Full-endoscopic Decompression Research Articles

Full Endoscopic Decompression for Single Level Lumbar Stenosis: A Clinical Evaluation

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of full endoscopic decompression for single level lumbar spinal canal stenosis. Methods:This observational study was conducted on a total of 370 patients selected by purposive sampling from January 2022 and December 2023, presenting with symptoms more than 3 months and non-responding to conservative treatment. The procedure was performed by placing the patient on a radiolucent Wilson frame with single-shot epidural analgesia. Outcome was measured in terms of pain reduction using Visual analog scale (VAS) before and after surgery, at 3rd, 6th month, and functional outcome was assessed using the Modified MacNab criteria at 6th month, Results: The mean age of the patients was 56.1 years, with 63% male. The most common stenosis level was L4-L5 (36.5%). The mean operation duration was 53 minutes, and the postoperative complications were minimal. Significant improvement in pain levels was observed, with back pain reduced from a preoperative mean of 3.2 to 1.1 at six months, and leg pain from 7.2 to 1.0 (p < 0.001). According to the Modified MacNab criteria, 91.1% of patients reported excellent outcomes at six months, and 8.4% reported good outcomes. Conclusion: Full endoscopic decompression is a highly effective and safe method for treating lumbar spinal stenosis, providing substantial pain relief and excellent functional outcomes with minimal complications. J Shaheed Suhrawardy Med Coll 2023; 15(1): 3-7

Full endoscopic laminotomy decompression versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the treatment of single-segment cervical spinal stenosis: a retrospective, propensity score-matched study.

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is the standard procedure for the treatment of cervical spinal stenosis (CSS), but complications such as adjacent segment degeneration can seriously affect the long-term efficacy. Currently, posterior endoscopic surgery has been increasingly used in the clinical treatment of CSS. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of single-segment CSS patients who underwent full endoscopic laminotomy decompression or ACDF. 138 CSS patients who met the inclusion criteria from June 2018 to August 2020 were retrospectively analyzed and divided into endoscopic and ACDF groups. The propensity score matching (PSM) method was used to adjust the imbalanced confounding variables between the groups. Then, perioperative data were recorded and clinical outcomes were compared, including functional scores and imaging data. Functional scores included Visual Analog Scale of Arms (A-VAS) and Neck pain (N-VAS), Japanese Orthopedic Association score (JOA), Neck Disability Index (NDI), and imaging data included Disc Height Index (DHI), Cervical range of motion (ROM), and Ratio of grey scale (RVG). After PSM, 84 patients were included in the study and followed for 24-30months. The endoscopic group was significantly superior to the ACDF group in terms of operative time, intraoperative blood loss, incision length, and hospital stay (P < 0.001). Postoperative N-VAS, A-VAS, JOA, and NDI were significantly improved in both groups compared with the preoperative period (P < 0.001), and the endoscopic group showed better improvement at 7days postoperatively (P < 0.05). The ROM changes of adjacent segments were significantly larger in the ACDF group at 12months postoperatively and at the last follow-up (P < 0.05). The RVG of adjacent segments showed a decreasing trend, and the decrease was more marked in the ACDF group at last follow-up (P < 0.05). According to the modified MacNab criteria, the excellent and good rates in the endoscopic group and ACDF group were 90.48% and 88.10%, respectively, with no statistically significant difference (P > 0.05). Full endoscopic laminotomy decompression is demonstrated to be an efficacious alternative technique to traditional ACDF for the treatment of single-segment CSS, with the advantages of less trauma, faster recovery, and less impact on cervical spine kinematics and adjacent segmental degeneration.

Full endoscopic percutaneous stenoscopic lumbar decompression and discectomy: An outcome and efficacy analysis on 606 lumbar stenosis patients.

