OBJECTIVETo explore the advantages of minimally invasive expandable in surgery of lumbar discectomy and interbody fusion and internal fixation.

METHODSThe clinical data of 48 patients who underwent lumbar discectomy and interbody fusion and internal fixation from January 2010 to March 2016 was retrospectively analyzed. According to the admission queue, the patients were randomly assigned into channel group (26 cases) or traditional group (22 cases). In channel group, surgical approach of minimally invasive expandable channel was applied, and in traditional group, open posterior operation approach (including posterior lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion, etc.) was applied. In channel group, there were 20 males and 6 females, aged from 43 to 74 years with an average of(56.6±5.1) years; course of disease was ranged from 4 to 22 months with an average of (6.7±1.8) months; 1 case was complicated with diabetes, 6 cases were complicated with hypertensive disease, and 2 cases were complicated with arrhythmia. In traditional group, there were 15 males and 7 females, aged from 43 to 73 years with an average of(55.9±4.6) years; course of disease was ranged from 4 to 26 months with an average of (6.2±2.1) months; 2 cases were complicated with diabetes, 5 cases were complicated with hypertensive disease, and 1 case was complicated with arrhythmia. Operation time, bleeding volume, and hospitalization time were compared between two groups and visual analogue scale(VAS), Oswestry Disability Index(ODI), bone fusion information, and complications correlated with incision were observed in two groups.

RESULTSAll 48 patients were followed up for more than 6 months. Postoperative VAS and ODI were significantly improved (<0.01), but 3 and 6 months after operation, there was no significant difference in VAS between two groups, and ODI score of channel group was lower than that of traditional group(<0.01). Operation time, bleeding volume, hospitalization time in channel group respectively were (167.3±30.2) min, (786.8±147.8) ml, (12.3±2.4) d, and in traditional group were (197.5±48.7) min, (786.8±147.8) ml, (16.5±3.8) d, there was significant differences between two groups. There was no significant difference in fusion rate and fusion time between two groups. There were 4 cases and 7 cases developed incision related complications in channel group and traditional group, respectively. The difference between two groups was significant(<0.01).

CONCLUSIONSCompared with conventional surgery minimally invasive lumbar discectomy and interbody fusion and internal fixation has advantages of less trauma, shorter operative time and better functional recovery.