causes iatrogenic lumbar instability. However, to our knowledge, five-level ULBD via two-stage UBE without lumbar fusion has been yet to be reported in the treatment of multilevel lumbar spinal stenosis. Case description We present a case of an 80-year-old female patient who developed progressive paralysis of the lower extremities. Radiographic examinations showed multilevel degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis and extensive compression of the dural sac and nerve roots from L1-2 to L5-S1. The patient underwent five-level ULBD through two-stage UBE without lumbar fusion or fixation. One week after the final procedure, the patient could ambulate with walking aids and braces. Moreover, no back pain or limited lumbar motion was observed at the 6-month follow-up. Conclusion Multilevel ULBD through UBE may provide elderly patients with an alternative, minimally invasive procedure for treating spinal stenosis. This procedure could be achieved by staging surgeries. In this case, we reported complaints of little back pain, despite not needing to perform lumbar fusion or fixation.
Collapse
|
46
|
Chen L, Zhu B, Zhong HZ, Wang YG, Sun YS, Wang QF, Liu JJ, Tian DS, Jing JH. The Learning Curve of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic (UBE) Spinal Surgery by CUSUM Analysis. Front Surg 2022; 9:873691. [PMID: 35574554 PMCID: PMC9099005 DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.873691] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/11/2022] [Accepted: 03/30/2022] [Indexed: 01/24/2023] Open
Abstract
ObjectiveTo assess the learning curve of the unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) technique for the treatment of single-level lumbar disc herniation by cumulative summation (CUSUM) method analysis.MethodsA retrospective analysis was conducted to assess 97 patients' general condition, operation time, complications, and curative effect of single segmental UBE surgery performed by a spinal surgeon in his early stage of this technique. The learning curve of operation time was studied using a CUSUM method, and the cut-off point of the learning curve was obtained.ResultsThe operation time was 30 – 241(97.9 ± 34.7) min. The visual analog scale score of lower limb pain decreased from 5.75 ± 0.81 before the operation to 0.39 ± 0.28 at the last follow-up (P < 0.05). The Oswestry disability index score decreased from 66.48 ± 4.43 before the operation to 14.57 ± 3.99 at the last follow-up (P < 0.05). The CUSUM assessment of operation time revealed the learning curve was the highest in 24 cases. In the learning stage (1–24 cases), the operation time was 120.3 ± 43.8 min. In the skilled stage (25–97 cases), the operation time was 90.5 ± 27.8 min.ConclusionsAbout 24 cases of single segmental UBE operation are needed to master the UBE technique.
Collapse
|
47
|
Librianto D, Ipang F, Saleh I, Srie Utami W, Aprilya D, Nurhayati R, Imran D. Comparison of Microscopic Decompression and Biportal Endoscopic Spinal Surgery in the Treatment of Lumbar Canal Stenosis and Herniated Disc: A One-year Follow-up. Open Access Maced J Med Sci 2022. [DOI: 10.3889/oamjms.2022.9043] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/05/2022] Open
Abstract
Backgrounds. Microscopic decompression (MD) has been widely used as an alternative to open decompression. Lately, biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (BESS) - a new approach in minimal-invasive spinal surgery – has also been used with good results. Although both groups can achieve adequate lumbar decompression, there is still a lack of evidence regarding their comparison. We aim to compare the outcomes of both techniques in a one-year follow-up.
Methods. This is a retrospective study in 100 consecutive patients with symptomatic lumbar spine compression due to herniated nucleus pulposus (HNP) and lumbar canal stenosis (LCS) that was treated by either BESS or MD. Clinical evaluations using Visual Analog Score (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and SF-36 questionnaire were obtained. Objective data such as surgery duration, amount of postoperative drain production, and hospital length of stay were collected. Complications were noted throughout the follow-up time.
Results. The BESS group had a significantly lesser surgical duration, drain production, and length of stay. At one year follow-up, both groups achieved significant improvement in VAS, ODI, and SF-36 compared to the preoperative condition. Complications were not observed in the BESS group.
