Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of Foraminal Decompression Using Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery for Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis

Uniportal Full-endoscopic Foraminotomy for Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis: Clinical Characteristics and Functional Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

Uniportal full-endoscopic foraminotomy offers a promising alternative to conventional surgical methods for individuals afflicted by lumbar foraminal stenosis. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and clinical outcomes of uniportal full-endoscopic foraminotomy in patients diagnosed with lumbar foraminal stenosis.

METHODS

A comprehensive retrospective analysis was conducted on individuals who underwent full-endoscopic foraminotomy in our medical center, between January 2018 and December 2019. The investigation encompassed the demographic data of patients and key clinical metrics such as the visual analogue scale of leg (VAS-L) and back pain (VAS-B), Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores, the Short Form-36 Health Survey physical component summary (SF-36 PCS) and the mental component summary (SF-36 MCS), as well as modified MacNab grades, were systematically assessed and compared. Furthermore, radiological parameters: Coronal Cobb angle (CCA), Intervertebral angle changes (IAC), Disc height index (DHI), the foraminal cross-sectional area (FCSA) and the FCSA enlargement ratio were also compared. A variety of statistical analyses including Student t-test, chi-square tests, Fisher's exact tests, Pearson's and Spearman's correlation analyses, and Interclass Correlation Coefficients (ICCs) were employed.

RESULTS

64 patients, including 34 males and 30 females were enrolled. The mean follow-up period extended to 22.66 ± 7.05 months. Distribution by affected segments revealed 26.6% at L4-5, 67.1% at L5-S1 level, and 6.25% at both L4-L5 and L5-S1 levels. At the final follow-up, VAS-L decreased from 7.26 ± 1.19 to 1.37 ± 1.25, while VAS-B decreased from 6.95 ± 0.54 to 1.62 ± 1.13 (p < 0.001). ODI score also demonstrated a substantial decrease from 74.73 ± 8.68 to 23.27 ± 8.71 (p < 0.001). Both SF-36 PCS and SF-36 MCS scores improved significantly (p < 0.001). Modified MacNab criteria revealed 58 excellent-good patients (90.7%), and 6 fair-poor patients (9.3%). No significant differences were founded in the CCA (p = 0.1065), IAC (p = 0.5544), and DHI (p = 0.1348) between pre-operation and the final follow-up. However, the FCSA significantly increased from 73.41 ± 11.75 to 173.40 ± 18.62 mm2 (p < 0.001), and the enlargement ratio was 142.9% ± 49.58%. Notably, the final follow-up FCSA and the FCSA enlargement ratio were found to be larger in the excellent and good group compared to the fair and poor group, according to the modified MacNab criteria.

CONCLUSION

The utilization of uniportal full-endoscopic foraminotomy has demonstrated its safety and efficacy in addressing lumbar foraminal stenosis. The clinical success of this procedure appears to be closely associated with the radiological decompression of the intervertebral foramen area. Importantly, the application of this technology does not seem to compromise the overall stability of the lumbar region.

Does obesity and varying body mass index affect the clinical outcomes and safety of biportal endoscopic lumbar decompression? A comparative cohort study

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.

Evaluation of the learning curve and complications in unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: cumulative sum analysis and risk-adjusted cumulative sum analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the learning curve and complications in unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (ULIF) using the Cumulative Sum (CUSUM) analysis and Risk-adjusted Cumulative Sum (RA-CUSUM) analysis.

METHODS

This study retrospectively analyzed 184 consecutive patients who received ULIF in our hospital, including 104 males and 80 females. CUSUM analysis and RA-CUSUM analysis were used to evaluate the learning curve of ULIF based on the operation time and surgical failure rate, respectively. All postoperative complications were defined as surgical failure. Variables of different phases were compared based on the learning curve.

RESULTS

The CUSUM analysis showed the cutoff point for ULIF was 29 cases, and the RA-CUSUM analysis showed the cutoff point for ULIF was 41 cases. Operating time and hospital stay were significantly decreased as the learning curve progressed (P < 0.05). Visual analogue score (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) at the last follow-up were significantly lower than preoperatively. At the last follow-up, a total of 171 patients reached intervertebral fusion, with a fusion rate of 92.9% (171/184). A total of eleven complications were observed, and RA-CUSUM analysis showed that the incidence of complications in the early phase was 17.07% and in the late phase was 2.6%, with a significant difference (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

ULIF is an effective minimally invasive lumbar fusion surgical technique. But a learning curve of at least 29 cases will be required to master ULIF, while 41 cases will be required to achieve a stable surgical success rate.

Does the use of tranexamic acid intraoperatively reduce postoperative blood loss and complications following biportal endoscopic lumbosacral decompression?

Background

Biportal endoscopic spine surgery is an effective minimally invasive technique for treating common lumbar pathologies. We aim to evaluate the impact of intraoperative tranexamic acid (TXA) use on postoperative blood loss in biportal endoscopic decompression surgery.

Methods

Patients undergoing biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomies and decompressions either by same day surgery or overnight stay at a single institution beginning in October 2021 were prospectively enrolled. This study was non-randomized, non-blinded with the first cohort of consecutive patients receiving 1 g of intravenous TXA intra-operatively before closure and the second cohort of consecutive patients receiving no TXA. Exclusion criteria included any revision surgery, any surgery for the diagnosis of spinal instability, infection, tumor, or trauma, any contraindication for TXA.

Results

Eighty-four patients were included in the study, with 45 (54%) receiving TXA and 39 (46%) not receiving TXA. Median follow-up was 168 days [interquartile range (IQR), 85-368 days]. There were no differences in patient or surgical characteristics between cohorts. Estimated blood loss (EBL) was similar (P=0.20), while post-operative drain output was significantly lower in the TXA cohort (P=0.0028). Single level discectomies had significantly less drain output as compared to 2 level unilateral laminotomy, bilateral decompression (ULBD) cases (P<0.005). Post-operative complications were similar, with low rates of wound complication (1.2%) and transient postoperative weakness (2.4%, P>0.99 for both). Oswestry disability index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS) back and VAS leg scores decreased significantly; the absolute decrease in scores did not differ between groups (P=0.71, 0.22, 0.86, respectively).