Laminectomy has long been a "gold standard" to treat symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). Minimal invasive spine surgery (MISS) is widely developed to overcome the limitations of conventional laminectomy to achieve a better outcome with minimal complications. Full endoscopic percutaneous stenoscopic lumbar decompression (FE-PSLD) is the newest MISS technique for spinal canal decompression. We aimed to evaluate and analyze the significance of FE-PSLD in reducing pain and its association with age, duration of symptoms, stenosis level, and operative time (OT). A longitudinal cross-sectional study was conducted on 606 LSS patients who underwent FE-PSLD and enrolled from 2020 to 2022. Three-month evaluation of the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and the modified MacNab criteria were assessed. The significance of changes was analyzed using the Wilcoxon signed-ranks test. Spearman's correlation test was performed to evaluate the significant correlation of several variables (pre-PSLD-VAS, age, symptoms duration, OT, and level of LSS) to post-PSLD-VAS, and multiple regression analysis was conducted. The reduction of VAS was statistically significant (P ≤ 0.005) with an average pre-PSLD-VAS of 6.75 ± 0.63 and post-PSLD-VAS of 2.24 ± 1.04. Pre-PSLD-VAS, age, and stenosis level have a statistically significant correlation with post-PSLD-VAS, while the duration of the symptoms and OT have an insignificant correlation. Multiple regression showed the effect of pre-PSLD-VAS (β =0.4033, P = 0.000) and stenosis level (β =0.0951, P = 0.021) are statistically significant with a positive coefficient. FE-PSLD is an efficacious strategy with favorable outcomes for managing LSS, shown by a significant reduction of pain level with a relatively short follow-up time after the procedure. Preoperative pain level, age, and stenosis level are significantly correlated with postoperative pain level. Based on this experimental study, PSLD can be considered a good strategy for treating lumbar canal stenosis in all age groups and all LSS levels.

Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of Full-Endoscopic Decompression for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis With Grade I Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Retrospective Study With a Minimum 1-Year Follow-up

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Decompression without fusion is a surgical option for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) with grade I degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS). However, the outcomes of full-endoscopic decompression remain unknown. This study aimed to investigate the clinical and radiological outcomes of lumbar full-endoscopic decompression for spinal stenosis with grade I DS. METHODS: A total 43 patients with LSS with grade I DS who underwent lumbar full-endoscopic unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression and were followed up for a minimum of 1 year were retrospectively reviewed. Data on demographic characteristics, operative details, radiological images, clinical outcomes, and complications were analyzed. RESULTS: Pain, evaluated using the visual analog scale, was significantly reduced in patients undergoing full-endoscopic decompression in both the leg and back; the Oswestry Disability Index scores also improved (P &lt; .001). MacNab's outcome classification was excellent or good in 95% of patients. One patient eventually needed the fusion surgery, and two patients required further diskectomy surgery because of recurrent symptoms. During follow-up, an increase in the vertebral slip was observed in 46.5% of the patients, but it was not statistically significant (P = .46). The progression of DS, defined as percentage of slip &gt;5%, was observed only in 7% of the patients. An increase in vertebral slip was not associated with the clinical outcomes. There was no difference in radiological outcomes, such as angular motion (P = .36) and translation (P = .13), compared with the preoperative state. The operation did not exacerbate spinal instability. Rather, fewer patients had spinal instability postoperatively. CONCLUSION: Endoscopic decompression alone has comparably good clinical outcomes with those of other surgical techniques in patients with LSS and DS. Few postoperative spinal instability occurred. Rather, the number of patients with instability decreased postoperatively. Full-endoscopic decompression may be a treatment option for patients with grade 1 DS.