Conclusions. Both procedures were comparably effective to treat lumbar stenosis. Although this study shows superiority with BESS technique in immediate and long-term follow-up, the final choice may depend on the surgeon's preference
Collapse
|
48
|
Perez-Roman RJ, Gaztanaga W, Lu VM, Wang MY. Endoscopic decompression for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. J Neurosurg Spine 2022; 36:549-557. [PMID: 34767533 DOI: 10.3171/2021.8.spine21890] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/29/2021] [Accepted: 08/02/2021] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Lumbar stenosis treatment has evolved with the introduction of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques. Endoscopic methods take the concepts applied to MIS a step further, with multiple studies showing that endoscopic techniques have outcomes that are similar to those of more traditional approaches. The aim of this study was to perform an updated meta-analysis and systematic review of studies comparing the outcomes between endoscopic (uni- and biportal) and microscopic techniques for the treatment of lumbar stenosis. METHODS Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search was performed using the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Ovid Embase, and PubMed databases from their dates of inception to December 14, 2020. All identified articles were then systematically screened against the following inclusion criteria: 1) studies comparing endoscopic (either uniportal or biportal) with minimally invasive approaches, 2) patient age ≥ 18 years, and 3) diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis. Bias was assessed using quality assessment criteria and funnel plots. Meta-analysis using a random-effects model was used to synthesize the metadata. RESULTS From a total of 470 studies, 14 underwent full-text assessment. Of these 14 studies, 13 comparative studies were included for quantitative analysis, totaling 1406 procedures satisfying all criteria for selection. Regarding postoperative back pain, 9 studies showed that endoscopic methods resulted in significantly lower pain scores compared with MIS (mean difference [MD] -1.0, 95% CI -1.6 to -0.4, p < 0.01). The length of stay data were reported by 7 studies, with endoscopic methods associated with a significantly shorter length of stay versus the MIS technique (MD -2.1 days, 95% CI -2.7 to -1.4, p < 0.01). There was no significant difference with respect to leg visual analog scale scores, Oswestry Disability Index scores, blood loss, surgical time, and complications, and there were not any significant quality or bias concerns. CONCLUSIONS Both endoscopic and MIS techniques are safe and effective methods for treating patients with symptomatic lumbar stenosis. Patients who undergo endoscopic surgery seem to report less postoperative low-back pain and significantly reduced hospital stay with a trend toward less perioperative blood loss. Future large prospective randomized trials are needed to confirm the findings in this study.
Collapse
|
49
|
Park SM, Song KS, Kim HJ, Park SY, Kang T, Kang MS, Heo DH, Park CK, Lee DG, Hwang JS, Jang JW, Kim JY, Kim JS, Lee HJ, You KH, Park HJ. Comparing the efficacy and safety of minimally invasive biportal endoscopic spine surgery versus conventional microscopic discectomy in single-level lumbar herniated intervertebral disc (ENDO-BH Trial): a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled equivalence trial study protocol. Trials 2022; 23:172. [PMID: 35193640 PMCID: PMC8864786 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-022-06094-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/11/2021] [Accepted: 02/07/2022] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Biportal endoscopic surgery has recently been performed in lumbar discectomy, with advantages over conventional surgery, such as less skin scarring and muscle damage. However, the clinical results have not been established. Although previous studies reported no difference between the biportal endoscopic and microscopic discectomy clinical results, the evidence was weak. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the biportal endoscopic discectomy versus the microscopic discectomy. Methods This prospective multicenter randomized controlled equivalence trial is designed to compare the efficacy and safety outcomes of patients who underwent lumbar discectomy using biportal endoscopy or microscopy. We will include 100 participants (50 per group) with a lumbar herniated disc. The primary outcome will be the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score 12 months after surgery based on a modified intention-to-treat strategy. The secondary outcomes will include the visual analog scale score for low back and lower extremity radiating pain, the ODI score, the Euro-Qol-5-Dimensions score, surgery satisfaction, walking time, postoperative return to daily life period, postoperative surgical scar, and surgery-related variables, such as postoperative drainage, operation time, admission duration, postoperative creatine kinase, and implementation status of conversion to open surgery. Radiographic outcomes will also be analyzed using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or computed tomography (CT) and