scholarly journals AOSpine Consensus Paper on Nomenclature for Working-Channel Endoscopic Spinal Procedures

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. 111S-121S ◽  
Author(s):  
Christoph P. Hofstetter ◽  
Yong Ahn ◽  
Gun Choi ◽  
J. N. A. Gibson ◽  
S. Ruetten ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rapid Development ◽  
Surgical Techniques ◽  
Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Surgical Instruments ◽  
International Consensus ◽  
Endoscopic Procedures ◽  
Endoscopic Spine Surgery ◽  
Consensus Paper ◽  
Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

Study Design: International consensus paper on a unified nomenclature for full-endoscopic spine surgery. Objectives: Minimally invasive endoscopic spinal procedures have undergone rapid development during the past decade. Evolution of working-channel endoscopes and surgical instruments as well as innovation in surgical techniques have expanded the types of spinal pathology that can be addressed. However, there is in the literature a heterogeneous nomenclature defining approach corridors and procedures, and this lack of common language has hampered communication between endoscopic spine surgeons, patients, hospitals, and insurance providers. Methods: The current report summarizes the nomenclature reported for working-channel endoscopic procedures that address cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spinal pathology. Results: We propose a uniform system that defines the working-channel endoscope (full-endoscopic), approach corridor (anterior, posterior, interlaminar, transforaminal), spinal segment (cervical, thoracic, lumbar), and procedure performed (eg, discectomy, foraminotomy). We suggest the following nomenclature for the most common full-endoscopic procedures: posterior endoscopic cervical foraminotomy (PECF), transforaminal endoscopic thoracic discectomy (TETD), transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy (TELD), transforaminal lumbar foraminotomy (TELF), interlaminar endoscopic lumbar discectomy (IELD), interlaminar endoscopic lateral recess decompression (IE-LRD), and lumbar endoscopic unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (LE-ULBD). Conclusions: We believe that it is critical to delineate a consensus nomenclature to facilitate uniformity of working-channel endoscopic procedures within academic scholarship. This will hopefully facilitate development, standardization of procedures, teaching, and widespread acceptance of full-endoscopic spinal procedures.

scholarly journals Linical efficacy of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis in elderly patients: a retrospective study

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hua Li ◽  
Yufu Ou ◽  
Furong Xie ◽  
Weiguo Liang ◽  
Gang Tian ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Lumbar Spine Surgery ◽  
Decompression Surgery ◽  
Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Pain Scores ◽  
Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

Abstract Background Although percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) is increasingly being used to treat lumbar degenerative disease, the treatment of elderly patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) involves considerable uncertainty. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of PELD for the treatment of LSS in elderly patients aged 65 years or older. Methods In this retrospective review, 136 patients aged 65 years or older who underwent PELD to treat LSS were evaluated. The patients were divided into two groups, group A (ages 65–74) and group B (age ≥ 75), and perioperative data were analyzed. The Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, visual analog scale (VAS) score, and MacNab classification were used to evaluate postoperative clinical efficacy. Results All patients successfully underwent the operation with satisfactory treatment outcomes. Compared to preoperative scores, the self-reported scores or pain while performing daily activities were significantly improved in both treatment groups (P < 0.05). No statistically significant between-group differences were observed in operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative bed rest, and postoperative hospital stay (P > 0.05). The overall postoperative complication rate was similar between the two groups. Moreover, no statistically significant differences in VAS-back pain scores, VAS-leg pain scores, JOA scores, and MacNab classification were found between the groups at the 3-month and 1.5-year follow-up examinations (P > 0.05). Conclusion PELD is safe and effective for the treatment of LSS in elderly patients. Age is not a contraindication for decompressive lumbar spine surgery. PELD has advantages such as reduced trauma, fewer anesthesia-related complications, and a fast postoperative recovery. Elderly patients should be considered good candidates for lumbar decompression surgery using minimally invasive techniques.

Risk of reoperation and infection after percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy and open lumbar discectomy

2021 ◽  
Vol 103-B (8) ◽  
pp. 1392-1399
Author(s):  
Tae Wook Kang ◽  
Si Young Park ◽  
Hoonji Oh ◽  
Soon Hyuck Lee ◽  
Jong Hoon Park ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Surgical Techniques ◽  
Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Infection Rates ◽  
Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Primary Endpoints ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
History Of ◽  
Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Reoperation Rates

