Percutaneous Endoscopic Decompression Research Articles

Two kinds of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression in the treatment of single level lumbar lateral recess stenosis

To prospectively compare the clinical efficacy and radiographic outcomes between interlaminar percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression(IL-PELD) and transforaminar percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression(TF-PELD) in the treatment of single-segment lumbar lateral recess stenosis. From April 2018 to July 2021, 85 patients with single-segment lumbar lateral recess stenosis underment percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression.There were 44 males and 41 females, aged from 49 to 81 years old with an average of (65.5±8.3) years old, duration of lumbar lateral recess stenosis ranging from 3 to 83 months with an average of (26.7±16.5) months. They were divided into IL-PELD group and TF-PELD group according to the different operation methods. There were 47 patients in the IL-PELD group, including 28 males and 19 females aged from 50 to 80 yeaes old with an average age was (66.7±9.3) years old. The disease duration ranged from 3 to 65 months with an average of (25.7±15.0) months. There were 38 patients in the TF-PELD group, including 16 males and 22 females, aged from 51 to 78 years old with an average of(64.1±7.6) years old. The disease duration ranged from 4 to 73 months with an average of (27.9±18.3) months The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative fluoroscopy, hospitalization day and complications of the two groups were recorded. Visual analogue scale (VAS) to evaluate low back pain and lower limb pain, Oswestry disability index(ODI) to evaluate lumbar function in preoperative and postoperative period(1month, 6 months and last follow-up)were recorded. the sagittal diameter of the lateral recess of the responsible intervertebral space in preoperative and 1 week after the operation were recorded. The operation was successfully completed in both groups without serious complications such as vascular injury, dural sac tear and nerve injury. The operation time in IL-PED group(69.3±19.3)min was significantly longer than that in TF-PELD group(57.5±14.5)min (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the intraoperative blood loss between the two groups (P>0.05). The number of intraoperative fluoroscopy in TF-PELD group (8.8±2.6)times was significantly higher than that in IL-PED group(4.8±1.2)times (P<0.05). The hospitalization days of the two groups were not statistically significant (P>0.05). VAS for low back and lower extremity pain and ODI were (5.1±2.2), (6.9±1.3) scores and (71.4±12.6) % in IL-PELD group, and (4.7±1.8), (6.9±1.3) scores and (68.4±13.9)% in TF-PELD group. In the IL-PELD group, the VAS of low back pain was (2.4±1.5), (1.6±0.8), (1.4±0.9) scores, and the VAS of lower extremity pain was (3.0±1.2), (1.6±0.7), (1.5±1.0) scores, ODI was (32.6±11.9) %, (17.4±6.5) %, (19.3±9.3)%;In TF-PELD group, the VAS of low back pain was (2.6±1.4), (1.5±0.6), (1.4±1.0) scores, and the VAS of lower extremity pain was (2.8±1.2), (1.6±0.6), (1.5±1.2) scores, The ODI was (32.0±11.2) %, (15.0±6.1) %, and (20.0±11.3) %. The VAS and ODI of the two groups at each time point after operation were significantly improved compared with those before operation (P<0.05), but there was no statistically significant difference between the groups (P>0.05), and there was no statistically significant difference in the interaction between different time points and groups (P>0.05). At 1 week after operation, the sagittal diameter of lateral recess in both groups was significantly increased compared with that before operation (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference between the two groups at each time point (P>0.05). According to the modified Macnab criteria, IL-PELD group was rated as excellent in 24 cases, good in 19 cases and fair in 4 cases. In TF-PELD group the results were excellent in 19 cases, good in 15 cases, fair in 3 cases and poor in 1 case. There was no significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05). IL-PELD and TF-PELD can expand the lateral recess in the treatment of single level lumbar lateral recess stenosis, and have achieved good clinical effects.

