Massively prolapsed intervertebral disc herniation with interlaminar endoscopic spine system Delta endoscope: A case series

Clinical outcomes of fenestration discectomy and iLESSYS-Delta interlaminar endoscopic system for treatment of LDH: a single-center retrospective cohort study

To compare the clinical efficacy of interlaminar endoscopic surgical system delta (iLESSYS-Delta) discectomy with that of classical fenestration discectomy for treating lumbar disc herniation. Patients who underwent iLESSYS-Delta or fenestration discectomy were enrolled in this study. Baseline information and clinical indicators were collected. The baseline data were matched using propensity score matching. Fifty-two patients were in each group. In the iLESSYS-Delta cohort, the volume of intraoperative bleeding was 18.17 ± 4.20 ml, the length of postoperative hospital stay was 4.16 ± 2.29 days, and the length of postoperative off-bed activity was 1.58 ± 0.88 days. In contrast, in the fenestration group, the volume of intraoperative bleeding was 32.50 ± 17.13 ml, the length of postoperative hospital stay was 6.66 ± 2.44 days, and the length of postoperative off-bed activity was 3.18 ± 1.28 days. The difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The operation time was 88.90 ± 19.14 min in the iLESSYS-Delta group and 67.63 ± 19.32 min in the fenestration group, and the difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P < 0.05). Regarding the pain visual analogue scale scores at 24, 48, and 72 h after surgery, patients in the iLESSYS-Delta group had less pain than did those in the fenestration group (P < 0.05). The Oswestry disability indices of postoperative patients in both groups significantly improved at 3 months after surgery and at the last follow-up (P < 0.05); however, there was no statistically significant difference in the postoperative ODI scores between the two surgery groups (P > 0.05). The two groups showed no significant differences in clinical effects, postoperative recurrence rates, or perioperative complications. iLESSYS-Delta can cause less intraoperative bleeding and faster recovery than fenestration discectomy.

Fully endoscopic transforaminal discectomy for thoracolumbar junction disc herniation with or without calcification under general anesthesia: Technical notes and preliminary outcomes

Objective

To evaluate the feasibility, safety, and outcomes of percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy (PETD) for thoracolumbar junction disc herniation (TLDH) with or without calcification.

Methods

This study included 12 patients diagnosed with TLDH with or without calcification who met the inclusion criteria and underwent surgery for PETD from January 2019 to December 2021. The mean patient age, operation time, hospitalization time, time in bed, and complications were recorded. Patients were followed up for at least 9 months. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores for low-back and leg or thoracic radicular pain and modified Japanese Orthopedic Association score (m-JOA) scores were preoperatively evaluated, at 1 day and 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively or at last follow-up. The modified MacNab criteria were used to evaluate clinical efficacy at 12 months postoperatively or at last follow-up.

Results

The mean patient age, operation time, hospitalization time, and time in bed were 53 ± 13.9 years, 101.3 ± 9.2 min, 4.5 ± 1.3 days, and 18.0 ± 7.0 h, respectively. The mean VAS scores of low-back and leg or thoracic radicular pain improved from 5.8 ± 1.5 and 6.5 ± 1.4 to 2.0 ± 0.9 and 1.3 ± 0.5, respectively (P < 0.05). The m-JOA score improved from 7.5 ± 1.2 to 10.0 ± 0.7 (P < 0.05). The overall excellent-good rate of the modified MacNab criteria was 83.3%. No severe complications occurred.

Conclusion

Fully endoscopic transforaminal discectomy and ventral decompression under general anesthesia is a safe, feasible, effective, and minimally invasive method for treating herniated discs with or without calcification at thoracolumbar junction zone.

Training to be a spinal endoscopic surgeon: What matters?

Objective

Spinal endoscopic surgery has been promoted rapidly in the past decade, attracting an increasing number of young, dedicated surgeons. However, it has long been denounced for its long learning curve as a factor impeding the development of this state-of-the-art technique. The aim of the present study was to discover what really matters in the educational process of becoming a spinal endoscopic surgeon.

Methods

An online survey consisting of 14 compulsory questions was distributed in April and May 2022 through the First Chinese Spinal Endoscopic Surgeons Skills Competition. Reminders were sent to increase response rates.

Results

Of the 893 emails that were sent, we received 637 responses. A total of 375 (76.7%) surgeons most frequently used endoscopic techniques in their practices. Regardless of their different backgrounds, 284 (75.7%) surgeons thought it would be necessary for a young spinal endoscopic surgeon to perform 300 cases independently in order to become proficient, followed by 500 (n=43, 11.5%), 100 (n=40, 10.7%), and 1,000 (n=8, 2.1%) cases. According to the surgeons, the most difficult aspect of mastering the endoscopic technique is a disparate surgical view (n=255, 68%), followed by adaption to new instruments (n=86, 22.9%) and hand-eye coordination (n=34, 9.1%). The most helpful training method for helping the spinal endoscopic surgeons of younger generations improve is operating on simulation models or cadaver courses (n=216, 57.6%), followed by online or offline theoretical courses (n=67, 17.9%), acquiring opportunities during surgeries (n=51, 13.6%), and frequently participating in surgeries as an assistant (n=41, 10.9%).

Conclusion

From the perspective of surgeons, to be skilled in spinal endoscopic surgery means overcoming a steep learning curve. However, training systems should be given more attention to make them more accessible to younger surgeons so they can work on simulation models or take cadaver courses.