ObjectiveTo observe the effectiveness and safety of percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal bilateral decompression for severe central lumbar spinal stenosis.MethodsA retrospective analysis of 44 patients with single-segment severe central lumbar spinal stenosis with bilateral lower extremity symptoms between October 2015 and December 2017 was performed. Among them, 36 cases underwent bilateral decompression through bilateral transforaminal approach, and 8 cases underwent bilateral decompression through unilateral transforaminal approach. There were 25 males and 19 females, the age ranged from 56 to 89 years with an average of 68.6 years. The disease duration was 5-39 months with an average of 14.5 months. Involved segments: L3, 4 in 6 cases, L4, 5 in 33 cases, and L5, S1 in 5 cases. The dural sac cross-sectional area (DSCA) of the MRI was (66.36±8.48) mm2. Morphological grading (MG) classification: 29 cases of grade C, 15 cases of grade D. The visual analogue scale (VAS) score of preoperative low back pain was 2.3±1.0 and the VAS score of lower extremity pain was 7.8±1.2; the Oswestry disability index (ODI) was 77.8±7.3. Postoperative VAS scores, ODI scores, MG classification, and DSCA were recorded and compared with preoperative ones, and clinical outcomes were assessed by using the modified MacNab criteria.ResultsAll patients successfully underwent surgery and the wounds healed by first intention. All 44 patients were followed up 13-46 months with an average of 24.8 months. One patient developed postoperative lower extremity paralysis and 1 patient developed a dural tear. There was no infection, recurrence, or revision surgery during the follow-up. Postoperative imaging showed that the central spinal canal was enlarged and the area of the dural sac was significantly increased compared with preoperative one. The VAS score of low back pain was 2.4±0.6 and 2.5±0.8 at 1 month after operation and at last follow-up, showing no significant difference when compared with preoperative scores (P>0.05). The VAS of lower limb pain was 2.1±0.6 and 2.0±1.1 at 1 month after operation and at last follow-up, which was significantly improved when compared with preoperative scores (P<0.05); but no significant difference was found between at 1 month after operation and at last follow-up (P>0.05). At last follow-up, the ODI score was 19.7±6.4, and the DSCA was (104.93±12.56) mm2, which was significantly improved when compared with preoperative values (P<0.05). The MG classification was also significantly higher than preoperative one (Z=−5.789, P=0.000). According to the modified MacNab criteria, the results were excellent in 32 cases, good in 9 cases, and fair in 3 cases, with an excellent and good rate of 93.2%.ConclusionPercutaneous endoscopic transforaminal bilateral decompression for treating severe central lumbar spinal stenosis has the advantages of less trauma, adequate decompression, and rapid recovery. The short-term effectiveness is good.
ObjectiveTo compare the effectiveness of percutaneous coaxial large-channel endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (PE-LIF) and minimal invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Methods The clinical data of 134 patients with single-segment degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis who met the selection criteria between January 2019 and January 2021 were retrospectively analyzed, including 52 cases in PE-LIF group and 82 cases in MIS-TLIF group. There was no significant difference in general data such as gender, age, disease duration, surgical segment, and preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) scores of low back pain and lower extremity pain, and Oswestry disability index (ODI) between the two groups (P>0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage, hospitalization stay, and complications were recorded and compared between the two groups. The level of serum creatine kinase (CK) was recorded at 1 day before operation and at 1 and 3 days after operation to evaluate intraoperative muscle damage. The Brantigan criteria was used to evaluate the interbody fusion in the two groups. The VAS scores of low back pain and lower extremity pain at 1 day before operation and at 3 days, 3 months, and 1 year after operation, and the ODI scores at 1 day before operation and at 3 months and 1 year after operation were recorded and compared between the two groups. ResultsThere was no significant difference in operation time and hospitalization stay between the two groups (P>0.05). The intraoperative blood loss and postoperative drainage in the PE-LIF group were significantly lower than those in the MIS-TLIF group (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in serum CK between the two groups before operation (P>0.05), and the serum CK in the PE-LIF group at 1 and 3 days after operation were significantly lower than those in the MIS-TLIF group (P<0.05). All patients were followed up regularly for 1 year. The postoperative VAS scores of low back pain and lower extremity pain and ODI score in both groups were significantly lower than those before operation (P<0.05); there was no significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05). At 1 year after operation, 48 patients in PE-LIF group had successful interbody fusion, and 77 patients in MIS-TLIF group had successful interbody fusion. There was no significant difference in the interbody fusion distribution between the two groups at 3 months and 1 year after operation (P>0.05). There were 2 and 3 cases of lower limb numbness, 1 and 3 cases of neuroedema pain, 1 and 1 case of Cage displacement, 1 and 1 case of pedicle screw loosening in the PE-LIF group and MIS-TLIF group, respectively. No infection or dural sac tearing occurred in the two groups. There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications between the two groups (9.6% vs. 9.8%) (χ2=0.001, P=0.979). ConclusionIn the treatment of single-segment degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis, PE-LIF can achieve similar effectiveness as MIS-TLIF, and PE-LIF has less intraoperative blood loss and less muscle damage.