Percutaneous Endoscopic Suprapedicular Decompression in the Treatment of Down-Migrated Lumbar DiscHerniation

[OBJECTIVE]: This study aimed to investigate the clinical efficacy of percutaneous endoscopic suprapedicular decompression in treatment of down-migrated lumbar disc herniation. [METHODS]: The clinical data of 43 patients with down-migrated lumbar disc herniation treated with endoscopic surgery at our hospital between January 2022 and January 2023 were retrospectively analysed. Twenty-two and 21 patients underwent percutaneous endoscopic decompression using the suprapedicular and TESSYS approaches, respectively. The perioperative, follow-up, and imaging data of the groups were compared. [RESULTS]: Surgery was uneventful in both groups. The number of intraoperative fluoroscopies and duration of surgery were significantly lower in the suprapedicular group (p<0.05). The patients in both groups were followed up for at least 12 months. At the last follow-up, lumbar pain and leg pain visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) scores were significantly improved in both groups compared with preoperative values (p<0.05); the differences in these indexes between the two groups were not significant preoperatively (p>0.05). However, at the last postoperative follow-up, lumbar pain VAS scores were significantly better in the suprapedicular group (0.83±0.85 vs. 2.54±1.32, p<0.05). There was no significant change in intervertebral space height or lumbar lordotic angle compared with preoperative values in either group at the last follow-up (p>0.05). However, the spinal canal cross-sectional area significantly increased (p<0.05). [CONCLUSION]: The treatment of down-migrated lumbar disc herniation via a suprapedicular approach enabled the incision of the superior margin of the pedicle as needed under direct vision, involved less fluoroscopy while preserving facet joint stability, and enabled targeted removal of the herniated nucleus pulposus, thus greatly reducing residual nucleus pulposus. This surgical procedure was safe, rapid, and showed satisfactory therapeutic efficacy.

Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Decompression with Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Decompression for Lumbar Degenerative Diseases: A Meta-Analysis

Unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression (UBED) offers the advantages of minimal tissue damage, operational flexibility, and clear visualization, positioning it as an innovative, minimally invasive endoscopic technique. Nevertheless, the clinical evidence supporting the use of UBED in the treatment of degenerative lumbar diseases (DLD) is limited and conflicting. As of October 1, 2023, a comprehensive search was conducted across databases including Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library to identify all published studies on minimally invasive UBED for the treatment of DLD. Data pertaining to patient demographics, fluoroscopy time, operative duration, intraoperative hemorrhage, hospitalization length, visual analog scale (VAS) score for back and leg pain, MacNab criteria, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and complication rates were extracted. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was utilized to assess the quality. Twelve articles were included, involving 816 patients. The back VAS score (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.09-0.07, p=0.75), MacNab criteria (95%CI: 0.52-2.3, p=0.82), fluoroscopy time (95%CI: -7.03-0.4, p=0.08), and the incidence of complications (95%CI: 0.5-1.73, p=0.82) were not significantly different, while the leg VAS score (95%CI: 0.01-0.18, p=0.03), ODI score (95%CI: -1.03-0.09, p=0.02), operation time (95%CI: 5.76-20.62, p=0.0005), hospitalization length (95%CI: 0.41-2.76, p=0.008), and intraoperative hemorrhage (95%CI: 21.92-72.44, p=0.0003) were significantly different. UBED offers superiority in ODI, flexibility, and visual field clarity. Conversely, percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression presents advantages in terms of operation duration, blood loss, hospitalization length, and leg VAS score. These factors should be thoroughly considered when selecting a surgical approach.

Percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic decompression with removal of the posterosuperior region underneath the slipping vertebral body for lumbar spinal stenosis with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a retrospective study

BackgroundPercutaneous transforaminal endoscopic decompression (PTED) is an ideal minimally invasive decompression technique for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS). The posterosuperior region underneath the slipping vertebral body (PRSVB) formed by DLS is an important factor exacerbating LSS in patients. Therefore, the necessity of removing the PRSVB during ventral decompression remains to be discussed. This study aimed to describe the procedure of PTED combined with the removal of the PRSVB and to evaluate the clinical outcomes.MethodsLSS with DLS was diagnosed in 44 consecutive patients at our institution from January 2019 to July 2021, and they underwent PTED combined with the removal of the PRSVB. All patients were followed up for at least 12 months. The clinical outcomes were evaluated using the visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and modified MacNab criteria.ResultsThe mean age of the patients was 69.5 ± 7.1 years. The mean preoperative ODI score, VAS score of the low back, and VAS score of the leg were 68.3 ± 10.8, 5.8 ± 1.0, and 7.7 ± 1.1, respectively, which improved to 18.8 ± 5.0, 1.4 ± 0.8, and 1.6 ± 0.7, respectively, at 12 months postoperatively. The proportion of patients presenting “good” and “excellent” ratings according to the modified MacNab criteria was 93.2%. The percent slippage in spondylolisthesis preoperatively (16.0% ± 3.3%) and at the end of follow-up (15.8% ± 3.3%) did not differ significantly (p>0.05). One patient had a dural tear, and one patient had postoperative dysesthesia.ConclusionsIncreasing the removal of PRSVB during the PTED process may be a beneficial surgical procedure for alleviating clinical symptoms in patients with LSS and DLS. However, long-term follow-up is needed to study clinical effects.

