-
Pain Physician Jan 2020Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) often refers to percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy (PETD) and percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) often refers to percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy (PETD) and percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy (PEID). As a minimally invasive spinal procedure, PELD has gained increasing recognition for its small incision, quick recovery, short hospital stay, and equivalent clinical outcome compared to open surgery. In order to obtain satisfactory clinical efficacy, adequate consideration should be given regarding the indication of PELD. On the other hand, complications related to PELD will also significantly affect the safety and outcome of surgery.
OBJECTIVE
Our objective was to conduct a literature review of the indications and complications of PELD and to provide our experience in patient selection and solutions to complications related to PELD.
STUDY DESIGN
The study is a literature review focused on the indications and complications of PELD.
SETTING
The study is a literature review on the indications and complications of PELD.
METHODS
A comprehensive review of available literature on PELD was performed. Particular focus was given to the development of indications and prevention of complications. The literature was searched in PubMed database, and key words were set as "percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy", "percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy", "percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy", "PELD", "PETD", "PEID", "YESS" and "TESSYS".
RESULTS
PELD is an effective and safe treatment for lumbar disc herniation, lumbar spinal stenosis, recurrent lumbar disc herniation, and other lumbar diseases. Complications related to PELD include dural tear, nerve root injury, recurrence, and so on.
LIMITATIONS
Some results drawn in this review are based on retrospective study or small sample size. Studies of larger sample size and more multicenter, randomized controlled trials should be conducted to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of PELD.
CONCLUSIONS
PELD is a promising surgical technique for lumbar diseases. Proper patient selection, excellent surgical skills, and rich experience are required for satisfactory outcomes.
KEY WORDS
Complications, indications, minimally invasive spine surgery, PELD.
Topics: Diskectomy, Percutaneous; Endoscopy; Female; Humans; Intervertebral Disc Degeneration; Intervertebral Disc Displacement; Lumbosacral Region; Male; Middle Aged; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32013278
DOI: No ID Found -
Neurospine Mar 2023In the past, the use of endoscopic spine surgery was limited to intervertebral discectomy; however, it has recently become possible to treat various spinal degenerative...
In the past, the use of endoscopic spine surgery was limited to intervertebral discectomy; however, it has recently become possible to treat various spinal degenerative diseases, such as spinal stenosis and foraminal stenosis, and the treatment range has also expanded from the lumbar spine to the cervical and thoracic regions. However, as endoscopic spine surgery develops and its indications widen, more diverse and advanced surgical techniques are being introduced, and the complications of endoscopic spine surgery are also increasing accordingly. We searched the PubMed/MEDLINE databases to identify articles on endoscopic spinal surgery, and key words were set as "endoscopic spinal surgery," "endoscopic cervical foramoinotomy," "PECD," "percutaneous transforaminal discectomy," "percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy," "PELD," "PETD," "PEID," "YESS" and "TESSYS." We analyzed the evidence level and classified the prescribed complications according to the literature. Endoscopic lumbar surgery was divided into full endoscopic interlaminar and transforaminal approaches and a unilateral biportal approach. We performed a comprehensive review of available literature on complications of endoscopic spinal surgery. This study particularly focused on the prevention of complications. Regardless of the surgical methods, the most common complications related to endoscopic spinal surgery include dural tears and perioperative hematoma. transient dysesthesia, nerve root injury and recurrence. However, Endoscopic spinal surgery, including full endoscopic transforaminal and interlaminar and unilateral biportal approaches, is a safe and effective a treatment for lumbar as well as cervical and thoracic spinal diseases such as disc herniation, lumbar spinal stenosis, foraminal stenosis and recurrent disc herniation.
PubMed: 37016854
DOI: 10.14245/ns.2346226.113 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Feb 2022To assess whether percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) is non-inferior to conventional open microdiscectomy in reduction of leg pain caused by lumbar... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Randomized Controlled Trial
OBJECTIVE
To assess whether percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) is non-inferior to conventional open microdiscectomy in reduction of leg pain caused by lumbar disc herniation.
DESIGN
Multicentre randomised controlled trial with non-inferiority design.
SETTING
Four hospitals in the Netherlands.
PARTICIPANTS
613 patients aged 18-70 years with at least six weeks of radiating leg pain caused by lumbar disc herniation. The trial included a predetermined set of 125 patients receiving PTED who were the learning curve cases performed by surgeons who did not do PTED before the trial.