Aims Open discectomy (OD) is the standard operation for lumbar disc herniation (LDH). Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD), however, has shown similar outcomes to OD and there is increasing interest in this procedure. However despite improved surgical techniques and instrumentation, reoperation and infection rates continue and are reported to be between 6% and 24% and 0.7% and 16%, respectively. The objective of this study was to compare the rate of reoperation and infection within six months of patients being treated for LDH either by OD or PELD. Methods In this retrospective, nationwide cohort study, the Korean National Health Insurance database from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2018 was reviewed. Data were extracted for patients who underwent OD or PELD for LDH without a history of having undergone either procedure during the preceding year. Individual patients were followed for six months through their encrypted unique resident registration number. The primary endpoints were rates of reoperation and infection during the follow-up period. Other risk factors for reoperation and infection were also evalulated. Results Out of 549,531 patients, 522,640 had undergone OD (95.11%) and 26,891 patients had undergone PELD (4.89%). Reoperation rates within six months were 2.28% in the OD group, and 5.38% in the PELD group. Infection rates were 1.18% in OD group and 0.83% in PELD group. The risk of reoperation was lower for patients with OD than for patients with PELD (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.38). The risk of infection was higher for patients with OD than for patients undergoing PELD (HR, 1.325). Conclusion Compared with the OD group, the PELD group showed higher reoperation rates and lower infection rates. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(8):1392–1399.

scholarly journals Robot Assisted Transforaminal Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy

10.29007/34nd ◽  
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Han Wang ◽  
Yajun Liu ◽  
Mingxing Fan ◽  
Jile Jiang ◽  
Wei Tian
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Results ◽  
Needle Insertion ◽  
Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Learning Curves ◽  
Computer Assisted ◽  
Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Assisted Navigation ◽  
Endoscopic Spine Surgery ◽  
Transforaminal Approach ◽  
Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy

Percutaneous endoscopic spine surgery is popular in recent years because of its minimally invasive manner. After transforaminal approach presented by Kambin in the late 1980s, many specific methods were described to establish an accurate and feasible approach to the target disc. Among them, the techniques of Yeung[1], Hoogland[2] and Ruetten[3] are the most famous ones and each has different design and indications. However, no consensus have been made because of the debated clinical results, steep learning curves, and pitfalls that exist in each approach. Guide needle insertion and subsequent working channel building remain a challenging procedure. Poor accuracy may lead to poor safety as the nerve root and dura are at risk. Many surgeons attempted to optimize the procedure, but few researches have integrated computer-assisted navigation with tPELD (transforaminal percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy). It is time to bring our surgical robot into the field.

scholarly journals Clinical Outcomes of “U” Route Transforaminal Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy in Chronic Pain Patients with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Combined with Disc Herniation

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Binbin Wu ◽  
Xinyi Tian ◽  
Ce Shi ◽  
Chenchen Jiang ◽  
Jing Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Pain Catastrophizing ◽  
Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Healthy Controls ◽  
Healthy Individuals ◽  
Chronic Pain Patients ◽  
Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Lumbar Spinal ◽  
Pain Patients

Introduction. “U” route transforaminal percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) was introduced for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) combined with disc herniation (DH) treatment. This study aims to explore the efficacy and safety of “U” route PELD on chronic pain patients with LSS combined with DH. Methods. Degenerative LSS combined with DH patients who underwent “U” route PELD were reexamined, and 80 patients were recruited and followed up for 2 years. The other 80 healthy individuals who were age- and sex-matched to the patients without chronic pain were enrolled as healthy controls. Minimum dura sac cross-sectional area (mDCSA) by MRI, Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and modified MacNab outcomes were assessed. Emotional evaluation of pain catastrophizing and depression was documented with Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) and Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), respectively, for patients before and after surgery and healthy individuals. Results . All patients were of the age range from 47 to 85 years, with an average of 59.5 ± 9.76 years. Symptoms duration was 114.6 ± 22.77 months, operation time was 87.7 ± 25.20 minutes, and the average hospital stay was 5.8 ± 2.81 days. Four patients quit, and hence, a total of 76 patients completed the follow-up. The results indicated that mDCSA was improved significantly after operation ( p < 0.001 ), either low back and leg VAS or ODI decreased over time ( p < 0.001 ), and the excellent-to-good rate was improved from 88.75% to 93.42% during postoperative 2 years ( p < 0.05 ). Complications of dural tear, nerve root, or dysesthesia were reported in 5 patients, and all recovered after conservative therapy. The scores of pain catastrophizing were reduced after operation ( p < 0.001 ), but no significance of BDI was found between patients and healthy controls ( p > 0.05 ). Conclusions. The “U” route PELD seems an alternative to LSS combined with DH treatment, which might reach a better decompression and effectively improve chronic pain conditions. Still, the complications were potential and required further consideration.

scholarly journals Lumbar spinal epidural arteriovenous fistula with perimedullary venous drainage after endoscopic lumbar surgery