The Method of Portal Making in Lumbar Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Surgery with Different Operative Approaches According to the Constant Anatomical Landmarks of the Lumbar Spine: A Review of the Literature.

Review. Unilateral Biportal Endoscopy (UBE) is a minimally invasive surgery that is gaining recognition and being employed in clinical practice. Nevertheless, the precise method for determining UBE portals' location varies depending on the originator's preferences or the anatomical structure's proximity to the portal positions. Consequently, the relationship among UBE portals' locations is messy. This study aims to elaborate on the specific portal localization and explore the positional association and commonality among different UBE approaches' portals. The following keywords are used to search in the PubMed, Ovid, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, SpringerLink, Scopus, CNKI, and Wanfang database: "Biportal endoscopic spinal surgery", "Two portal endoscopic spinal surgery", "Percutaneous biportal endoscopic decompression", "Unilateral biportal endoscopy", "Irrigation endoscopic discectomy", "UBE" and "BESS". After screening, 29 pieces of literature are included. The study summarizes different UBE approach portal localizations, categorized by fusion or non-fusion surgery and pathological classification. The study presents an inaugural method for categorizing the lumber into four surgical intervals based on bone landmarks and assigns different UBE approaches to the appropriate intervals based on their characteristics, making the selection of UBE surgical approaches' portal locations more flexible. Additionally, the study provides an overview of the indications, complications, and distinct benefits associated with each interval, further refining the novel UBE portal interval localization method. The study clarifies the interrelationship and commonality between the portals of different UBE approaches and proposes a new UBE portal interval localization method to enhance surgeons' understanding and proficiency in UBE procedures.

Clinical outcome of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression in treatment of elderly patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a matched retrospective study.

This retrospective cohort study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression (PELD) in elderly patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). A matched retrospective study. The research was conducted in Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, China. This study included patients treated with PELD for LSS from September 2016 to September 2020. Patients with LSS aged ≥ 80years were screened according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria as the study group, and then the same number of patients with LSS aged 50-80years were matched according to gender, stenosis type, and surgical segment as the control group. Preoperative patient status was assessed using the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) and the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification score. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, modified Macnab criteria, radiological parameters and complication rates. A total of 624 LSS patients met the screening criteria between September 2016 and September 2020, with 47 LSS patients ≥ 80years old serving as the study group. Forty-seven LSS patients aged 50-80years were matched to the study group according to gender, stenosis type, and stenosis segment. The CCI score (1.77 ± 1.67) and ASA classification (2.62 ± 0.74) of the study group were significantly higher than the CCI score (0.66 ± 0.96) and ASA classification (1.28 ± 0.54) of the control group, and the difference was statistically significant. Compared with preoperative data, postoperative ODI, leg pain VAS scores and back pain VAS scores were significantly improved in both groups (p < 0.05). However, no significant difference was found between two groups in preoperative and postoperative ODI, leg pain VAS scores and back pain VAS scores (p > 0.05). The operation time and postoperative hospital stay in control group were significantly lower than those in study (p < 0.05), but there was no significant difference in blood loss between the two groups (p > 0.05). Besides, overall radiological parameters were comparable in elder and younger patients (p > 0.05), and disc height (DH), lumbar lordosis and segmental lordosis decreased after twoyear follow-up in both groups (p < 0.05). In addition, complication rates were similar between the two groups (p > 0.05), and no serious complications and deaths were found. Single-centre retrospective design, non-randomized sample, small sample size. Although elderly LSS patients (≥ 80years old) are less fit and have more comorbidities, satisfactory outcomes can be achieved with PELD, comparable to those of LSS patients < 80years old, and without increased complications.