Outcomes of FETD versus UBE in the treatment of L5S1 foraminal stenosis: A comparative study

BackgroundThe L5S1 level exhibits unique anatomical features compared with other levels. This makes minimally invasive surgery for L5S1 foraminal stenosis (FS) challenging. This study compared the surgical outcomes of full endoscopic transforaminal decompression (FETD) and unilateral biportal endoscopy with the far-lateral approach (UBEFLA) in patients with L5S1FS. MethodsIn this retrospective study, 49 patients with L5S1FS were divided into two groups. Of these, 24 patients underwent FETD, 25 patients underwent UBEFLA. The study assessed demographic data, leg pain visual analog scale (VAS) score, back pain VAS score, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), modified MacNab outcome scale, and radiographic parameters including postoperative lateral facet preservation (POLFP). ResultsThe Mann-Whitney U test revealed that the UBEFLA group exhibited a higher VAS score for back pain at one week after the operation, whereas the FETD group exhibited a higher leg pain VAS score 6 weeks after the operation. All four undesired MacNab outcomes in the FETD group were attributed to residual leg pain, whereas all five undesired MacNab outcomes in the UBEFLA group were due to recurrent symptoms. Radiographically, the FETD group exhibited greater POLFP. ConclusionsWhen L5S1FS is performed, there may be challenges in adequately clearing the foraminal space in FETD. On the other hand, UBEFLA allowed for a more comprehensive clearance. However, this advantage of UBEFLA was associated with spinal instability as a future outcome.

Transforaminal full-endoscopic decompression under local anesthesia for foraminal stenosis due to stable L5 isthmic spondylolisthesis, a technical note and review:Pars crisscross decompression.

Foraminal stenosis is one of the types of lumbar spinal stenosis. The pathology can be treated minimally invasively by full-endoscopic spine surgery (FESS). The final challenge in transforaminal FESS is foraminal stenosis in patients with stable isthmic spondylolisthesis at L5. This article provides a step-by-step explanation of how to achieve complete decompression. A cannula of 8 mm in diameter is docked at the base of the superior articular process of the sacrum. The pars crisscross that consists of the superior articular process at S1, the floating lamina, the inferior articular process at L4, and the pars ragged edge is then clearly seen endoscopically. Visualization of the pars crisscross is key to successful decompression. Starting with the superior articular process at S1, followed by partial removal of the floating lamina. Next, the tip of the inferior articular process at L4 is removed. The pars ragged edge is then carefully shaved. Finally, decompression of the exiting nerve root at L5 is confirmed. This report provides the first step-by step description of full-endoscopic decompression of foraminal stenosis under local anesthesia in patients with stable L5 isthmic spondylolisthesis, which we have named "full-endoscopic pars crisscross decompression". J. Med. Invest. 71 : 191-196, August, 2024.

Artificial intelligence-based analysis of associations between learning curve and clinical outcomes in endoscopic and microsurgical lumbar decompression surgery.

A common spine surgery procedure involves decompression of the lumbar spine. The impact of the surgeon's learning curve on relevant clinical outcomes is currently not well examined in the literature. A variety of machine learning algorithms have been investigated in this study to determine how a surgeon's learning curve and other clinical parameters will influence prolonged lengths of stay (LOS), extended operating times (OT), and complications, as well as whether these clinical parameters can be reliably predicted. A retrospective monocentric cohort study of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis treated with microsurgical (MSD) and full-endoscopic (FED) decompression was conducted. The study included 206 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis who underwent FED (63; 30.6%) and MSD (118; 57.3%). Prolonged LOS and OT were defined as those exceeding the 75th percentile of the cohort. Furthermore, complications were assessed as a dependent variable. Using unsupervised learning, clusters were identified in the data, which helped distinguish between the early learning curve (ELC) and the late learning curve (LLC). From 15 algorithms, the top five algorithms that best fit the data were selected for each prediction task. We calculated the accuracy of prediction (Acc) and the area under the curve (AUC). The most significant predictors were determined using a feature importance analysis. For the FED group, the median number of surgeries with case surgery type at the time of surgery was 72 in the ELC group and 274 in the LLC group. FED patients did not significantly differ in outcome variables (LOS, OT, complication rate) between the ELC and LLC group. The random forest model demonstrated the highest mean accuracy and AUC across all folds for each classification task. For OT, it achieved an accuracy of 76.08% and an AUC of 0.89. For LOS, the model reached an accuracy of 83.83% and an AUC of 0.91. Lastly, in predicting complications, the random forest model attained the highest accuracy of 89.90% and an AUC of 0.94. Feature importance analysis indicated that LOS, OT, and complications were more significantly affected by patient characteristics than the surgical technique (FED versus MSD) or the surgeon's learning curve. A median of 72 cases of FED surgeries led to comparable clinical outcomes in the early learning curve phase compared to experienced surgeons. These outcomes seem to be more significantly affected by patient characteristics than the learning curve or the surgical technique. Several study variables, including the learning curve, can be used to predict whether lumbar decompression surgery will result in an increased LOS, OT, or complications. To introduce the provided prediction tools into clinics, the algorithms need to be implemented into open-source software and externally validated through large-scale randomized controlled trials.