Conclusions

Systemic intraoperative TXA administration is associated with a significant decrease in post-operative blood loss in biportal spinal endoscopy, with no impact on the improvement in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) or rate of post-operative complications. Single level biportal discectomies had significantly less postoperative drainage with TXA and may not need drains postoperatively. Larger, randomized studies are necessary to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of TXA use in biportal spinal endoscopy.

Clinical effects of arthroscopic-assisted uni-portal spinal surgery and unilateral bi-portal endoscopy on unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the clinical effectiveness of Arthroscopic-assisted Uni-portal Spinal Surgery (AUSS) in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis.

METHODS

A total of 475 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis from January 2019 to January 2023 were included in this study. Among them, 240 patients were treated with AUSS (AUSS group); the other 235 patients were treated with unilateral bi-portal endoscopy treatment (UBE group). The differences in surgery-related clinical indicators, pain degree before and after surgery, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), CT imaging parameters of spinal stenosis, and clinical efficacy were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Patients in the AUSS group had a shorter operative time than those in the UBE group, and the length of incision and surgical bleeding were less than those in the UBE group, with statistically significant differences (P < 0.05). Before operation, there was no significant difference in the VAS score of low back pain and leg pain between the two groups (P > 0. 05). After operation, patients in both groups showed a significant reduction in low back and leg pain, and their VAS scores were significantly lower than before the operation (P < 0.05). Three months after surgery, the results of CT re-examination in both groups showed that the spinal stenosis of the patients was well improved, and the measurements of lumbar spinal interspace APDC, CAC, ICA, CAD and LAC were significantly higher than those before surgery (P < 0. 05). Besides, the lumbar function of patients improved significantly in both groups, and ODI measurements were significantly lower than those before surgery (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Both AUSS and UBE with unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression can achieve good clinical results in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis, but the former has the advantages of simpler operation, shorter operation time, shorter incision length, and less surgical blood loss.

Is Minimally Invasive Spinal Surgery Superior to Endoscopic Spine Surgery in Postoperative Radiologic Outcomes of Lumbar Spine Degenerative Disease? A Systematic Review

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.

Early efficacy observation of the unilateral biportal endoscopic technique in the treatment of multi-level lumbar spinal stenosis

BACKGROUND

To explore the early curative effect of unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) in the treatment of multi-level lumbar spinal stenosis with the help of multiple small incisions.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on 26 patients with multi-level lumbar spinal stenosis treated by UBE in our hospital from August 1, 2021, to March 1, 2022. We collect patients' basic medical records and independently design surgical incisions. The visual analog score (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were compared before surgery, 7 days after surgery and 6 months after surgery. Spinal canal diameters on CT were compared before surgery and 7 days after surgery. The modified MacNab standard was used to evaluate the efficacy satisfaction at 6 months after operation.

RESULTS

In this study, 26 patients were operated according to the predetermined surgical plan. The operative time was 145 ± 40.11 min, the intraoperative blood loss was 156.25 ± 44.32 ml, and the postoperative hospital stay was 4.79 ± 1.31 days. The VAS scores of postoperative lumbago and leg pain were lower than those before surgery (P < 0.05). The postoperative ODI score was significantly different from that before surgery (P < 0.05). The postoperative CT sagittal diameter was significantly different from that before surgery (P < 0.05). The curative effect of modified MacNab was 76.92% when followed up 7 days after surgery. The curative effect of modified MacNab was 92.31% when followed up 6 months after surgery, which was significantly improved compared with 7 days after surgery.

CONCLUSION

Under multiple small incision channels, UBE can effectively treat multi-level lumbar spinal stenosis, significantly relieve the clinical symptoms of patients, and significantly improve the quality of life of patients. It is a safe and feasible minimally invasive surgical treatment method for multi-level lumbar spinal stenosis.

Biportal Endoscopic Approach for Lumbar Degenerative Disease in the Ambulatory Outpatient vs Inpatient Setting: A Comparative Study

BACKGROUND

Biportal spinal endoscopy is increasingly utilized for lumbar disc herniations and lumbar stenosis. The objective was to investigate the safety and effectiveness of the technique in the outpatient vs inpatient setting.

METHODS

This is a comparative study of consecutive patients who underwent biportal spinal endoscopy by a single surgeon at a single institution. Demographics, surgical complications, and patient-reported outcomes were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed. Statistics were calculated among treatment groups using unpaired t test and χ 2 analysis where appropriate. Statistical significance was determined as P < 0.05.

RESULTS

Eighty-four patients were included, 58 (69.0%) as outpatient, 26 (31.0%) as inpatient. Mean follow-up was 7.5 months. Statistically significant differences in age, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, and Charleston Comorbidity Index scores were reported between cohorts, with younger and healthier patients undergoing outpatient surgery (P < 0.0001). Outpatients were more likely to have discectomies while inpatients were more likely to have decompressions for stenosis. No significant differences in postoperative complications were found between groups.Both cohorts demonstrated significant improvement in visual analog scale (VAS) back and leg pain scores and Oswestry Disability Index scores (P < 0.001). Outpatients had significantly lower postoperative VAS back pain (P = 0.001) and Oswestry Disability Index scores (P = 0.004) at 5-8 weeks compared with inpatients, but there was no significant difference for VAS leg pain scores at all time points between the cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Early results demonstrate that biportal spinal endoscopy can safely and effectively be performed in both inpatient and outpatient settings.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Outpatient biportal spinal endoscopy can be performed successfully in well selected patients, which may reduce the financial burden of spine surgery to the U.S. healthcare system.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3

Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery: Clinical Results for 163 Patients

BACKGROUND

Biportal endoscopy spine surgery is an endoscopic procedure that uses 2 portals, 1 for the endoscope and 1 for the instruments. It provides an excellent and very versatile field of view, with the advantage of another portal to approach the most common degenerative lumbar pathologies.

METHODS

We evaluated a retrospective series of patients who underwent biportal endoscopy with ≥1 year of follow-up. Relevant epidemiological and clinical data, such as the Oswestry disability index and visual analog scale for pain, were also considered. Complications and the effects of the learning curve are also discussed.

RESULTS

We included 163 patients treated within a 5-year period with ≥1 year of follow-up available. The main pathologies were disc herniation (53.4%), foraminal stenosis (19%), and central canal stenosis (16.6%). The outcomes regarding disability and pain scores after surgery were very good, with a redistribution of the patient sample to the mild categories of disability. Inferential analysis showed relative and absolute improvements for both disc herniation and canal stenosis in terms of the Oswestry disability index and visual analog scale for pain, especially for disc herniation. The incidence of complications was approximately 7%. The most common approach was interlaminar (89%), and the most common pathology was disc herniation (54.9%). The duration of surgery overall and for the different stages had improved at the end of the learning curve with a reduction of almost 58 minutes.

CONCLUSIONS

Biportal endoscopy is a minimally invasive procedure that is safe and effective, with a low rate of complications. It has a reproducible learning curve and provides very good outcomes regarding functionality and pain scores.

A case report: Unilateral biportal endoscopic revision for adjacent segmental disease: Case presentations and literature review

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.

Technical Feasibility and Early Clinical Outcome of Biportal Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Larger Cage

BACKGROUND

Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with biportal endoscopic guidance (BE-TLIF) has been previously reported with promising clinical results. However, complications such as delayed union or subsidence occurred as with open surgery. We assumed using larger cages would result in less occurrence of such complications. We aimed to analyze the clinical outcome and technical feasibility of BE-TLIF using larger cages, initially designed for oblique lumbar interbody fusion.

METHODS

We enrolled cases that underwent single-level BE-TLIF between January 2021 and January 2022. Polyetheretherketone cages that were larger than the conventional size were used. Diagnoses were degenerative spondylolisthesis or isthmic spondylolisthesis. Visual analog scale scores of the back and leg and Oswestry Disability Index were collected perioperatively. Modified Macnab criteria were used to evaluate the patients at the final follow-up. Radiologic outcome of interbody fusion rate and perioperative complications were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 35 cases were included in this study. The mean age was 67.5 ± 8.4 and consisted of 13 male patients, and the mean follow-up duration was 18.3 ± 3.7 months. The majority (32/35, 91.3%) of the index level was located within the lower lumbar region, L4-S1. Oswestry Disability Index scores improved from 65.4 ± 5.4 preoperatively to 15.4 ± 6.1 at the final follow-up (P < 0.001). Visual analog scale scores of the leg decreased from 7.9 ± 1.5 to 1.7 ± 1.5 at the final follow-up (P < 0.001). Per the modified Macnab criteria on the final follow-up, 94% of the patients reported good/excellent. Most (94.2%) of the patients showed fusion grade I and II at the 1-year follow-up. No patient showed subsidence or other postoperative complication.

CONCLUSIONS

BE-TLIF using a larger cage was safely performed without risk of subsidence during the 1-year follow-up. A cage with a larger footprint may be advantageous in BE-TLIF in the aspect of interbody fusion and subsidence.

Biportal endoscopic paraspinal decompressive foraminotomy for lumbar foraminal stenosis: clinical outcomes and factors influencing unsatisfactory outcomes

BACKGROUND

Lumbar foraminal stenosis (LFS) is an important pathologic entity that causes lumbar radiculopathies. Unrecognized LFS may be associated with surgical failure, and LFS remains challenging to treat surgically. This retrospective cohort study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes and prognostic factors of decompressive foraminotomy performed using the biportal endoscopic paraspinal approach for LFS.

METHODS

A total of 102 consecutive patients with single-level unilateral LFS who underwent biportal endoscopic paraspinal decompressive foraminotomy were included. We evaluated the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) before and after surgery. Demographic, preoperative data, and radiologic parameters, including the coronal root angle (CRA), were investigated. The patients were divided into Group A (satisfaction group) and Group B (unsatisfaction group). Parameters were compared between these two groups to identify the factors influencing unsatisfactory outcomes.

RESULTS

In Group A (78.8% of patients), VAS and ODI scores significantly improved after biportal endoscopic paraspinal decompressive foraminotomy (p < 0.001). However, Group B (21.2% of patients) showed higher incidences of stenosis at the lower lumbar level (p = 0.009), wide segmental lordosis (p = 0.021), and narrow ipsilateral CRA (p = 0.009). In the logistic regression analysis, lower lumbar level (OR = 13.82, 95% CI: 1.33-143.48, p = 0.028) and narrow ipsilateral CRA (OR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.86-1.00, p = 0.047) were associated with unsatisfactory outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant improvement in clinical outcomes was observed for a year after biportal endoscopic paraspinal decompressive foraminotomy. However, clinical outcomes were unsatisfactory in 21.2% of patients, and lower lumbar level and narrow ipsilateral CRA were independent risk factors for unsatisfactory outcomes.

Clinical outcomes and complications after biportal endoscopic spine surgery: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of 3673 cases

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.

Transforaminal Interbody Fusion Using the Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Technique Compared With Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for the Treatment of Lumbar Spine Diseases: Analysis of Clinical and Radiological Outcomes

BACKGROUND

There has been a widespread application of minimally invasive spinal surgery techniques in the past few years. Unilateral biportal endoscopic has been successfully used in a variety of lumbar spine diseases, but there are few studies on lumbar fusion assisted by unilateral biportal endoscopy.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of transforaminal interbody fusion using the unilateral biportal endoscopic technique (UBEIF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in patients with lumbar disease.

METHODS

We studied 128 patients, 58 in the UBEIF group and 70 in the TLIF group. The Oswestry disability index, creatine kinase, visual analog score (VAS) for leg and back pain were used to assess clinical outcomes. Radiographic outcomes were assessed using the fusion rate, internal fixation loosening, and adjacent segment degeneration.