Retracted: Outcome of Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Lumbar Decompression for Multisegment Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and the Effect on VAS Scores.

[This retracts the article DOI: 10.1155/2022/9040402.].

Research progress of different minimally invasive spinal decompression in lumbar spinal stenosis

To review the application and progress of different minimally invasive spinal decompression in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). The domestic and foreign literature on the application of different minimally invasive spinal decompression in the treatment of LSS was extensively reviewed, and the advantages, disadvantages, and complications of different surgical methods were summarized. At present, minimally invasive spinal decompression mainly includes microscopic bilateral decompression, microendoscopic decompression, percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression, unilateral biportal endoscopy, and so on. Compared with traditional open surgery, different minimally invasive spinal decompression techniques can reduce the operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative pain of patients, thereby reducing hospital stay and saving treatment costs. The indications of different minimally invasive spinal decompression are different, but there are certain advantages and disadvantages. When patients have clear surgical indications, individualized treatment plans should be formulated according to the symptoms and signs of patients, combined with imaging manifestations.

A Comparative Study of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Decompression and Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Decompression for Geriatric Patients with Lumbar Lateral Recess Stenosis.

The purpose of this research was to compare the efficacy of unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression (UBE) and percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic decompression (PTED) in the treatment of elderly patients with single-level lumbar lateral recess stenosis (LRS). Data from January 2020 to March 2022 were analyzed. Thirty-eight patients in the PTED group and thirty-nine patients in the UBE group completed the minimum 12-month follow-up. The demographic data and perioperative outcomes were reviewed. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the VAS for back and leg pain, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and the modified MacNab criteria. Both groups of patients completed surgery and a one-year follow-up. There was no significant difference between the two groups in demographics data. UBE has the advantage in operative duration and X-ray time; as far as incision length, blood loss, and drainage volume are concerned, PTED is advantageous. Under the modified MacNab criteria, UBE exhibited a good-to-excellent rate similar to that of PTED (84.6% vs 81.6%, P>0.05). There were no significant differences at any point in time between UBE and PTED with respect to ODI, VAS, or back pain scores (P>0.05). UBE and PTED did not differ significantly in terms of complications. Both PTED and UBE achieved favorable outcomes in single-level LRS. For operative time and X-ray times, UBE is more advantageous, while PTED offers better estimates of blood loss, incision length, and drainage volume.

Surgical outcomes of percutaneous endoscopic thoracic decompression in the treatment of multi-segment thoracic ossification of the ligamentum flavum.

Previous studies have demonstrated satisfactory outcomes of percutaneous endoscopic thoracic decompression (PETD) for single-segment thoracic ossification of the ligamentum flavum (TOLF). However, the clinical outcomes of PETD in patients with multi-segment TOLF (mTOLF) remain unclear. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of PETD for patients with multi-segment mTOLF. Eighteen consecutive patients (41 segments) with mTOLF were treated with PETD between January 2020 and December 2021. The clinical outcomes were evaluated using the modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) score and Visual Analog Scale (VAS), whereas radiographic parameters were measured by cross-section area of the spinal canal and anteroposterior diameter of the spinal cord. The follow-up period ranged from 14 to 34months. The mean operation time and blood loss were 154.06 ± 32.14min and 61.72 ± 12.72ml, respectively. Hospital stay after first-stage operation was 10.89 ± 2.42days. The mJOA score and VAS score significantly improved at the final follow-up, with a mean mJOA recovery rate of 63.3 ± 21.90%. The incidence of complications was 12.2% per level. The radiographic outcomes showed adequate decompression of the spinal cord. The present study demonstrates that PETD is effective and safe as a minimally invasive procedure to treat patients with mTOLF. All patients showed relief of their symptoms and improvement in neurological function.

Comparison of 270-degree percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic decompression under local anesthesia and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of geriatric lateral recess stenosis associated with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis

PurposeVarious lumbar decompression techniques have been used for the treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS). Few studies have compared the clinical efficacy of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic decompression (PTED) and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) in the treatment of lateral recess stenosis associated with DLS (LRS-DLS) in geriatric patients. The objective of the study was to compare the safety and short-term clinical efficacy of 270-degree PTED under local anesthesia and MIS-TLIF in the treatment of LRS-DLS in Chinese geriatric patients over 60 years old.Materials and methodsFrom January 2017 to August 2019, the data of 90 consecutive geriatric patients with single-level L4-5 LRS-DLS were retrospectively reviewed, including those in the PTED group (n = 44) and MIS-TLIF group (n = 46). The patients were followed up for at least 1 year. Patient demographics and perioperative outcomes were reviewed before and after surgery. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS) for leg pain, and modified MacNab criteria were used to evaluate the clinical outcomes. X-ray examinations were performed 1 year after surgery to assess the progression of spondylolisthesis in the PTED group and bone fusion in the MIS-TLIF group.ResultsThe mean patient ages in the PTED and MIS-TLIF groups were 70.3 years and 68.6 years, respectively. Both the PTED and MIS-TLIF groups demonstrated significant improvements in the VAS score for leg pain and ODI score, and no significant differences were found between the groups at any time point (P > 0.05). Although the good-to-excellent rate of the modified MacNab criteria in the PTED group was similar to that in the MIS-TLIF group (90.9% vs. 91.3%, P > 0.05), PTED was advantageous in terms of the operative time, estimated blood loss, incision length, drainage time, drainage volume, length of hospital stay, and complications.ConclusionsBoth PTED and MIS-TLIF led to favorable outcomes in geriatric patients with LRS-DLS. In addition, PTED caused less severe trauma and fewer complications. In terms of perioperative quality-of-life and clinical outcomes, PTED could supplement MIS-TLIF in geriatric patients with LRS-DLS.

Percutaneous foraminal endoscopy for the treatment of lumbar lateral recess stenosis in elderly

To investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of percutaneous foraminal endoscopy in the treatment of lumbar lateral recess stenosis in elderly. The clinical data of 31 elderly patients with lumbar lateral recess stenosis treated by percutaneous foraminal endoscopic decompression from March 2018 to August 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Including 16 males and 15 females, aged from 65 to 81 years with an average of (71.13±5.20) years, the course of disease ranged from 3 months to 7 years with an average of (14.36±6.52) months. Visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) were used to assess clinical symptom and functional status before operation and 1, 6, 12 months after operation. At the final follow-up, the modified Macnab standard was used to evaluate clinical efficacy. All patients were completed the operation successfully. The operation time was from 75 to 120 min with an average of (97.84±11.22 ) min. All 31 patients were followed up from 12 to 28 months with an average of (17.29±5.56) months. Postoperative lumbago-leg pain VAS and ODI were significantly improved at 1, 6, and 12 months(P<0.01). At the final follow-up, according to the modified Macnab standard to evaluate the effect, 23 got excellent results, 5 good, 3 fair. One patient had severe adhesions between peripheral tissues and nerve root, and postoperative sensory abnormalities in the lower extremities were treated conservatively with traditional Chinese medicine and neurotrophic drugs, which recovered at 2 weeks after surgery. No complications such as nerve root injury and infection occurred. The intervertebral foraminal endoscopy technique, which is performed under local anesthesia for a short period of operation, ensures adequate decompression while minimizing complications, and is a safe and effective surgical procedure for elderly patients with lumbar lateral recess stenosis.

Identification of preoperative radiological risk factors for reoperation following percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression to treat degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis.