Use of indocyanine green angiography during endoscopic microvascular decompression for trigeminal neuralgia

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of indocyanine green (ICG) angiography during full endoscopic microvascular decompression for trigeminal neuralgia. MethodsWe extracted retrospective data of patients who received ICG videoangiography during full endoscopic microvascular decompression for trigeminal neuralgia. Preoperative neurovascular contact was evaluated by three-dimensional (3D) fusion images using image analysis software Ziostation2 (ZIOSOFT, Tokyo, Japan) and Intraoperative ICG angiography was used in pre and post ICG injection to identify and assess blood flow in the offending vessel for adequate transposition planification and assess for immediate post transposition blood flow or vasospasm respectively. Patients were assessed the next morning for early signs of brainstem infarction and at one month follow up. ResultsThere were 44 patients. All patients had ICG videoangiography done during the procedure. The mean age was 65.5 and male female ratio 3.4:1. Some anatomical variants were identified during this procedure. Five patients (11.3%) had a trigeminocerebellar artery, three patients (6.8%) had a developed superior petrosal vein and one patient (2.2%) had dural adhesions with encasement of anterior inferior cerebellar artery. Among the 44 patients enrolled, 34 had transposition done and 10 had combined transposition either with neurolysis or Teflon interposition. The main offending vessel was Superior cerebellar artery (SCA) in 23 patients (67.6%). In 5 (14.7%) of 34 patients who underwent Transposition, vasospasm was seen and no complications were observed in all patients but 93.1% had good pain control in postoperative. ConclusionICG angiography in endoscopic microvascular decompression is safe and effective in depicting the offending vessel, its branches and some perforators and contributes significantly to the determination of treatment strategy.

Surgical Technique of Central and Over-the-Top Full-Endoscopic Decompression of the Cervical Spine: A Technical Note.

Endoscopic surgery of the cervical spine is constantly evolving and the spectrum of its indications has expanded in recent decades. Full-endoscopic techniques have standardized the procedures for posterior and anterior access. The full-endoscopic approach was developed to treat degenerative diseases with the least possible invasion and without causing instability of the cervical spine. The posterior full-endoscopic approach is indicated for the treatment of diseases of the lateral part of the vertebral segment, such as herniations and stenoses of the lateral recess and vertebral foramen. There has been little discussion of this approach to the treatment of central stenosis of the cervical spine. This technical note describes a step-by-step surgical technique for central and over-the-top full-endoscopic decompression in the cervical spine, using a 3.7 mm working channel endoscope. This technique has already been shown to be effective in a recent case series with a 4.7 mm working channel endoscope, and may represent a new treatment option for central or bilateral lateral recess stenosis. There is also the possibility of a bilateral full-endoscopic approach, but this may be associated with greater muscle damage and a longer operative time. Case series and comparative studies should be encouraged to confirm the safety and utility of this technique.