RESULTS

Back and leg pain VAS scores in both groups were significantly lower 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery ( P < .05). A significant reduction in Oswestry disability index in both groups was observed 6 and 12 months after surgery ( P < .05). Compared with the TLIF group at 1 week after surgery, UBEIF patients' VAS score for back pain significantly improved ( P < .05). There was no difference in fusion rate between the 2 groups (98.27% vs 98.57%).

CONCLUSION

UBEIF and TLIF have similar clinical and radiographic outcomes in the treatment of single-segment lumbar disease with lumbar instability, including improved back and leg pain, improved disability, and high fusion rates. Furthermore, with UBEIF, less blood is lost, there is better relief of early back pain, and hospital stays are shorter.

Morphometric change in intervertebral foramen after percutaneous endoscopic lumbar foraminotomy: an in vivo radiographic study based on three-dimensional foramen reconstruction

PURPOSE

This study aimed to perform in vivo three-dimensional (3D) quantitative measurements of morphometric changes in the foramen in patients with lumbar foraminal stenosis (LFS) undergoing percutaneous endoscopic lumbar foraminotomy (PELF) and investigate the relationship between anatomical changes in the foramen and clinical outcomes.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed consecutive patients with LFS treated with PELF between January 2016 and September 2020 at our centre. Clinical outcomes were evaluated. Foraminal volume (FV) and foraminal minimal area (FMA) were calculated using a novel vertebral and foramen segmentation method. A comparison of the anatomical parameters of the foramen were conducted between the satisfied and unsatisfied groups divided based on the modified MacNab criteria.

RESULTS

A total of 26 eligible patients with a mean follow-up of 3.6 years were enrolled. A significant increase was found in overall FV (71.5%) from 1.436 ± 0.396 to 2.464 ± 0.719 cm3 (P < 0.001) and FMA (109.5%) from 0.849 ± 0.207 to 1.780 ± 0.524 cm2. All clinical outcomes were significantly improved (P < 0.001) after PELF. No significant difference was found in changes in neither FV nor FMA between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Clinical results and foraminal dimensions improved significantly after PELF, indicating that PELF was a prominent technique suitable for LFS because of the direct decompression at impingement structures. No relationship was found between morphometric changes and clinical outcomes, revealing that full-scale endoscopic decompression is necessary and adequate for LFS, and unsatisfactory outcomes are less likely to result from decompression procedure.

Complications and Management of Endoscopic Spinal Surgery

In the past, the use of endoscopic spine surgery was limited to intervertebral discectomy; however, it has recently become possible to treat various spinal degenerative diseases, such as spinal stenosis and foraminal stenosis, and the treatment range has also expanded from the lumbar spine to the cervical and thoracic regions. However, as endoscopic spine surgery develops and its indications widen, more diverse and advanced surgical techniques are being introduced, and the complications of endoscopic spine surgery are also increasing accordingly. We searched the PubMed/MEDLINE databases to identify articles on endoscopic spinal surgery, and key words were set as “endoscopic spinal surgery,” “endoscopic cervical foramoinotomy,” “PECD,” “percutaneous transforaminal discectomy,” “percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy,” “PELD,” “PETD,” “PEID,” “YESS” and “TESSYS.” We analyzed the evidence level and classified the prescribed complications according to the literature. Endoscopic lumbar surgery was divided into full endoscopic interlaminar and transforaminal approaches and a unilateral biportal approach. We performed a comprehensive review of available literature on complications of endoscopic spinal surgery. This study particularly focused on the prevention of complications. Regardless of the surgical methods, the most common complications related to endoscopic spinal surgery include dural tears and perioperative hematoma. transient dysesthesia, nerve root injury and recurrence. However, Endoscopic spinal surgery, including full endoscopic transforaminal and interlaminar and unilateral biportal approaches, is a safe and effective a treatment for lumbar as well as cervical and thoracic spinal diseases such as disc herniation, lumbar spinal stenosis, foraminal stenosis and recurrent disc herniation.

Indications for and Outcomes of Three Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Approaches for the Decompression of Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Systematic Review

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.

SPINE: High heterogeneity and no significant differences in clinical outcomes of endoscopic foraminotomy vs fusion for lumbar foraminal stenosis: a meta-analysis

Objective

This study aimed to systematically review the literature for comparative and non-comparative studies reporting on clinical outcomes of patients with lumbar foraminal stenosis treated by either endoscopic foraminotomy or fusion.

Methods

In adherence with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a literature search was done on January 17, 2022, using Medline and Embase. Clinical studies were eligible if they reported outcomes following fusion or endoscopic foraminotomy, in patients with primary lumbar foraminal stenosis. Two independent reviewers screened titles, abstracts, and full-texts to determine eligibility; performed data extraction; and assessed the quality of eligible studies according to the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklist.

Results

The search returned 827 records; 266 were duplicates, 538 were excluded after title/abstract/full-text screening, and 23 were eligible, with 16 case series reporting on endoscopic foraminotomy, 7 case series reporting on fusion, and no comparative studies. The JBI checklist indicated that 21 studies scored ≥4 points. When comparing endoscopic foraminotomy to fusion, pooled data revealed reduced operative time (69 vs 119 min, P < 0.01) but similar Oswestry disability index (19 vs 20, P = 0.67), lower back pain (2 vs 2, P = 0.11), leg pain (2 vs 2, P = 0.15), complication rates (10% vs 5%, P = 0.22), and reoperation rates (5% vs 0%, P = 0.16). The proportions of patients with good/excellent MacNab criteria were similar for endoscopic foraminotomy and fusion (82-91% vs 85-91%).

Conclusions

There were high heterogeneity and no significant differences in clinical outcomes, complication rates, and reoperation rates between endoscopic foraminotomy and fusion for the treatment of lumbar foraminal stenosis; although endoscopic foraminotomy has reduced operative time.

Modified Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy Results in Improved Clinical Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate and describe the clinical efficacy and safety of a modified unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomy.

