Comparative Study of the Outcomes of Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy and Microscopic Lumbar Discectomy Using the Tubular Retractor System Based on the VAS, ODI, and SF-36.
10.14245/kjs.2012.9.3.215
- Author:
Sang Mok YOON
1
;
Soon Seob AHN
;
Ki Hong KIM
;
Young Don KIM
;
Jae Hoon CHO
;
Dae Hyun KIM
Author Information
1. Department of Neurosurgery, College of Medicine, Catholic University of Daegu, Daegu, Korea. daehkim@cu.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Comparative Study ; Original Article
- Keywords:
Percutaneous discectomy;
Microdiscectomy;
Lumbar disc herniation;
VAS;
ODI;
SF-36
- MeSH:
Back Pain;
Diskectomy;
Diskectomy, Percutaneous;
Follow-Up Studies;
Humans;
Leg;
Prospective Studies;
Return to Work
- From:Korean Journal of Spine
2012;9(3):215-222
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE: Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) and microdiscectomy with the microscope endoscopic tubular retractor system(METRx-MD) are considered popular minimally invasive surgery (MIS) methods for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation. Many authors have also reported good clinical outcomes of these methods, but there are few comparative studies of them. This report compares the clinical outcomes of PELD and METRx-MD for lumbar disc herniation as MIS methods and discusses the efficacy of PELD. METHODS: Seventy-two patients who had undergone single-level unilateral discectomy using two different methods, PELD and METRx-MD, between 2009 and 2011 were given a follow-up examination prospectively. Thirty-seven of these patients underwent discectomy using PELD, and the remaining 35 patients underwent discectomy using METRx-MD. In addition to the general parameters, clinical outcomes were assessed as specific parameters using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), the Short-form 36 (SF-36), and the return-to-work time. RESULTS: Sixty-seven percent (25/37) of the patients in the PELD group and 74%(26/35) in the METRx-MD group were included in follow-up more than 6 months post-operatively. The mean improvements in the VAS scores for the back pain, leg pain, and ODI were 2.6, 4.8, and 30.1% for the PELD group and 2.8, 4.6, and 33.2% for the METRx-MD group, respectively. The SF-36 physical health component subscale score improved from 40.6 pre-operatively to 68.3 at the last follow-up for the PELD group post-operatively, and from 48.5 to 65.1 in the mental component subscale (METRx-MD group: from 34.4 to 66.5 and from 44.87 to 56.7). Complications occurred in 3/37 patients in the PELD group and in 2/35 patients in the METRx-MD group in the peri-operative period. The mean return-to-work times were 37.5 days in the PELD group and 42.5 days in the METRx-MD group. CONCLUSION: The outcomes for the PELD group are comparable to those for the METRx-MD group. It can thus be concluded that PELD for lumbar disk herniations may be performed safely and effectively. Also, PELD can be considered one of the treatment modalities of lumbar disk herniation.
