Comparison of Efficacy Between Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Discectomy and Percutaneous Endoscopic Interlaminar Discectomy for L5/S1 Lumbar Disc Herniation
10.3969/j.issn.1009-6604.2025.11.005
- VernacularTitle:单侧双通道与经椎板间入路内镜椎间盘切除术治疗L5/S1椎间盘突出症的疗效比较
- Author:
Yue WANG
1
;
Shaojun LIU
;
Yaoning QU
Author Information
1. 西安电子科技大学医院外科,西安 710071
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Lumbar disc herniation;
Unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy;
Percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy
- From:
Chinese Journal of Minimally Invasive Surgery
2025;25(11):664-669
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To compare clinical effects of unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy(UBED)and percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy(PEID)in the treatment of L5/S1 lumbar disc herniation.Methods From June 2021 to June 2023,68 patients with L5/S1 disc herniation who underwent endoscopic surgery in our hospital were retrospectively analyzed.They were divided into UBED group(33 cases)and PEID group(35 cases)according to surgical methods.Incision length,operation time,flushing fluid usage,intraoperative bleeding and postoperative hospital stay were compared between the two groups.The Visual Analogue Scale(VAS)and Oswestry disability index(ODI)were also compared at preoperative and different postoperative follow-up timepoints.Clinical efficacy was evaluated by the modified MacNab criteria at one year after operation.Results The length of incision,amount of irrigation solution,and intraoperative bleeding in the UBED group were longer/greater than those in the PEID group[(27.1±2.8)mm vs.(9.3±0.7)mm,t=35.891,P=0.000;(9.8±1.6)L vs.(6.2±0.7)L,t=11.871,P=0.000;(54.8±3.4)ml vs.(43.8±3.6)ml,t=13.027,P=0.000].The operation time was less in the UBED group than that in the PEID group[(57.5±8.9)min vs.(75.4±8.8)min,t=-8.315,P=0.000].There was no significant difference in postoperative hospital stay between the UBED group and the PEID group[4(4,5)d vs.5(4,5)d,Z=-0.491,P=0.624].There was significant difference in the VAS score of low back pain between each timepoint within both groups(P<0.05).There was no significant difference in the VAS score of leg pain between one month and six months after operation within both groups(UBED group:P=0.105,PEID group:P=0.165),but there were significant differences at other timepoints(P<0.05).There was no significant difference in the VAS score of low back pain and leg pain at each timepoint between the two groups(P>0.05).There was significant difference in ODI at each timepoint within both groups(all P=0.000),but there was no statistical difference at each timepoint between the two groups(P=0.157),with time×group interaction being not significant(P=0.708).There was no significant difference in the modified MacNab outcomes at one year after surgery(78.8%vs.74.3%,χ2=0.191,P=0.662).Conclusions Both UBED and PEID are safe,effective,and minimally invasive surgical methods for L5/S1 lumbar disc herniation.UBED has shorter operation time,while PEID has less trauma and irrigation solution during operation.