METHODS

From February 2019 to February 2020, patients who met the inclusion criteria were treated using a modified unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomy. During the operation, the herniated disc was removed and the ligamentum flavum was preserved. Clinical efficacy was assessed via postoperative imaging and follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 70 patients were followed up for more than 2 years, including 51 males and 19 females, aged 49.4 ± 16.0 years. All operations were completed and no complications were noted. Postoperative lumbar magnetic resonance imaging showed that the decompression of the nerve root was sufficient and the ligamentum flavum was preserved in all patients. Postoperative lumbar CT showed that the caudal lamina and inferior articular process of the cephalad vertebral were partially removed. Lower back and leg pain were significantly relieved after surgery, and the Oswestry Disability Index was significantly improved compared to presurgery measurements (P ＜ 0.01). After 2 years of follow-up, the sensory and muscle strength of nerve roots were significantly recovered (P ＜ 0.01). According to the MacNab score of the patients, 40 cases were defined as "excellent," 26 cases were "good," 2 cases were "fair," and 2 cases were "poor."

CONCLUSIONS

Modified unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomy can completely remove a lumbar herniated disc; relieve lower back and leg pain; improve lumbar function; reduce the risk of dural tearing, cerebrospinal fluid leakage, and epidural hematoma; and reduce the epidural adhesion and arachnoiditis caused by ligamentum flavum resection.

Comparison of the safety and efficacy of unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion and uniportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion: a 1-year follow-up

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.

Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Technical Note and an Outcome Comparison with the Conventional Minimally Invasive Fusion

Background

In the past few decades, the minimally invasive technique for spine surgery has developed extensively from the scope of decompression until fusion surgeries to reduce damages to the normal anatomical structure. Unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (ULIF) is one of the fusion options which is readily available without a sophisticated minimal invasive instrument. Our aim is to introduce ULIF experience in our center and comparing the result with conventional minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF).

Methods

This is a retrospective cohort study of 145 lumbar spondylolisthesis cases that underwent fusion surgery with either ULIF or the conventional MIS-TLIF. All of the patients were observed within a 12-month follow-up period to evaluate the back pain and leg pain Visual Analogue Score (VAS), the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), and fusion rate.

Results

The leg pain VAS was similarly improved in both groups. ULIF has a significant back pain improvement on direct post operation and at the 3-months follow-up (p value 0.032 and 0.046 respectively). ULIF group also had a significantly better improvement of ODI scores on the early post-operative period (p=0.045). However, both groups similarly showed improvement of ODI score and the SF-36 at the 3-, 6-, and 12- months follow up.

Conclusion

Full endoscopic fusion surgery with ULIF offers a comparable long-term outcome and a significantly better back pain VAS reduction in short-term follow up compared to the conventional MIS-TLIF. ULIF, with further improvement, can be the next gold standard in managing degenerative lumbar spine conditions.

Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Foraminotomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Spinal endoscopic techniques have recently been applied to complex degenerative conditions or failed back surgery syndrome. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess transforaminal endoscopic lumbar foraminotomy (TELF) outcomes and adverse event rates. We also analyzed the effectiveness of the technique for chronic pain after arthrodesis or previous spinal surgery.

METHODS

Multiple databases were searched for studies published in the English language, involving patients > 18 years old who underwent endoscopic foraminotomy. Outcomes included the rate of patients who showed "excellent" and "good" postoperative improvement, decreased leg pain, and improved Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores. Adverse events considered in the analysis included nerve root damage and intraoperative dural tear, the proportion of patients requiring revision surgery or recurrences, and infections.

RESULTS

A total of 14 studies, encompassing 600 patients, were identified. Approximately 85% of patients improved significantly after TELF, without significant differences among different groups (85% vs. 78%, respectively). Mean leg pain decreased an average of 5.2 points, and ODI scores improved by 41.2%. Patients with previous spine surgery or failed back surgery syndrome had higher postoperative leg dysesthesia rates after TELF (14% vs. 1%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

TELF is a useful and safe method to achieve decompression in foraminal stenosis. This technique is indicated in the elderly or patients with comorbidities. Preoperative planning is paramount in determining the foraminal size and endoscope trajectory. A diamond burr is recommended because it has an advantage over the regular endoscopic shaver in bleeding control and complication avoidance.

Long-term Outcomes after Microsurgical Decompression of Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis and Adverse Effects of Preoperative Scoliosis: A Prospective Cohort Study

Lumbar foraminal stenosis is a common disorder, with surgical treatment varying from simple decompression to interbody fusion. It is often associated with degenerative lumbar scoliosis, but the effects of scoliosis on outcomes are unclear. The objectives of this study were to clarify long-term outcomes after microsurgical decompression of lumbar foraminal stenosis through Wiltse’s approach and to determine the effects of scoliosis on these outcomes. A total of 86 consecutive patients with lumbar foraminal stenosis were prospectively followed after microsurgical decompression. They were categorized in multiple subcohorts with follow-up durations ranging from 6 months to 5 years. Outcomes were assessed using the Short Form 36 questionnaire (average physical scores and bodily pain scores). Local Cobb angle of the operative segment was measured preoperatively, and its effects on outcomes were analyzed. Average physical scores improved significantly from 33.8 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 29.1–38.5) preoperatively to 59.5 (95% CI: 54.6–64.3) at 6 months postoperatively and remained improved for 5 years. Bodily pain scores improved significantly from 23.7 (95% CI: 18.7–28.6) preoperatively to 56.3 (95% CI: 51.2–61.6) at 6 months postoperatively and remained improved for 5 years. Patients with preoperative scoliosis (local Cobb angle >10 degrees) had poorer outcomes: average physical scores were worse by 9.6 points (p = 0.07) and bodily pain scores were worse by 12.1 points (p = 0.02), compared with patients without scoliosis (local Cobb angle ≤10 degrees). Microsurgical foraminal decompression produced overall excellent outcomes in patients with lumbar foraminal stenosis. Preoperative scoliosis attenuated these beneficial effects.