Pain improvement and reoperation rate after full-endoscopic decompression for lateral recess stenosis: a 10-year follow-up

PurposeTo share long-term clinical outcomes and our experience with full-endoscopic interlaminar decompression (FEI) for lateral recess stenosis (LRS).MethodsWe included all patients who underwent FEI for LRS from 2009 to 2013. VAS for leg pain, ODI, neurological findings, radiographic findings, and complications were analyzed at one week, one month, three months, and one year postoperation. The telephone interview for local patients with simple questions was done approximately ten years after the operation. International patients receive an email with the same questionnaire as local patients during the same follow-up period.ResultsOne hundred and twenty-nine patients underwent FEI for LRS with complete data during 2009–2013. Most of the patients (70.54%) had LRS radiculopathy for less than one year, mainly L4-5 (89.92%), followed by L5-S1 (17.83%). Early outcomes three months after surgery showed that most patients (93.02%) reported significant pain relief, and 70.54% reported no pain at their ODI scores were significantly reduced from 34.35 to 20.32% (p = 0.0052). In contrast, the mean VAS for leg pain decreased substantially by 3.77 points (p < 0.0001). There were no severe complications. At ten years of follow-up, 62 patients responded to the phone call or email. 69.35% of the patients reported having little or no back or leg pain, did not receive any further lumbar surgery, and were still satisfied with the result of the surgery. There were six patients (8.06%) who underwent reoperation.ConclusionFEI for LRS was satisfactory at 93.02%, with a low complication rate during the early follow-up period. Its effect seems to decline slightly in the long term at a 10-year follow-up. 8.06% of the patients subsequently underwent reoperation.

Technical Notes and Clinical Outcomes of Full-Endoscopic Interbody Fusion Via Transforaminal Approach for Hard Disc Herniations in Thoracolumbar Junction.

Obtaining sufficient decompression and solid fusion and avoiding approach-related injuries simultaneously are still challenging for the treatment of hard disc herniation in thoracolumbar junction. A combined full-endoscopic decompression and interbody fusion via a transforaminal approach was used to achieve this goal. The purpose of this study was to introduce the technical notes and clinical outcomes of this novel technique. Twenty segments of hard disc herniations in the thoracolumbar junction of 14 patients treated with full-endoscopic interbody fusion via the transforaminal approach between January 2018 and September 2021 were analyzed. The patients were an average age of 43.3 years. Full-endoscopic interbody fusion and discectomy via the transforaminal approach were performed under local anesthesia, followed by percutaneous pedicle screw system fixation under general anesthesia. Imaging, including magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), and X-ray, was carried out. MRI was performed on the second day and 3 months postoperatively. CT was performed on the second day, 6 months, and 1 year (as needed) postoperatively. Back and radicular pain, neurological function, and thoracic spine function were scored using a visual analog scale, the Nurick scale, and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) scale, and the Oswestry disability index at 1 week, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year postoperatively. All the operations were successfully completed, and no intraoperative conversion of the surgical methods occurred. Postoperative thoracolumbar junction MRI and CT examinations of all the patients revealed a sufficiently decompressed spinal cord or cauda equina, without any residual compression. At the 1-year follow-up, all the surgical segments were fused. Back and radicular pain was relieved in all the patients, and neurological function was restored. The average recovery rate of the mJOA was 72.5%, including seven excellent, five good, and two fair cases. Although dural tears occurred in two cases during the operation, no cerebrospinal fluid leakage or pseudomeningocele occurred during follow-up. No other surgical complications were noted. A combined full-endoscopic decompression and interbody fusion via a transforaminal approach can achieve complete spinal canal decompression and solid interbody fusion with fewer approach-related injuries. It is a safe and effective minimally invasive spine surgery for treating hard disc herniation in the thoracolumbar junction.

Surgeon reported practice patterns related to full endoscopic cervical decompression procedures.

