Comparative study of microscope assisted minimally invasive anterior fusion and mobile microendoscopic discectomy assisted fusion for lumbar degenerative diseases

Abstract

To investigate the effectiveness of microscope assisted anterior lumbar discectomy and fusion (ALDF) and mobile microendoscopic discectomy assisted lumbar interbody fusion (MMED-LIF) for lumbar degenerative diseases. A clinical data of 163 patients with lumbar degenerative diseases who met the criteria between January 2018 and December 2020 was retrospectively analyzed. Fifty-three cases were treated with microscope assisted ALDF (ALDF group) and 110 cases with MMED-LIF (MMED-LIF group). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of gender, age, disease type, surgical segments, preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) scores of low back pain and leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI), intervertebral space height, lordosis angle, and spondylolisthesis rate of the patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis ( P>0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and hospital stay of the two groups were recorded. The effectiveness was evaluated by VAS scores of low back pain and leg pain and ODI. Postoperative lumbar X-ray films were taken to observe the position of Cage and measure the intervertebral space height, lordosis angle, and spondylolisthesis rate of the patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis. The operations were successfully completed in both groups. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and hospital stay in ALDF group were less than those in MMED-LIF group ( P<0.05). The patients in both groups were followed up 12-36 months, with an average of 24 months. The VAS scores of low back pain and leg pain and ODI after operation were lower than those before operation in the two groups, and showed a continuous downward trend, with significant differences between different time points ( P<0.05). There were significant differences between two groups in VAS score of low back pain and ODI ( P<0.05) and no significant difference in VAS score of leg pain ( P>0.05) at each time point. The improvement rates of VAS score of low back pain and ODI in ALDF group were significantly higher than those in MMED-LIF group ( t=7.187, P=0.000; t=2.716, P=0.007), but there was no significant difference in the improvement rate of VAS score of leg pain ( t=0.556, P=0.579). The postoperative lumbar X-ray films showed the significant recovery of the intervertebral space height, lordosis angle, and spondylolisthesis rate at 2 days after operation when compared with preoperation ( P<0.05), and the improvements were maintained until last follow-up ( P>0.05). The improvement rates of intervertebral space height and lordosis angle in ALDF group were significantly higher than those in MMED-LIF group ( P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the reduction rate of spondylolisthesis between the two groups ( t=1.396, P=0.167). During follow-up, there was no loosening or breakage of the implant and no displacement or sinking of the Cage. Under appropriate indications, microscope assisted ALDF and MMED-LIF both can achieve good results for lumbar degenerative diseases. Microscope assisted ALDF was superior to MMED-LIF in the improvement of low back pain and function and the recovery of intervertebral space height and lordosis angle.