Biportal endoscopic posterior lumbar decompression and vertebroplasty for extremely elderly patients affected by lower lumbar delayed vertebral collapse with lumbosacral radiculopathy

Background

Lower lumbar osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture in extremely elderly patients can often lead to lumbosacral radiculopathy (LSR) due to delayed vertebral collapse (DVC). Surgical intervention requires posterior instrumented lumbar fusion as well as vertebral augmentation or anterior column reconstruction depending on the cleft formation and intravertebral instability. However, it is necessary to decide on surgery in consideration of the patient’s frail status, surgical invasiveness, and rehabilitation. In the lower lumbar DVC without intravertebral instability, biportal endoscopic posterior lumbar decompression and vertebroplasty (BEPLD + VP) can be simultaneously attempted. This study aimed to assess the clinical outcomes of BEPLD + VP for the treatment of DVC-related LSR.

Methods

This retrospective case series enrolled 18 consecutive extremely elderly (aged ≥ 75-year-old) patients (6 men and 12 women) who had lower lumbar (at or below L3) DVC-related LSR. Patients who require anterior column reconstruction, such as cleft formation accompanied by intravertebral instability and patients who have not been followed for more than 6 months, were excluded from this study. All patients underwent BEPLD + VP under epidural anesthesia. Clinical results were evaluated by the visual analog scale (VAS) score and the modified Japanese Orthopedic Association (mJOA) scores.

Results

Most of the patients had DVC affecting level L4, with the deformation being a flat type or concave type rather than a wedge type. The VAS score (back and leg) significantly decreased from 7.78 ± 1.17 and 6.89 ± 1.13 preoperatively to 2.94 ± 0.64 and 2.67 ± 1.08 within 2 postoperative days (p < 0.001). The mJOA score significantly improved from 4.72 ± 1.27 preoperatively to 8.17 ± 1.15 in the final follow-up (p < 0.001). The mean recovery rate (RR) in the last follow-up was 56.07% ± 9.98. Incidental durotomy was reported in two patients and epidural hematomas in another two patients; however, all patients improved with conservative treatment, and no re-operation was required.

Conclusions

BELPD + VP was a type of salvage therapy that reduces surgical morbidity, requires major spine surgery under general anesthesia and provides good clinical outcomes in extremely elderly patients with DVC-related LSR.

Postoperative spinal epidural hematoma in a biportal endoscopic spine surgery

ABSTRACT

Biportal endoscopic spine surgery (BESS) is extending its application to most kind of spine surgeries. Postoperative spinal epidural hematoma (POSEH) is one of the major concerns of this emerging technique. Through this study we aim to investigate the incidence of POSEH in BESS comparing to a conventional spine surgery (CSS).The patients who underwent a non-fusion decompressive spine surgery due to degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) or herniated lumbar disc (HLD) or both between January 2015 and March 2019 were reviewed retrospectively. The incidence of clinical POSEH that demanded a revision surgery for hematoma evacuation was compared between CSS and BESS. As a second endpoint, the morphometric degree of POSEH was compared between the two groups. The maximal compression of cauda equina by POSEH was measured by 4 grade scale at the T2 axial image and the neurological state was evaluated by 5 grade scale. The indication of hematoma evacuation was more than hG3 with more than nG1. As a subgroup analysis, risk factors of POSEH in BESS were investigated.The 2 groups were homogenous in age, sex, number and level of operated segments. There was significant difference in the incidence of symptomatic POSEH as 2/142 (1.4%) in CSS and 8/95 (8.4%) in BESS (P = .016). The radiological thecal sac compression by hematoma was hG1 65 (61.3%), hG2 35 (33.0%), hG3 5 (4.7%), hG4 1 (0.9%) cases in CSS and hG1 33 (39.8%), hG2 25 (30.1%), hG3 22 (26.5%), hG4 3 cases (3.6%) in BESS. The difference was significant (P < .001). In BESS subgroup analysis, the risk factor of high grade POSEH was bilateral laminectomy (OR = 8.893, P = .023).The incidence of clinical and morphometric POSEH was higher in BESS. In BESS, POSEH developed more frequently in bilateral laminectomy than unilateral laminectomy.

Learning Curve and Clinical Outcome of Biportal Endoscopic-Assisted Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Interbody fusion is a common surgical technique for diseases of the lumbar spine. Biportal endoscopic-assisted lumbar interbody fusion (BE-LIF) is a novel minimally invasive technique that has a long learning curve, which can be a barrier for surgeons. Therefore, we analyzed the learning curve in terms of operative time and evaluated the outcomes of BE-LIF. A retrospective study of fifty-seven consecutive patients who underwent BE-LIF for degenerative lumbar disease by a single surgeon from January 2017 to December 2018 was performed. Fifty patients underwent a single-level procedure, and 7 underwent surgery at two levels. The mean follow-up period was 24 months (range, 14-38). Total operative time, postoperative drainage volume, time to ambulation, and complications were analyzed. Clinical outcome was measured using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score for back and leg pain, and modified Macnab criteria. The learning curve was evaluated by a nonparametric regression locally weighted scatterplot smoothing curve. Cases before the stable point on the curve were designated as group A, and those after the stable point were designated group B. Operative time decreased as the number of cases increased. A stable point was noticed on the 400th day and the 34th case after the first BE-LIF was performed. All cases showed improved ODI and VAS scores at the final follow-up. Overall mean operative time was 171.74 ± 35.1 min. Mean operative time was significantly lower in group B (139.7 ± 11.6 min) compared to group A (193.4 ± 28.3 min). Time to ambulation was significantly lower in group B compared to group A. VAS and ODI scores did not differ between the two groups. BE-LIF is an effective minimally invasive technique for lumbar degenerative disease. In our case series, this technique required approximately 34 cases to reach an adequate performance level.

Does "Coronal Root Angle" Serve as a Parameter in the Removal of Ventral Factors for Foraminal Stenosis at L5-S1 In Stand-alone Microendoscopic Decompression?