The microsurgical anterior approach to the cervical spine is commonplace. Fewer surgeons perform posterior cervical microsurgical procedures on a routine basis for lack of indication, more bleeding, persistent postoperative neck pain, and risk of progressive misalignment. In comparison, the endoscopic technique is preferentially performed through the posterior approach. Many spine surgeons and even surgeons versed in lumbar endoscopy are often reluctant to consider endoscopic procedures in the cervical spine. We report the results of a surgeon survey to find out why. A questionnaire of 10 questions was sent to spine surgeons by email and chat groups in social media networks including Facebook, WeChat, WhatsApp, and LinkedIn to collect practice pattern data about microscopic and endoscopic spine surgery in the lumbar and cervical spine. The responses were cross-tabulated by surgeons' demographic data. Pearson Chi-Square measures, Kappa statistics, and linear regression analysis of agreement or disagreement were performed by analyzing the distribution of variances using the statistical package SPSS Version 27.0. The survey response rate was 39.7%, with 50 of the 126 surgeons who started the survey submitting a completed questionnaire. Of the 50 surgeons, 56.2% were orthopedic, and 42% neurological surgeons. Most surgeons worked in private practice (42%). Another 26% were university-employed, 18% were in private practice affiliated with a university, and the remaining 14% were hospital employed. The majority of surgeons (55.1%) were autodidacts. The largest responding surgeon groups were between 35-44years (38%) and between 45-54years of age (34%). Half of the responding surgeons were routinely performing endoscopic cervical spine surgery. The other half did not perform it for the main hurdle of fear of complications (50%). Lack of appropriate mentorship was listed as second most reason (25.4%). More concerns for not performing cervical endoscopic approaches were the perception of lack of technology (20.8%) and suitable surgical indication (12.5%). Only 4.2% considered cervical endoscopy too risky. Nearly a third (30.6%) of the spine surgeons treated over 80% of their cervical spine patients with endoscopic surgeries. Most commonly performed were posterior endoscopic cervical discectomy (PECD; 52%), posterior endoscopic cervical foraminotomy (PECF; 48%), anterior endoscopic cervical discectomy (AECD; 32%), cervical endoscopic unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (CE-ULBD; 30%), respectively. Cervical endoscopic spine surgery is gaining traction among spine surgeons. However, by far most surgeons performing cervical endoscopic spine surgery work in private practice and are autodidacts. This lack of a teacher to shorten the learning curve as well as fear of complications are two of the major impediments to the successful implementation of cervical endoscopic procedures.

Comparison of full-endoscopic and tubular-based microscopic decompression in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomized controlled trial.

We aimed to demonstrate non-inferiority in terms of functional outcomes in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis who underwent full-endoscopic decompression compared with tubular-based microscopic decompression. This prospective, randomized controlled, non-inferiority trial included 60 patients with single-level lumbar spinal stenosis who required decompression surgery. The patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to the full-endoscopic group (FE group) or the tubular-based microscopic group (TM group). Based on intention-to-treat analysis, the primary outcome was the Oswestry Disability Index score at 24 months postoperative. The secondary outcomes included the visual analog scale (VAS) score for back and leg pain, European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) score, walking time, and patient satisfaction rate according to the modified MacNab criteria. Surgery-related outcomes were also analyzed. Of the total patients, 92% (n = 55) completed a 24-month follow-up. The primary outcomes were comparable between the two groups (p = 0.748). However, the FE group showed a statistically significant improvement in the mean VAS score for back pain at day 1 and at 6, 12, and 24months after surgery (p < 0.05). No significant difference was observed in the VAS score for leg pain, EQ-5D score, or walking time (p > 0.05). Regarding the modified MacNab criteria, 86.7% of patients in the FE group and 83.3% in the TM group had excellent or good results at 24months after surgery (p = 0.261). Despite the similar results in surgery-related outcomes, including operative time, radiation exposure, revision rate, and complication rate, between the two groups (p > 0.05), less blood loss and shorter length of hospital stay were observed in the FE group (p ≤ 0.001 and 0.011, respectively). This study suggests that full-endoscopic decompression is an alternative treatment for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis because it provides non-inferior clinical efficacy and safety compared with tubular-based microscopic surgery. In addition, it offers advantages in terms of less invasive surgery. Trial registration number (TRN): TCTR20191217001.

A 30-Year Worldwide Research Productivity of Scientific Publication in Full-Endoscopic Decompression Spine Surgery: Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis.