INTERVENTIONS
PTED (n=179) compared with open microdiscectomy (n=309).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
The primary outcome was self-reported leg pain measured by a 0-100 visual analogue scale at 12 months, assuming a non-inferiority margin of 5.0. Secondary outcomes included complications, reoperations, self-reported functional status as measured with the Oswestry Disability Index, visual analogue scale for back pain, health related quality of life, and self-perceived recovery. Outcomes were measured until one year after surgery and were longitudinally analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Patients belonging to the PTED learning curve were omitted from the primary analyses.
RESULTS
At 12 months, patients who were randomised to PTED had a statistically significantly lower visual analogue scale score for leg pain (median 7.0, interquartile range 1.0-30.0) compared with patients randomised to open microdiscectomy (16.0, 2.0-53.5) (between group difference of 7.1, 95% confidence interval 2.8 to 11.3). Blood loss was less, length of hospital admission was shorter, and timing of postoperative mobilisation was earlier in the PTED group than in the open microdiscectomy group. Secondary patient reported outcomes such as the Oswestry Disability Index, visual analogue scale for back pain, health related quality of life, and self-perceived recovery, were similarly in favour of PTED. Within one year, nine (5%) in the PTED group compared with 14 (6%) in the open microdiscectomy group had repeated surgery. Per protocol analysis and sensitivity analyses including the patients of the learning curve resulted in similar outcomes to the primary analysis.
CONCLUSIONS
PTED was non-inferior to open microdiscectomy in reduction of leg pain. PTED resulted in more favourable results for self-reported leg pain, back pain, functional status, quality of life, and recovery. These differences, however, were small and may not reach clinical relevance. PTED can be considered as an effective alternative to open microdiscectomy in treating sciatica.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
NCT02602093ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02602093.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Diskectomy; Endoscopy; Female; Humans; Leg; Lumbar Vertebrae; Male; Microsurgery; Middle Aged; Pain; Pain Measurement; Quality of Life; Sciatica; Self Report; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
PubMed: 35190388
DOI: 10.1136/bmj-2021-065846 -
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and... Jan 2022Unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy (UBE) is a rapidly growing surgical method that uses arthroscopic system for treatment of lumbar disc herniation (LDH), while...
BACKGROUND
Unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy (UBE) is a rapidly growing surgical method that uses arthroscopic system for treatment of lumbar disc herniation (LDH), while percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) has been standardized as a representative minimally invasive spine surgical technique for LDH. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes between UBE and PELD for treatment of patients with LDH.
METHODS
The subjects consisted of 54 patients who underwent UBE (24 cases) and PELD (30 cases) who were followed up for at least 6 months. All patients had lumber disc herniation for 1 level. Outcomes of the patients were assessed with operation time, incision length, hospital stay, total blood loss (TBL), intraoperative blood loss (IBL), hidden blood loss (HBL), complications, total hospitalization costs, visual analogue scale (VAS) for back and leg pain, the Oswestry disability index (ODI) and modified MacNab criteria.
RESULTS
The VAS scores and ODI decreased significantly in two groups after operation. Preoperative and 1 day, 1 month, 6 months after operation VAS and ODI scores were not significantly different between the two groups. Compared with PELD group, UBE group was associated with higher TBL, higher IBL, higher HBL, longer operation time, longer hospital stay, longer incision length, and more total hospitalization costs. However, a dural tear occurred in one patient of the UBE group. There was no significant difference in the rate of complications between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS
Application of UBE for treatment of lumbar disc herniation yielded similar clinical outcomes to PELD, including pain control and patient satisfaction. However, UBE was associated with various disadvantages relative to PELD, including increased total, intraoperative and hidden blood loss, longer operation times, longer hospital stays, and more total hospitalization costs.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Diskectomy; Diskectomy, Percutaneous; Endoscopy; Female; Humans; Intervertebral Disc Displacement; Lumbar Vertebrae; Male; Middle Aged; Pain; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35033143
DOI: 10.1186/s13018-022-02929-5 -
Spine Apr 2021Systematic review and meta-analysis. (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE
To give a systematic overview of effectiveness of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) compared with open microdiscectomy (OM) in the treatment of lumbar disk herniation (LDH).
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA
The current standard procedure for the treatment of sciatica caused by LDH, is OM. PTED is an alternative surgical technique which is thought to be less invasive. It is unclear if PTED has comparable outcomes compared with OM.
