Percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy versus microendoscopic discectomy for upper lumbar disc herniation: a retrospective comparative study.
Zhi-zhen Jing, Lijun Li, Jiefu Song
Abstract
Zhi-zhen Jing, Lijun Li, Jiefu Song
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The present study aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) and microendoscopic discectomy (MED) in the treatment of upper lumbar disc herniation (ULDH). METHODS: A total of 62 ULDH patients treated with PTED or MED were enrolled in this study and were randomly divided into group A (PTED, n=31) and group B (MED, n=31). The characteristics, surgical duration, incision length, blood loss, volume of drainage, length of hospital stay, and the complications and recurrences of patients were recorded and compared between the two groups. The Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and visual analogue scale (VAS) scores were compared preoperatively, postoperatively, and at the final follow-up between group A and group B. The postoperatively clinical outcomes of patients were evaluated according to the modified MacNab criterion. RESULTS: <0.05). CONCLUSION: PTED provides better results in the treatment of ULDH compared with MED. It is beneficial to improve the quality of life of patients and is worthy of promotion in clinical application.
OpenAlex reports 24 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
BACKGROUND: The present study aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) and microendoscopic discectomy (MED) in the treatment of upper lumbar disc herniation (ULDH). METHODS: A total of 62 ULDH patients treated with PTED or MED were enrolled in this study and were randomly divided into group A (PTED, n=31) and group B (MED, n=31). The characteristics, surgical duration, incision length, blood loss, volume of drainage, length of hospital stay, and the complications and recurrences of patients were recorded and compared between the two groups. The Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and visual analogue scale (VAS) scores were compared preoperatively, postoperatively, and at the final follow-up between group A and group B. The postoperatively clinical outcomes of patients were evaluated according to the modified MacNab criterion. RESULTS: <0.05). CONCLUSION: PTED provides better results in the treatment of ULDH compared with MED. It is beneficial to improve the quality of life of patients and is worthy of promotion in clinical application.
Key concepts: Medicine, Oswestry Disability Index, Visual analogue scale, Surgery, Percutaneous, Lumbar disc herniation, Blood loss, Orthopedic surgery