The ever-growing number of articles related to full-endoscopic spine surgery published in the last few decades presents a challenge which is perplexing and time-consuming in identifying the current research status. The study aims to identify and analyze the most cited works related to full-endoscopic decompression spine surgery, compare the articles published by different publishers and area, and show the current publication status of full-endoscopic research. Using Bibliometrix, CiteSpace, and VOSviewer, we analyzed the bibliometric data selected from the Web of Science database between 1992 and 2022. Spine has the highest H-index with the most-cited journal in the field of full-endoscopic decompression spine surgery. China ranked as the most productive country, whereas the most cited with high H-index papers came from South Korea. For the author analysis, Yeung AT, Ruetten S, Hoogland T, Ahn Y, Choi G, and Mayer HM were the most impactful authors in the global and local citations. The most productive organization is Wooridul Spine Hospital. The bibliometric study showed a growing trend of research on full-endoscopic decompression spine surgery over the past 30 years. It has demonstrated that there is a significant increase in the number of authors, institutions, and internationally collaborated countries. However, the quality of studies is still low, and the lack of high-quality clinical evidence and the trend of general journal submissions has somewhat affected the quality of endoscopy journals in recent years.

Commentary on "A 30-year Worldwide Research Productivity of Scientific Publication in Full-endoscopic Decompression Spine Surgery: Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis".

See the article "A 30-Year Worldwide Research Productivity of Scientific Publication in Full-Endoscopic Decompression Spine Surgery: Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis" in Volume 20 on page 374.

Case-matched radiological and clinical outcome evaluation of interlaminar versus microsurgical decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis

PurposeEndoscopic spine surgery is a globally expanding technique advocated as less invasive for spinal stenosis treatment compared to the microsurgical approach. However, evidence on the efficiency of interlaminar full-endoscopic decompression (FED) vs. conventional microsurgical decompression (MSD) in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis is still scarce. We conducted a case-matched comparison for treatment success with consideration of clinical, laboratory, and radiologic predictors.MethodsWe included 88 consecutive patients (FED: 36/88, 40.9%; MSD: 52/88, 59.1%) presenting with lumbar central spinal stenosis. Surgery-related (operation time, complications, length of stay (LOS), American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status (ASA) score, C-reactive protein (CRP), white blood cell count, side of approach (unilateral/bilateral), patient-related outcome measures (PROMs) (Oswestry disability index (ODI), numeric rating scale of pain (NRS; leg-, back pain), EuroQol questionnaire (eQ-5D), core outcome measures index (COMI)), and radiological (dural sack cross-sectional area, Schizas score (SC), left and right lateral recess heights, and facet angles, respectively) parameters were extracted at different time points up to 1-year follow-up. The relationship of PROMs was analyzed using Spearman’s rank correlation. Surgery-related outcome parameters were correlated with patient-centered and radiological outcomes utilizing a regression model to determine predictors for propensity score matching.ResultsComplication (most often residual sensorimotor deficits and restenosis due to hematoma) rates were higher in the FED (33.3%) than MSD (13.5%) group (p < 0.05), while all complications in the FED group were observed within the first 20 FED patients. Operation time was higher in the FED, whereas LOS was higher in the MSD group. Age, SC, CRP revealed significant associations with PROMs. We did not observe significant differences in the endoscopic vs. microsurgical group in PROMs. The correlation between ODI and COMI was significantly high, and both were inversely correlated with eQ-5D, whereas the correlations of these PROMs with NRS findings were less pronounced.ConclusionsEndoscopic treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis was similarly successful as the conventional microsurgical approach. Although FED was associated with higher complication rates in our single-center study experience, the distribution of complications indicated surgical learning curves to be the main factor of these findings. Future long-term prospective studies considering the surgical learning curve are warranted for reliable comparisons of these techniques.

Full-Endoscopic Decompression for Thoracic Ossification of the Ligamentum Flavum Combined with Dural Ossification

Ossification of the ligamentum flavum (OLF) can result in spinal stenosis. Thoracic spinal cord compression due to spinal stenosis is a common cause of progressive thoracic myelopathy in Asian countries. The incidence of complications is high in open decompression surgeries for thoracic OLF. With dural ossification (DO), the risk of complications is even higher in thoracic OLF. We introduce a full-endoscopic decompression surgery for thoracic OLF combined with DO under local anesthesia. Hemilaminectomy is performed using a high-speed burr under the endoscopy first, and then decompression of the contralateral spinal canal is completed using an "over the top" technique. DO resection uses the eggshell technique; after the base of the DO is cut from the lamina, forceps or lamina rongeurs are typically used for removal. The dural defect left after resection does not need repair. Neurological function was improved, and no complications such as hematoma or neck pain occurred. On imaging, no pseudodural cyst, cerebrospinal fluid leakage, or wound complications were observed after the operation. Endoscopic surgery causes less damage to the posterior ligament complex, so no cases of persistent back pain complaints or secondary internal fixation requirements were found in this study. Full-endoscopic decompression can achieve good imaging and clinical effects in the treatment of thoracic OLF with DO.

Full endoscopic decompression in lumbar canal stenosis - How big is the learning curve?

Full endoscopic decompression in lumbar canal stenosis - How big is the learning curve?

Contraindications and Complications of Full Endoscopic Lumbar Decompression for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Systematic Review

The purpose of this study was to suggest appropriate indications and contraindications for full endoscopic surgery and to predict the prognosis for the incidence of complications by reviewing the literature on full endoscopic lumbar decompression for various spinal stenoses and systematically analyzing the contraindications and complications of endoscopic surgery. We searched the PubMed/MEDLINE database to identify articles on full endoscopic decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis. The levels of evidence in all studies were classified according to the method adopted by the North American Spine Society (NASS) 2005. Full endoscopic lumbar decompression was divided into interlaminar and transforaminal decompressions. We selected articles that contained preoperative contraindications and complications during and after surgery. We analyzed the evidence level and classified the prescribed contraindications and complications according to the literature. We identified 362 articles, of which 57 met our criteria, with evidence ranging from levels I to V. After reviewing the literature on full endoscopic lumbar decompression, pure back pain without neurogenic symptoms and instability/deformities requiring stabilization were found to be contraindications. Also, in transforaminal decompression, central stenosis or complex foraminal stenoses were contraindications. Dysesthesia (most common), untreated pain, dural tear, disc herniation, infection, incomplete decompression, and other complications have been reported as complications of transforaminal decompression. On the other hand, dural tear (most common), epidural hematoma, transient dysesthesia, untreated pain, motor weakness, and other complications have been reported in interlaminar decompression. Full endoscopic lumbar surgery, including transforaminal and interlaminar decompression, is a safe and effective surgical option for treating lumbar spinal stenosis; however, it is important to select the transforaminal or interlaminar approach according to the indication.

Full Endoscopic Decompression for a Misdiagnosed Far-Out Syndrome (L5/S1 Extraforaminal Stenosis) in an Elderly Patient with L5 Radiculopathy: Case Report

We present a case of a L5/S1 extraforaminal stenosis (EFS), also known as far-out syndrome, in which ineffective multiple previous fusion surgeries were performed because of misdiagnosis. An 83-year-old man, complaining of back and left sided leg pain along the L5 dermatome for 5 years visited our institute claiming persistent pain even after 2 fusion surgeries at another hospital. A new magnetic resonance image (MRI) scan with a half coronal T1-weighted sequence revealed left L5/S1 EFS and resultant L5 nerve root compression. Because of the patient’s old age, history of angina and anti-platelet medications, a minimally invasive full-endoscopic decompression was performed. Afterwards the patient experienced immediate relief of the radicular pain, satisfied with the surgery. Diagnosis of L5/S1 EFS can be challenging especially when only routine sagittal/axial MRI scans are provided. Half coronal plane T1-weighted image MRI can be extremely helpful in diagnosis of this distinct pathology. Through this case report, we would like to emphasize the significance of half coronal MRI in diagnosis of L5/S1 EFS and also show a representative successful full-endoscopic decompression for the disease.