2015 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 249-254 ◽  
Author(s):  
Toshiharu Murakami ◽  
Ichiro Nakagawa ◽  
Takeshi Wada ◽  
Kimihiko Kichikawa ◽  
Hiroyuki Nakase
Keyword(s):  
Transarterial Embolization ◽  
Venous Drainage ◽  
Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Neurological Deficits ◽  
Endoscopic Surgical Procedure ◽  
Lumbar Surgery ◽  
Lower Extremity Weakness ◽  
Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Lumbar Spinal ◽  
Spinal Epidural

Spinal epidural arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) with perimedullary venous drainage are rare. This report describes a case of lumbar epidural AVF in a patient with a history of endoscopic lumbar discectomy at the same level 8 years prior to presenting with progressive myelopathy secondary to retrograde venous reflux into the perimedullary vein. A 69-year-old man presented with progressive lower extremity weakness and sensory disturbance and loss of sphincter control 8 years after endoscopic lumbar discectomy for a disc herniation at L4–5 level. Magnetic resonance imaging showed spinal cord edema and dilated intradural perimedullary vessels. Spinal angiography revealed an epidural AVF at the site of the previous endoscopic lumbar surgery with intradural perimedullary venous drainage. The fistula was successfully occluded via endovascular transarterial embolization, and the patient had stabilization of his neurological deficits. Lumbar spinal epidural AVFs, especially those associated with iatrogenic trauma, are rare. Endoscopic surgical procedure can occlude the epidural venous plexus and disturb venous drainage, thereby inducing local venous hypertension and leading to epidural AVF with perimedullary venous drainage. This type of pathology should be considered within the differential diagnosis of delayed neurological deterioration after spinal surgery.

scholarly journals Percutaneous Endoscopic Spine Surgery for Extruded Lumbar Disc Herniation

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 482-495
Author(s):  
Mutombo Menga Arsene ◽  
Xiao-Tao Wu ◽  
Zan- Li Jiang ◽  
Lei Zhu
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Lumbar Disc Herniation ◽  
Spine Surgery ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Surgical Techniques ◽  
Surgical Instruments ◽  
Disc Space ◽  
Advanced Technique ◽  
Endoscopic Spine Surgery

The conventional open discectomy is the gold standard for treating extruded lumbar disc herniation, especially in highly migrated lumbar disc herniation. Endoscopic spine surgery is known to be very challenging and technically demanding, in particular for highly migrated disc herniation. However, several studies have reported numerous effective techniques with results approximatively equal to conventional open surgeries or mini-open surgery. In the last few years, an increased number of endoscopic spine surgical techniques have been proposed in order to overcome various issues encountered in traditional endoscopic spine surgery. Nevertheless, surgical approach selection for treating extruded lumbar disc herniation is based on aspects such as anatomical structures, availability of surgical instruments, surgeon’s experience, and the disc herniation location. Advances in endoscopic visualization and instrumentation, as well as an increased demand for minimally invasive procedures, have led to the popularity of Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy (PELD). PELD is a recent and advanced technique among other minimally invasive spine surgeries (MIS). It includes various kinds of surgical techniques to treat lumbar disc herniation and aims to offer a safe, less invasive surgical procedure for lumbar disc space decompression and removal of nucleus pulposus.

scholarly journals Lumbar Scoliosis Combined Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and Herniation Diagnosed Patient Was Treated with “U” Route Transforaminal Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Binbin Wu ◽  
Shaobo Zhang ◽  
Qingquan Lian ◽  
Haibo Yan ◽  
Xianfa Lin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Pain Intensity ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Lumbar Scoliosis ◽  
Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

The objective was to report a case of a 63-year-old man with a history of low back pain (LBP) and left leg pain for 2 years, and the symptom became more serious in the past 5 months. The patient was diagnosed with lumbar scoliosis combined with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) and lumbar disc herniation (LDH) at the level of L4-5 that was confirmed using Computerized Topography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging. The surgical team preformed a novel technique, “U” route transforaminal percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD), which led to substantial, long-term success in reduction of pain intensity and disability. After removing the osteophyte mass posterior to the thecal sac at L4-5, the working channel direction was changed to the gap between posterior longitudinal ligament and thecal sac, and we also removed the herniation and osteophyte at L3-4 with “U” route PELD. The patient’s symptoms were improved immediately after the surgical intervention; low back pain intensity decreased from preoperative 9 to postoperative 2 on a visual analog scale (VAS) recorded at 1 month postoperatively. The success of the intervention suggests that “U” route PELD may be a feasible alternative to treat lumbar scoliosis with LSS and LDH patients.

scholarly journals Unique Complications of Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy and Percutaneous Endoscopic Interlaminar Discectomy

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (21;1) ◽  
pp. E105-E112 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ma Xuexiao
Keyword(s):  
Nerve Root ◽  
Epidural Hematoma ◽  
Surgical Techniques ◽  
Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Nerve Root Injury ◽  
Root Injury ