• Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi · Oct 2009

    Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study

    [Comparison of microendoscopic discectomy with open discectomy for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis].

    • Xiaosheng Lu, Hao Peng, Shangzhun Ling, and Wen Wei.
    • Department of Orthopaedics, People's Hospital of Baise, Baise Guangxi, 533000, P.R. China.
    • Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2009 Oct 1; 23 (10): 1200-3.

    ObjectiveTo compare microendoscopic discectomy (MED) with open discectomy (OD) for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis in terms of clinical outcomes, and provide experience and therapeutic evidence for clinical application.MethodsFrom May 2002 to October 2007, 215 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis were randomized into two groups, and underwent either MED or OD. In group A, 105 patients underwent MED, including 56 males and 49 females aged 34 to 83 years old (average 45 years old); the duration of the disease ranged from 9 months to 26 years (average 50 months); the spinal stenosis involved one segment in 76 cases, two segments in 27 cases, and three segments in 2 cases. In group B, 110 patients received OD, including 57 males and 53 females aged 35 to 85 years old (average 47 years old); the duration of the disease ranged from 8 months to 25 years (average 48 months); the spinal stenosis involved one segment in 78 cases, two segments in 29 cases, and three segments in 3 cases. No significant difference was evident between two groups in terms of the general information (P > 0.05).ResultsOperation was successfully performed in all cases. Volume ofintraoperative blood loss was (82.14 +/- 6.18) mL in group A and (149.24 +/- 11.17) mL in group B. Length of hospital stay was (7.0 +/- 2.1) days in group A and (12.0 +/- 2.6) days in group B. Significant difference was noted between two groups in terms of the above parameters (P < 0.01). All the wounds healed by first intention. The patients were followed up for 13-54 months (average 27 months) in group A and 12-55 months (average 29 months) in group B. Four patients in each group suffered from spinal dural rupture during operation and recovered after corresponding treatment. Three patients in group B had lumbar instability 3 years after operation and recovered using lumbar interbody fusion combined with general spine system internal fixation. No such complications as wrong orientation, nerve root injury, cauda equina injury and infection occurred in each group, and radiology exam showed no relapse. Therapeutic effect was evaluated by Nakai standard, 52 cases in group A were graded as excellent, 45 as good, 7 as fair, 1 as poor, and the excellent and good rate was 92.4%; 53 cases in group B were graded as excellent, 48 as good, 8 as fair, 1 as poor, and the excellent and good rate was 91.8%; there was no significant difference between two groups (P > 0.05).ConclusionTwo methods have the similar therapeutic effect, but MED eliminates the shortcomings of traditional OD, so it is one of ideal minimally invasive operative approaches for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,624,503 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.