首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery Research >Comparison of outcomes between conventional lumbar fenestration discectomy and minimally invasive lumbar discectomy: an observational study with a minimum 2-year follow-up
【24h】

Comparison of outcomes between conventional lumbar fenestration discectomy and minimally invasive lumbar discectomy: an observational study with a minimum 2-year follow-up

机译:常规腰椎开窗椎间盘摘除术与微创腰椎间盘摘除术的结局比较:一项观察期最少为2年的随访研究

获取原文
           

摘要

Background Different surgical techniques for lumbar discectomy are in vogue. This study compares the outcomes of two techniques for lumbar discectomy, viz. micro lumbar discectomy (LD) and conventional fenestration discectomy. Materials and methods Sixty-six patients who had single-level 'virgin’ lumbar disc herniation with unilateral radicular symptoms were included. Of these, 39 had undergone MLD while 27 had undergone fenestration. Outcomes were measured using the visual analogue scale (VAS) for back and leg pain, Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score, Roland-Morris score (RM) improvement and North American Spine Society (NASS) score. All quantitative data were summarised using mean and standard deviation, and qualitative data using proportions. Significance of differences across the two groups in terms of mean scores was assessed using independent sample t test, and the improvement within the same groups was measured using paired t test. Multiple linear regression analysis was done to assess independent predictors of improvement. Results The MLD group showed statistically better outcomes with regard to improvement in JOA score at 6 weeks, 6 months and 2 years. Mean (SD) VAS for lower back ache at 6 weeks, 6 months, and 2 years was better for the MLD group. But the difference noted in VAS for leg pain was not statistically significant across the groups ( P = 0.133). The improvement noted in JOA at 2 years postoperatively compared to the preoperative score was 13.67 (2.89) in the MLD group and 12.11 (3.30) in the macrodiscectomy group ( P = 0.046). The mean (SD) RM improvement for the MLD group was 79.24% (8.96%) vs 71.72% (16.53), P = 0.02, in the macrodiscectomy group. Mean NASS score for the MLD group was 2.74 vs 2.96 in the conventional group ( P = 0.407). The type of surgery was the significant predictor of improvement in JOA score ( P = 0.046) even after adjusting for age, sex, level of lesion and the initial JOA score. MLD as the surgical procedure ( P = 0.002) and a lower initial JOA score ( P = 0.006) were found significantly contributing to the RM improvement. Conclusion The study shows that both MLD and fenestration give comparable results at short-term follow-up. There is statistically significant improvement in MLD with regard to improvement in JOA, VAS and RM scores at 2 years. However, the difference is not large and may not be clinically significant.
机译:背景技术腰椎间盘切除术的不同外科技术正在流行。这项研究比较了两种腰椎间盘切除术的效果,即。微型腰椎间盘切除术(LD)和常规开窗椎间盘切除术。材料和方法包括66例单侧“根治性”腰椎间盘突出症伴单侧根性症状的患者。其中,有39例经历了MLD,而27例进行了开窗。使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)评估背部和腿部疼痛,日本骨科协会(JOA)得分,罗兰·莫里斯(Roland-Morris)得分(RM)改善和北美脊柱协会(NASS)得分来评估结局。使用均值和标准差汇总所有定量数据,并使用比例汇总定性数据。使用独立样本t检验评估两组平均得分差异的显着性,并使用配对t检验评估同一组内的改善。进行了多元线性回归分析,以评估改善的独立预测因素。结果MLD组在6周,6个月和2年时的JOA评分改善方面显示出统计学上更好的结局。对于MLD组,在6周,6个月和2年时的下背痛的平均(SD)VAS更好。但是,VAS中腿痛的差异在各组之间均无统计学意义(P = 0.133)。与术前评分相比,MLD组术后2年JOA的改善为13.67(2.89),大盘切除组为12.11(3.30)(P = 0.046)。大盘切除术组MLD组的平均(SD)RM改善为79.24%(8.96%),而71.72%(16.53),P = 0.02。 MLD组的平均NASS得分为2.74,而常规组为2.96(P = 0.407)。即使调整了年龄,性别,病变程度和初始JOA评分,手术类型仍是JOA评分改善的重要预测指标(P = 0.046)。发现MLD作为外科手术方法(P = 0.002)和较低的初始JOA评分(P = 0.006)显着促进了RM的改善。结论研究表明,MLD和开窗术在短期随访中均具有可比的结果。就2年时JOA,VAS和RM评分的改善而言,MLD有统计学上的显着改善。但是,差异并不大,在临床上可能并不重要。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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