This study aimed to identify radiological risk factors associated with reoperation after percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic decompression (PTED) for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS). The preoperative clinical data of 527 consecutive patients with DLSS who underwent PTED were retrospectively reviewed. Overall, 44 patients who underwent reoperation were matched for age, sex, body mass index, and surgical segment to 132 control patients with excellent or good clinical outcomes. Radiological characteristics were compared between the groups using independent sample t-tests and Pearson's chi-square tests. A predictive model was established based on multivariate logistic regression analysis. The analyses revealed significant differences in the presence of lumbosacral transitional vertebra (LSTV, 43.2% vs. 17.4%, p = 0.001), the number of levels with senior-grade disc degeneration (2.57 vs. 1.96, p = 0.018) and facet degeneration (1.91 vs. 1.25 p = 0.002), and the skeletal muscle index (SMI, 849.7 mm2/m2 vs. 1008.7 mm2/m2, p < 0.001) between patients in the reoperation and control groups. The results of the logistic analysis demonstrated that LSTV (odds ratio [OR] = 2.734, 95% confidence interval [CI]:1.222-6.117, p < 0.014), number of levels with senior-grade facet degeneration (OR = 1.622, 95% CI:1.137-2.315, p = 0.008), and SMI (OR = 0.997, 95% CI:0.995-0.999, p = 0.001) were associated with reoperation after PTED. The application of the nomogram based on these three factors showed good discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.754, 95% CI 0.670-0.837) and good calibration. LSTV, more levels with senior-grade facet degeneration, and severe paraspinal muscle atrophy are independent risk factors for reoperation after PTED. These factors can thus be used to predict reoperation risk and to help tailor treatment plans for patients with DLSS.

Efficacy of Repeat Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Decompression for Reoperation of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Retrospective Study.

To evaluate the efficacy of repeat percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression (PELD) in lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) reoperation. This study included patients with LSS who relapsed following treatment with PELD therapy between March 2017 and March 2020. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were analyzed preoperatively, postoperatively at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months, and at final follow-up. The modified MacNab criteria were used to assess clinical effects. All complications were recorded. At a mean follow-up of 3 years, 24 patients with LSS who underwent repeat PELD were identified. The patients' mean operative time was 122.3±29.2 min, blood loss was 12.5±5.3 mL, and mean hospital stay was 7.0±1.9 days. VAS leg-pain score improved from 6.1±1.0 to 2.0±1.2 (P<0.001), VAS back-pain score improved from 6.2±0.8 to 2.1±1.1 (P<0.001), and ODI improved from 68.9±6.0 to 20.9±5.6 (P <0.001). According to the modified MacNab criteria, the good-to-excellent rate was 83.3%. Postoperative complications, including hematoma, nerve root injury, and dural injury, developed in four patients. Repeat PELD for reoperation in patients with LSS has a good clinical effect, and is recommended in routine clinical practice. Careful intraoperative manipulation is recommended to prevent complications.

Clinical Outcomes of Interlaminar Percutaneous Endoscopic Uniportal Pars Decompression for Lumbar Spondylolysis.

To evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes of a novel full endoscopic procedure performed via an interlaminar approach to decompress entrapped nerve roots in patients with lumbar spondylolysis. Patients who underwent interlaminar percutaneous endoscopic pars decompression were included in this retrospective cohort study. Patients with back pain and dynamic lumbar instability were excluded from the study. Clinical parameters related to outcomes, including the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and visual analog scale (VAS) for leg pain, were assessed before and after surgery. The radiological outcomes, vertebral slippage percentage, and motion radiographs were evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively. Of the 11 patients included in the study, 5 had spondylolysis alone, 1 of whom had spondylolysis at L3-L4 and L4-L5, and 4 of whom had it at L5-S1; and 6 patients had spondylolysis in combination with spondylolisthesis, of whom 4 had involvement at L5-S1, 1 had involvement at L4-L5, and 1 had involvement at L3-L4. At a mean follow-up period of 22.64 months, 63.3% of patients achieved more than 50% improvement in ODI score and 90.91% of patients achieved more than 50% improvement in VAS score. Spondylolysis with vertebral slippage had inferior ODI improvement outcomes as compared with spondylolysis alone, but the VAS was not significantly different. No significant difference was observed on the slippage percentage observed between the pre- and postoperative periods. However, 1 patient experienced vertebral slippage after surgery, but fusion surgery was not required. Interlaminar percutaneous endoscopic pars decompression is a safe and successful treatment for patients with stable lumbar spondylolysis and nerve root compression. Even in situations in which vertebral slippage occurs, spinal fusion may not be the best option for all patients with lumbar spondylolysis. The interlaminar percutaneous endoscopic pars decompression is a safe and successful procedure for treatment of patients with stable lumbar spondylolysis and nerve root compression.