simple radiographs. Safety will be assessed by evaluating all adverse and severe adverse events and surgery-related effects. The participants will be assessed by a blinded assessor before surgery (baseline) and 2 weeks and 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Discussion This trial will be the first prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial to analyze the efficacy and safety of biportal endoscopic discectomy in lumbar herniated disc. This trial is designed for evaluating the equivalence of the results between biportal endoscopic and microscopic discectomy including adequate sample size, blinded analyses, and prospective registration to reduce bias. This trial will provide enough data on the effectiveness and safety of biportal endoscopic surgery and will be an important study that allows clear conclusions. Trial registration Clinical Research Information Service (cris.nih.go.kr.) (KCT0006191). Registered on 27 March 2021
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sang-Min Park
- Spine Center and Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine and Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, South Korea
| | - Kwang-Sup Song
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Chung-Ang University, College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Ho-Joong Kim
- Spine Center and Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine and Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, South Korea
| | - Si-Young Park
- Department of Orthopaedics, Korea University College of Medicine, Anam Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Taewook Kang
- Department of Orthopaedics, Korea University College of Medicine, Anam Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Min-Seok Kang
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Endoscopic Spine Surgery Center, Bumin Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Dong Hwa Heo
- Department of Neurosurgery, Endoscopic Spine Surgery Center, Seoul Bumin Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Choon Keun Park
- Department of Neurosurgery, The Leon Wiltse Memorial Hospital, Suwon, South Korea
| | - Dong-Geun Lee
- Department of Neurosurgery, The Leon Wiltse Memorial Hospital, Suwon, South Korea
| | - Jin Sub Hwang
- Department of Neurosurgery, The Leon Wiltse Memorial Hospital, Suwon, South Korea
| | - Jae-Won Jang
- Department of Neurosurgery, The Leon Wiltse Memorial Hospital, Suwon, South Korea
| | - Jun Young Kim
- Department of Neurosurgery, The Leon Wiltse Memorial Hospital, Suwon, South Korea
| | - Jin-Sung Kim
- Department of Neurosurgery, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Hong-Jae Lee
- Department of Neurosurgery, Daejeon St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Ki-Han You
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Spine Center, Kangnam Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, 1, Singil-ro, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul, 07441, South Korea
| | - Hyun-Jin Park
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Spine Center, Kangnam Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, 1, Singil-ro, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul, 07441, South Korea.
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Finneran MM, Naik A, Hawkins JC, Nardone EM. Minimally invasive bilateral decompressive lumbar laminectomy with unilateral approach: patient series. JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY: CASE LESSONS 2022; 3:CASE21676. [PMID: 36130553 PMCID: PMC9379756 DOI: 10.3171/case21676] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2021] [Accepted: 12/30/2021] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Minimally invasive bilateral decompressive lumbar laminectomy with a unilateral approach is a less destructive procedure compared to the traditional open bilateral laminectomy. The objective of this study is to report the authors’ experience with this technique. The first 26 cases performed using the unilateral approach for bilateral decompression are described. Baseline characteristics, operative time, blood loss, and intraoperative complications were collected retrospectively. No specific surgical equipment is needed for this technique. OBSERVATIONS Twenty-six patients and a total of 40 lumbar levels were treated. Mean operative time was 82 minutes per level and mean estimated blood loss was 40.4 mL per level. Mean length of hospitalization was 1.65 days. Cerebrospinal fluid leak occurred in 1 of 26 (3.85%) cases. LESSONS Although improved stabilization needs to be proven in future long-term studies to clearly show a decrease in need for fusion, the initial experience with a unilateral approach is positive and continued use in minimally invasive spine surgery seems promising.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Megan M. Finneran
- Department of Neurological Surgery, Carle BroMenn Medical Center, Normal, Illinois; and
| | - Anant Naik
- Carle Illinois College of Medicine, Champaign, Illinois
| | - John C. Hawkins
- Department of Neurological Surgery, Carle BroMenn Medical Center, Normal, Illinois; and
| | - Emilio M. Nardone
- Department of Neurological Surgery, Carle BroMenn Medical Center, Normal, Illinois; and
| |
Collapse
|