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective single-center cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

The present study aims to investigate the causes of failure of L5/S1 foraminal stenosis, and it is hypothesized that the newly defined "L5 coronal root angle (CRA)" may be a parameter in the removal of ventral pathologies.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Lumbar foraminal stenosis is an important cause of recurrent leg pain after central spinal stenosis surgery. Although it can be seen at all levels, L5/S1 is the level at which it is most frequently seen due to its specific characteristics, with success rate is lower than other levels after foraminal decompression.

METHODS

L5/S1 microendoscopic foraminal decompression was performed to 51 patients. According to Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) improvement at 12-month follow-up, those with improvement >20% were classified as Group 1 and <20% were classified as Group 2. The patients who underwent discectomy in addition to foraminotomy formed Group 3. Lumbar lordosis angle, segmental lordosis angle, anterior disc height, pelvic tilt, pelvic incidence, sacral slope, relative disc height ratio, pedicle height/vertebral body height ratio, L5 depth, L5 CRA, and anterior disc height/ posterior disc height ratio parameters were measured with lumbar radiographic views, computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

RESULTS

Among the parameters compared between groups, L5 CRA, posterior disc height, anterior disc height/posterior disc height, relative disc height ratio, and lumbar lordosis angle during extension were seen to be statistically significantly related with low success rate.

CONCLUSION

Failure to remove the ventral pathologies when the L5 CRA is <112. 1º may lead to failed results. Besides, in cases wherein the posterior disc height is <2.85 mm or the anterior/posterior disc height ratio is >3.98, approaches to restoring disc height rather than stand-alone posterior decompression may reduce the possibility of failure.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2.

Complete resolution of chronic pain, sensory impairment, and motor dysfunction following percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic decompression in a failed back surgery syndrome patient-a case report

Failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) is an increasingly common problem that presents a clinical challenge. Though usual treatments may improve pain for some period of time, they do not provide clinically significant recovery of subjective numbness and weakness. We describe a case of a 48-year-old female with FBSS, who presented to the pain clinic with a 29-year history of low back pain, and a 7-year history of sensory and motor dysfunction of her left lower extremity, ever since a left hemi-laminectomy. At the time of presentation, she was wheelchair bound with intense pain, 4/5 strength in her left lower extremity proximally, and 3/5 strength distally. She had previously failed conservative management including medications, physical therapy, and epidural and facet injections. During percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic decompression, her transiting left L5 nerve root was found to be encased in thick scar tissue. The entirety of this scar tissue entrapping her L5 nerve was able to be released, resulting in not only complete resolution of pain but full return of sensory and motor function; in fact, the patient was able to walk out of the post anesthesia care unit without any assistive devices. Despite long-standing damage from many years of nerve entrapment, this patient's sensory and motor function was able to be restored simply by freeing her nerve of scar tissue. Thus, if nerve entrapment in scar tissue is the cause of FBSS, transforaminal endoscopic decompression may offer not only pain relief, but also return of sensory and motor function.

A Narrative Review of Development of Full-Endoscopic Lumbar Spine Surgery

In the first phase of development of lumbar endoscopic spine surgery, the focus was on removal of soft disc material through the working corridor of Kambin’s triangle using transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy. With the introduction of the interlaminar approach and increased interest from both industry and surgeons, there has been an exponential development of endoscopic surgical equipment and a corresponding expansion of endoscopic techniques. Endoscopic treatment strategies are applied to conditions ranging from contained prolapsed intervertebral discs to noncontained migrated herniated discs, hard calcified discs, spinal stenosis in the central or lateral recess and the foraminal and extraforaminal region, and other combinations of degenerative conditions requiring decompression or fusion surgery. The further expansion of endoscopic surgical management involving complicated spinal cases and the final quartet of trauma, infections, tumors, and possibly deformities could be the future stage of endoscopic spine surgery development. This article covers the full range of current treatment strategies and presents possible future developments of endoscopic spine surgery for the management of lumbar spinal conditions.

Effectiveness of Gelatin-Thrombin Matrix Sealants (Floseal®) on Postoperative Spinal Epidural Hematoma during Single-Level Lumbar Decompression Using Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery: Clinical and Magnetic Resonance Image Study

Background

Symptomatic postoperative spinal epidural hematoma (PSEH) is a devastating complication that could develop after lumbar decompression surgery. PSEH can also develop after biportal endoscopic spine surgery (BESS), one of the recently introduced minimally invasive spine surgery techniques. Gelatin-thrombin matrix sealant (GTMS) is commonly used to prevent PSEH. This study aimed at analyzing the clinical and radiological effects of GTMS use during BESS.

Methods

A total of 206 patients with spinal stenosis who underwent decompression by BESS through a posterior interlaminar approach from October 2015 to September 2018 were enrolled in this study. Postoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was performed in all patients for evaluation of PSEH. Patients in whom GTMS was not used during surgery were assigned to Group A, and those in whom GTMS was used were classified as Group B. In the clinical evaluation, the visual analog scale (VAS) of the leg and back, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and modified MacNab criteria were used. The incidence rate and degree of dural compression of PSEH on postoperative MRI were measured.

Results

The average age of the patients was 68.1 ± 11.2 (42–89) years. The overall incidence rate of PSEH was 20.9% (43/206). The incidence rates in Groups A and B were 26.4% and 13.6%, respectively, showing a significant difference (p = 0.023). The VAS-leg and ODI improvement was significantly different depending on the intraoperative use of GTMS. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of the VAS-back improvement. Groups A and B showed “good” and “excellent” rates according to the modified MacNab criteria in 79.4% and 87.6% of patients, respectively, showing statistically significant difference (p = 0.049). In Group A, two patients underwent revision surgery due to PSEH, while none in Group B had such event.

Conclusion

Intraoperative use of GTMS during BESS may be related to reduction in the occurrence rate of PSEH. Specifically, patients with GTMS appliance showed marked decrease in the occurrence of PSEH and had better clinical outcomes.

Risk Factors and Options of Management for an Incidental Dural Tear in Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery

Study Design

Here we perform a retrospective analysis regarding an incidental dural tear (IDT) during biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (BESS).

Purpose

This study investigates the causes of IDT specifically related to technical procedures of BESS with the aim of lowering its risk during training.