METHODS
Multiple online databases were systematically searched up to April 2020 for randomized controlled trials and prospective studies comparing PTED with OM for LDH. Primary outcomes were leg pain and functional status. Pooled effect estimates were calculated for the primary outcomes only and presented as standard mean differences (SMD) with their 95% confidence intervals (CI) at short (1-day postoperative), intermediate (3-6 months), and long-term (12 months).
RESULTS
We identified 2276 citations, of which eventually 14 studies were included. There was substantial heterogeneity in effects on leg pain at short term. There is moderate quality evidence suggesting no difference in leg pain at intermediate (SMD 0.05, 95% CI -0.10-0.21) and long-term follow-up (SMD 0.11, 95% CI -0.30-0.53). Only one study measured functional status at short-term and reported no differences. There is moderate quality evidence suggesting no difference in functional status at intermediate (SMD -0.09, 95% CI -0.24-0.07) and long-term (SMD -0.11, 95% CI -0.45-0.24).
CONCLUSION
There is moderate quality evidence suggesting no difference in leg pain or functional status at intermediate and long-term follow-up between PTED and OM in the treatment of LDH. High quality, robust studies reporting on clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness on the long term are lacking.Level of Evidence: 2.
Topics: Cost-Benefit Analysis; Diskectomy, Percutaneous; Endoscopy; Humans; Intervertebral Disc Degeneration; Intervertebral Disc Displacement; Lumbar Vertebrae; Microsurgery; Pain Measurement; Prospective Studies; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33290374
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003843 -
Medicine Feb 2023The effect of spinal anatomical anomalies on the efficacy of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) for disc herniation repair is unclear. This retrospective...
The effect of spinal anatomical anomalies on the efficacy of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) for disc herniation repair is unclear. This retrospective review aims to assess the safety and effectiveness of PELD for treating L5-S1 disc herniation with a range of characteristics and to determine the prevalence of lumbosacral transitional vertebrae (LSTV) anatomical anomalies to facilitate pre-surgical planning. From July 2005 to June 2019, 345 patients with L5-S1 disc herniations were treated with PELD. The primary outcome was 1-year postoperative visual analogue scale scores for low back and lower limb pain. The secondary outcomes included the surgical approach used, lumbosacral bony anomalies, presence of a ruptured disc or severely calcified disc, pediatric lumbar disc herniation, recurrent disc herniation management, and the long-term outcome. visual analogue scale scores for most patients were significantly improved after surgery. The prevalence of LSTVs was 4.05% (14/345 patients) in lumbar sacralization and 7.53% (26/345 patients) in sacral lumbarization. The prevalence of ruptured and severely calcified discs was 18.55% (64/345) and 5.79% (20/345), respectively. The prevalence of pediatric lumbar disc herniation was 2.02% (7/345). The recurrence rate was 4.34% (15/345). Two durotomy cases without sequelae and 8 cases of lower limb dysesthesia lasting longer than 3 months postoperatively were reported. PELD is safe and effective for treating L5-S1 disc herniation, including cases complicated by calcified lumbar disc herniation, disc rupture with migration, and the presence of LSTV. Appropriate imaging is essential to identify case-specific factors, including the prevalent LSTV anatomical anomalies, before surgery.
Topics: Humans; Child; Intervertebral Disc Displacement; Diskectomy, Percutaneous; Retrospective Studies; Lumbar Vertebrae; Endoscopy; Lumbosacral Region; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 36749265
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000032832 -
Orthopaedic Surgery Apr 2022The study aimed to make a bibliometric analysis of the current research situation in unilateral biportal endoscopy/biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (UBE/BESS).... (Review)
Review
Global and Current Research Trends of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopy/Biportal Endoscopic Spinal Surgery in the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Diseases: A Bibliometric and Visualization Study.
