首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Bioscience Reports >Percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy precedes interlaminar discectomy in the efficacy and safety for lumbar disc herniation
【2h】

Percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy precedes interlaminar discectomy in the efficacy and safety for lumbar disc herniation

机译:经皮内镜经椎间孔椎间盘切除术在椎间盘椎间盘切除术治疗腰椎间盘突出症的有效性和安全性之前

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

We searched several databases from the times of their inception to 20 December 2018. Randomized controlled trials and cohort studies that compared percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy (PETD) with percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy (PEID) were identified. We used a random-effects model to calculate the relative risks (RRs) of, and standardized mean differences (SMDs) between the two techniques, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Twenty-six studies with 3294 patients were included in the final analysis. Compared with PEID, PETD reduced the short-term (SMD −0.68; 95% CI −1.01, −0.34; P=0.000) and long-term (SMD −0.47; 95% CI −0.82, −0.12; P=0.000) visual analog scale scores, blood loss (SMD −4.75; 95% CI −5.80, −3.71; P=0.000), duration of hospital stay (SMD −1.86; 95% CI −2.36, −1.37; P=0.000), and length of incision (SMD −3.93; 95% CI −5.23, −2.62; P=0.000). However, PEID was associated with a lower recurrence rate (P=0.035) and a shorter operative time (P=0.014). PETD and PEID afforded comparable excellent- and good-quality data, long- and short-term Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores, and complication rates. PETD treated lumbar disc herniation (LDH) more effectively than PEID. Although PETD required a longer operative time, PETD was as safe as PEID, and was associated with less blood loss, a shorter hospital stay, and a shorter incision. PETD is the best option for patients with LDH.
机译:我们从成立之日至2018年12月20日搜索了多个数据库。确定了将经皮内镜经椎间孔椎间盘切除术(PETD)与经皮内镜椎间盘状椎间盘切除术(PEID)进行比较的随机对照试验和队列研究。我们使用随机效应模型以95%的置信区间(CI)计算两种技术之间的相对风险(RRs)和标准化均值差(SMD)。最终分析包括26项针对3294例患者的研究。与PEID相比,PETD减少了短期(SMD -0.68; 95%CI -1.01,-0.34; P = 0.000)和长期(SMD -0.47; 95%CI -0.82,-0.12; P = 0.000)视觉模拟量表评分,失血量(SMD -4.75; 95%CI -5.80,-3.71; P = 0.000),住院时间(SMD -1.86; 95%CI -2.36,-1.37; P = 0.000)和切口长度(SMD -3.93; 95%CI -5.23,-2.62; P = 0.000)。但是,PEID与较低的复发率(P = 0.035)和较短的手术时间(P = 0.014)相关。 PETD和PEID提供了可比的优秀和高质量数据,长期和短期Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)评分以及并发症发生率。 PETD治疗腰椎间盘突出症(LDH)比PEID更有效。尽管PETD需要更长的手术时间,但PETD与PEID一样安全,并且出血量更少,住院时间更短,切口更短。 PETD是LDH患者的最佳选择。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号