Overview of Literature

The incidence of dural tear is reported 0.5%–18% in open spinal surgery and 1.7%–4.3% during endoscopic spinal surgery. Because conversion to open surgery for direct repair could become necessary during endoscopic spinal surgery, prevention of this complication is essential.

Methods

We have retrospectively studied IDTs by four surgeons during 1 or 2 years after starting BESS for lumbar degenerative diseases and analyzed the locations, sizes, and specific endoscopic conditions specific to each.

Results

Twenty-five cases (1.6%) of IDTs among 1,551 cases of BESS occurred; 13 cases (52%) of these were within the first 6 months. The locations were dorsal midline in 12 cases, ipsilateral side in 11 cases, and contralateral side in two cases. The tear sizes were <10 mm in 20 cases and ≥10 mm in five cases. IDT commonly occurred due to injury of central dural folding during flavectomy under turbid surgical fields due to small bleeds under water. Twenty cases with IDTs of <10 mm were treated well with the patch technique. Among five cases of ≥10 mm, three underwent open repair within a few days, and two of these which failed to conservative management required a delayed revision operation due to pseudomeningocele. No cases progressed to surgical site infection or infectious spondylitis.

Conclusions

IDTs of <10 mm can be successfully treated with the patch technique. To prevent IDT during the early learning period, maintaining clear visibility by securing fluent saline outflow and meticulous hemostasis of small bleeding from exposed cancellous bone and epidural vessels is essential with caution not to injure the central dural folding during midline flavectomy.

Residual leg numbness after endoscopic discectomy treatment of lumbar disc herniation

Background

Transforaminal endoscopic discectomy was popular in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation. Previous study focuses on the leg pain of disc herniation, and little study concern the residual leg numbness after surgery. The purposes of this study were to evaluate the clinical outcomes of transforaminal endoscopic discectomy in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation with leg pain and numbness.

Methods

Patients with one level lumbar disc herniation who had transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy from June 2016 to July 2019 were categorized into two groups according to the leg numbness. 293 patients initially fulfilled the study criteria, and 27 patients were lost to follow-up. Of the remaining 266 patients available for analysis, 81 cases with leg numbness and pain (A group), and 185 cases with leg pain (B). Endoscopic transforaminal lumbar discectomy was performed, and the clinical outcomes of blood loss, operation times, hospital stay days, pain (Visual Analog Scale, VAS-pain), numbness (VAS-numbness), functional disability (Oswestry Disability Index, ODI), and the disk height and intervertebral foramen height were recorded.

Results

All patients with pain and numbness pre-operation in group A, complain of leg numbness during or just after walking or standing not diminished after surgery in group A, and no one complain numbness after surgery in group B. The pain index and ODI score were better than preoperational in all patients (P < 0.01), and no significant difference between two groups (P > 0.05). The postoperative disk and foramen height were no significant difference compare to preoperative in all patients (P > 0.05), and no significant difference between two groups (P > 0.05). The leg numbness symptoms last longer in central disc herniation patients (10.4 ± 2.2 months) than in paracentral (6.3 ± 2.1 months) and foraminal disc herniation patients (5.6 ± 2.3 months) after surgery (P < 0.01).

Conclusions

Based on the results of this study, transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy was effective and safe procedures in the treatment of disc herniation with leg pain and numbness. The leg numbness symptoms last longer in central disc herniation patients than in paracentral and foraminal disc herniation patients after surgery.

Biportal endoscopic versus microscopic lumbar decompressive laminectomy in patients with spinal stenosis: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Biportal endoscopic decompressive laminectomy is a widely performed procedure and shows acceptable clinical outcomes. However, the evidence regarding the advantages of biportal endoscopic surgery is weak, a randomized controlled trial is therefore warranted.

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical efficacies of biportal endoscopic and microscopic decompressive laminectomy in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Sixty-four participants suffering from low back and leg pain with single-level lumbar spinal stenosis who required decompressive laminectomy.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Outcomes were assessed with the use of patient-reported outcome measures, visual analog scale (VAS) score for low back and lower extremity radiating pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI), European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) score, and painDETECT for neuropathic pain. Surgery-related outcomes including operation time, length of hospital stay, postoperative drainage, and serum creatine phosphokinase were evaluated. Perioperative (<30 days) and late (1-12 months) complications were also noted.

METHODS

All participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to undergo biportal endoscopic or microscopic decompressive laminectomy. The primary outcome was the ODI score at 12 months after surgery based on a modified intention-to-treat strategy. The secondary outcomes included VAS score for low back and lower extremity radiating pain, ODI scores, EQ-5D score, and painDETECT score. There were no sources of funding and no conflicts of interest associated with this study.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between groups in the mean ODI score at 12 months after surgery (30 in the microscopy vs. 29 in the biportal endoscopy group, p=.635). There were also no significant differences in low back and lower extremity pain VAS scores, ODI, EQ-5D scores, and painDETECT scores at the 3-, 6-, or 12-month follow-up. Operation time, length of hospital stay, serum creatine phosphokinase, and perioperative complications, such as durotomies and symptomatic hematoma, showed no significant differences between the groups; however, one participant underwent additional revision surgery 9 months after the index surgery in the microscopy group.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the study design limitation of relatively short duration of follow-up, this trial suggests that biportal endoscopic decompressive laminectomy is an alternative to and offers similar clinical outcomes as microscopic open surgery in patients with symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis.

Pseudomeningocele after biportal endoscopic spine surgery: A case report

Background

Biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (BESS) was recently introduced and became prevalent fast. Incidental dural tear (IDT) could happen as one of the common complications even in endoscopic spine surgery.

Case description

A 45-year old male underwent discectomy by BESS. IDT sized about 15mm at the dorsal surface of dura occurred during the laminotomy procedure with an osteotome. Revision surgery was planned for assuming that the IDT is small enough to be sealed with a patch.

Conclusion

Revision surgery using BESS for a small-sized IDT could be reasonable alternative treatment to preserve the soft tissue, the primary purpose of MISS.