The study aimed to make a bibliometric analysis of the current research situation in unilateral biportal endoscopy/biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (UBE/BESS). Research data sets were acquired from the Web of Science database. The study chosed "biportal endoscopic spinal surgery" OR "two portal endoscopic spinal surgery" OR "percutaneous biportal endoscopic decompression" OR "unilateral biportal endoscopy" OR "irrigation endoscopic discectomy" as the search terms. The literature search was limited to articles published before March 5, 2021. We only included original articles and reviews. VOS viewer and Citespace software were used to analyze the data and generate visualization knowledge maps. Annual trend of publications, distribution, H-index status, co-authorship status, and research hotspots were analyzed. A total of 74 publications met the requirement. The sum number of citations was 31,204, in which 19,336 were no self-citations. The average citation of all the papers was 21.84 times. The H-index of all the publications was 85. South Korea's total number of articles was far higher than that of other countries and regions (61, 82.4%), followed by United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and Peoples Republic of China (three, ranking second, accounting for 12.2% of the total). For the most productive authors, Choi ranked first with 21 articles, Kim ranked second with 16 articles, and Heo ranked third with 12 articles. The journal with the greatest number of publications was World Neurosurgery, with a total of 18 (39.1%) papers. Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery ranked second with six (13.0%) papers. In third place, there were fix articles published by Asian Spine Journal and Neurospine, accounting for 21.8% of the total articles. These top three journals accounted for 73.9% of all the papers. Spondylolisthesis and endoscopic decompression were the research hotspots in recent years. The number of publications has showed an upward trend with a stable rise in recent years. South Korea is the country with the highest productivity, not only in quality, but also in quantity. Barun Hosp and Leon Wiltse Mem Hosphave published most articles. Choi is the most productive author. World Neurosurgery is the most productive journal. Spondylolisthesis and endoscopic decompression are the research hotspots in recent years. Indeed, this study provides new insight into the growth and development of UBE/BESS.
Topics: Bibliometrics; Decompression, Surgical; Endoscopy; Humans; Lumbar Vertebrae; Spondylolisthesis
PubMed: 35293686
DOI: 10.1111/os.13216 -
Ugeskrift For Laeger Oct 2023The technical development has caused a reintroduction of endoscopic techniques directed towards degenerative spine disease. A summary of the endoscopic procedure is... (Review)
Review
The technical development has caused a reintroduction of endoscopic techniques directed towards degenerative spine disease. A summary of the endoscopic procedure is given in this review. The spinal canal is reached through an inter-laminar or transforaminal access. In comparison with open surgery the percutaneous transforaminal access seems especially advantageous for the removal of paramedian and/or foraminal herniated disc material. However, careful patient selection is required, as the restricted manoeuverability and working zone of the endoscope and patient specific pathoanatomy in some cases will disfavour endoscopy.
Topics: Humans; Intervertebral Disc Displacement; Diskectomy, Percutaneous; Treatment Outcome; Lumbar Vertebrae; Endoscopy; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37921109
DOI: No ID Found -
Journal of Spine Surgery (Hong Kong) Sep 2022Open discectomy (OD) and microdiscectomy (MD) are routine procedures for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS), such as... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Open discectomy (OD) and microdiscectomy (MD) are routine procedures for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS), such as micro-endoscopic discectomy (MED) and full endoscopic discectomy (FED), offers potential advantages (less pain, less bleeding, shorter hospitalisation and earlier return to work), but their complications have not yet been fully evaluated. The aim of this paper was to identify the frequency of these complications with a focus on MIS in comparison to OD/MD.
METHODS
The authors conducted a Medline database search for randomised controlled and prospective cohort studies reporting complications associated with MIS and MD/OD from 1997 to February 2020. Included studies were assessed for bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality assessment form. Mean complication rates for each technique were calculated by dividing the total number of each complication by the total number of patients included in the studies which reported that specific complication.
RESULTS
Of the 1,095 articles retrieved from Medline, 35 met the inclusion criteria. OD, MD, MED and FED were associated with: recurrent lumbar disc hernias in 4.1%, 5.1%, 3.9% and 3.5% respectively; re-operations in 5.2%, 7.5%, 4.9% and 4% respectively; wound complications in 3.5%, 3.5%, 1.2% and 2% respectively; durotomy in 6.6%, 2.3%, 4.4% and 1.1% respectively; neurological complications in 1.8%, 2.8%, 4.5% and 4.9% respectively. Nerve root injury was reported in 0.3% for MD, 0.8% for MED and 1.2% for FED.
DISCUSSION
This up-to-date systematic review of complications after various techniques of lumbar discectomy (including a large pool of patients who had MIS) confirms previous findings of low and comparable rates. However variable levels of bias were reported amongst included studies, which reported complications with varying levels of clinical detail.
PubMed: 36285095
DOI: 10.21037/jss-21-59