Comparison of the Short-Term Efficacy of Percutaneous Endoscopic Thoracic Decompression and Laminectomy in the Treatment of Thoracic Ossification of the Ligamentum Flavum

This study aimed to investigate the short-term efficacy of percutaneous endoscopic thoracic decompression (PETD) under local anesthesia and traditional posterior thoracic laminectomy (PTL) in treating single-segment thoracic ossification of the ligamentum flavum (T-OLF). This was a retrospective review of the clinical information of 52 patients with T-OLF between September 2017 and September 2021. Based on the inclusion criteria, a total of 52 patients were included in the present research, 26 in the PETD group and 26 in the PTL group. The general preoperative data, intraoperative surgical conditions, preoperative and postoperative clinical information, and complications were collected. The modified Japanese Orthopedic Association (mJOA) score and recovery rate (RR) were evaluated preoperatively and 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. There was no statistically significant difference in the baseline parameters in either group(P>0.05). There were statistically significant differences in operation time (94.62 vs. 144.62 min) and blood loss (22.12 vs. 287.69 mL) between the PETD group and the PTL group. The mJOA score in the two groups improved from (5.46 ± 1.10) and (5.69 ± 1.01) preoperatively to (9.08 ± 0.90) and (8.88 ± 1.07) at 12 months postoperatively, respectively. The RR was 84.6% in the PETD group and 76.9% in the PTL group. In addition, the complications in the PETD group were fewer than those in the PTL group. The PETD under local anesthesia for T-OLF has many advantages, such as high patient acceptance, good short-term clinical outcomes, and few complications; therefore, this procedure should be promoted as a viable treatment option for thoracic ossification of the ligamentum flavum.

Early Readmission and Reoperation After Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Decompression for Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Incidence and Risk Factors.

To identify the incidence rates and risk factors for early readmission and reoperation after percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic decompression (PTED) for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS). A total of 1011 DLSS patients who underwent PTED were retrospectively evaluated. Of them, 58 were readmitted, and 31 underwent reoperation. The patients were matched with 174 control patients to perform case-control analyses. The clinical and preoperative imaging data of each patient were recorded. Univariate analyses were performed using independent sample t-tests and Fisher's exact tests. Furthermore, the risk factors for early readmission and reoperation were analyzed using multivariate logistic regression analyses. The incidence rates of readmission and reoperation within 90 days after PTED were 5.7% and 3.1%, respectively. Age (odds ratio [OR]=1.054, p=0.001), BMI (OR=1.104, p=0.041), a history of lumbar surgery (OR=3.260, p=0.014), and the number of levels with radiological lumbar foraminal stenosis (LFS, OR=2.533, p<0.001) were independent risk factors for early readmission. The number of levels with radiological LFS (OR=5.049, p<0.001), the grade of surgical-level facet joint degeneration (OR=2.010, p=0.023), and a history of lumbar surgery (OR=10.091, p<0.001) were independent risk factors for early reoperation. This study confirmed that aging, a higher BMI, a history of lumbar surgery, and more levels with radiological LFS were associated with a higher risk of early readmission. More levels with radiological LFS, a higher grade of surgical-level facet joint degeneration, and a history of lumbar surgery were predictors of early reoperation. These results are helpful in patient counseling and perioperative evaluation of PTED.

Outcome of Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Lumbar Decompression for Multisegment Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and the Effect on VAS Scores.

Purpose To investigate the efficacy of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic lumbar decompression (PTED) in the treatment of multisegment lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) and its effect on VAS scores. Methods 126 patients with multisegment LSS admitted between August 2017 and August 2021 were selected and divided into the PTED group and the traditional open surgery group (TOS group) according to the different treatment methods. There were 70 cases in the PTED group, treated with PTED, and 56 cases in the TOS group, treated with traditional open surgery. The clinical outcomes, the preoperative and postoperative pain visual analogue scale (VAS), the Oswestry disability index (ODI), the SF-36 quality of life questionnaire scores, the perioperative indicators (operative time, days in hospital, intraoperative blood loss), the postoperative complications, and imaging data were compared between the two groups. Results After the operation, the excellent and good rate in the PTED group (91.43%) was significantly higher than that in the TOS group (75.00%) (P < 0.05). At each time after the operation, the VAS and ODI scores of the two groups were lower than those before the operation, and the VAS scores of the PTED group at 1 day and 3 months after operation were lower than those of the TOS group, and the ODI scores of the PTED group at 3 months after operation were lower than those of the TOS group (P < 0.05). 3 months after the operation, the SF-36 scores in both groups were higher than those before the operation, and those in the PTED group were higher than those in the TOS group (P < 0.05). The operation time and days in hospital in the PTED group were shorter than those in the TOS group, and the intraoperative dominant blood loss and recessive blood loss were less than those in the TOS group (P < 0.05). The total incidence of complications in the PTED group (15.71%) was significantly lower than that in the TOS group (32.14%) (P < 0.05). Conclusion Both PTED and traditional open surgery are effective in treating patients with multisegmental LSS, and both show positive postoperative changes in all indicators, but the former has more promising near -term results in improving lumbar spine pain, function and quality of life than the latter, and has the advantages of less trauma, less bleeding, and fewer complications.

