Cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus percutaneous endoscopic discectomy for the treatment of single-segment lumbar disc herniation
10.3760/cma.j.cn341190-20240705-00865
- VernacularTitle:MIS-TLIF与PTED治疗单节段腰椎间盘突出症的成本-效果比较
- Author:
Haojun WANG
1
;
Yibin DU
1
;
Zhongjiang LAN
1
;
Yanliang JIAO
1
Author Information
1. 安徽医科大学第三附属医院 合肥市第一人民医院脊柱骨科，合肥 230041
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Spinal diseases;
Intervertebral disc displacement;
Diskectomy;
Operative time;
Blood loss，surgical;
Visual analog scale
- From:
Chinese Journal of Primary Medicine and Pharmacy
2025;32(4):539-544
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To compare the cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) versus percutaneous endoscopic discectomy (PTED) for the treatment of single-segment lumbar disc herniation (LDH). Methods:This study is a retrospective analysis that included patients diagnosed and treated with either MIS-TLIF or PTED for single-segment LDH at Hefei First People's Hospital from January to December 2022. The study comprised 35 patients in the MIS-TLIF group and 35 patients in the PTED group. Total medical costs, surgery duration, blood loss, time to catheter removal, Visual Analog Scale scores before surgery, and at 3 and 12 months post-surgery, along with the Oswestry Disability Index, were recorded for each group. The cost-effectiveness ratio was compared between the two groups.Results:A total of 70 patients were included, including 35 patients in the MIS-TLIF group and 35 patients in the PTED group. There was no significant difference in general data between the two groups (all P >0.05). The differences in Visual Analog Scale and Oswestry Disability Index scores between the two groups, as well as within each group before surgery, and at 3 and 12 months post-surgery, were not statistically significant (all P > 0.05). The surgery duration for the PTED group [(112.94 ± 53.17) minutes] was significantly shorter than that of the MIS-TLIF group [(210.14 ± 25.68) minutes, Z = 2.21, P < 0.05]. However, the success rate for the PTED group [94.29% (33/35)] was not significantly different from that of the MIS-TLIF group [91.43% (32/35), Z = 0.46, P > 0.05]. The cost-effectiveness ratio for the PTED group was 239.56, while the cost-effectiveness ratio for the MIS-TLIF group was 377.69. Conclusions:PTED offers greater economic advantages in the treatment of single-segment LDH, particularly in terms of reduced blood loss and shorter surgery duration compared with MIS-TLIF. The choice of surgical approach should be made according to clinical requirements.