Clinical Efficacy of Large-Channel Percutaneous Lumbar Endoscopic Decompression in the Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Secondary to Old Compression Fractures

We sought to explore the clinical efficacy of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) secondary to old vertebral compression fractures (OVCF) treatment by large-channel percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression. Medical data for a total of 17 patients diagnosed with LSS secondary to OVCF and treated with large-channel percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression in our institution from January 2019 to January 2021 were collected. The dural sac cross-sectional area and morphologic grading of the magnetic resonance imaging cross-sectional area were recorded. Lumbar spine stability was assessed using the White-Panjabi scoring system. Visual analog scale and Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores were used to evaluate the surgical efficacy, and the SF-36 health questionnaire was used to evaluate the quality of life of patients. Type and probability of complications were also recorded. The operative segments of the enrolled patients were all in the lower lumbar spine. One-year follow-up post operation showed that the dural sac cross-sectional area was significantly enlarged compared with preoperation, and the morphologic grade was significantly improved (P < 0.05). There was no difference in White-Panjabi score between preoperation and postoperation (P > 0.05). Visual analog scale and Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores at each follow-up time point after operation were higher than those before operation and were significantly improved (P < 0.05). The SF-36 health survey score at 1 year after operation was significantly higher than that before operation (P < 0.05). The complication rate was 6%. Large-channel percutaneous lumbar endoscopic decompression has an evident clinical effect in the treatment of LSS secondary to OVCF and has little effect on the stability of the lumbar spine, which is worthy of clinical application.

The effectiveness of percutaneous endoscopic decompression compared with open decompression and fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis: protocol for a multicenter, prospective, cohort study

BackgroundLumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is one of the most frequent indications for spine surgery. Open decompression and fusion surgery was the most common treatment and used to be regarded as the golden standard treatment for LSS. In recent years, percutaneous endoscopic decompression surgery was also used for LSS. However, the effectiveness and safety of percutaneous endoscopic decompression in the treatment of LSS have not been supported by high-level evidence. Our aim is to 1) compare the effectiveness of percutaneous endoscopic decompression surgery and open decompression and fusion for the treatment of LSS. 2) Investigate the prognosis risk factors for LSS. 3) Evaluate the influence of percutaneous endoscopic decompression for the stability of operative level, and degeneration of adjacent level.MethodsIt’s a prospective, multicenter cohort study. The study is performed at 4 centers in Beijing. This study plans to enroll 600 LSS patients (300 patients in the percutaneous endoscopic decompression group, and 300 patients in the open decompression and fusion group). The demographic variables, healthcare variables, symptom related variables, clinical assessment (Visual analogue score (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association score (JOA)), and radiological assessment (dynamic X-ray, CT, MRI) will be collected at baseline visit. Patients will follow up at 3, 6, 12 months. The primary outcome is the difference of improvement of ODI between baseline and 12-month follow-up between the two groups. The secondary outcome is the score changes of preoperative and postoperative VAS, the recovery rate of JOA, MacNab criteria, patient satisfaction, degeneration grade of adjacent level, ROM of operative level and adjacent level, complication rate.DiscussionIn this study, we propose to conduct a prospective registry study to address the major controversies of LSS decompression under percutaneous spinal endoscopy, and investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of percutaneous endoscopic decompression and open decompression in the treatment of LSS.Trial registrationThis study has been registered on clinicaltrials.gov in January 15, 2020 (NCT04254757). (SPIRIT 2a).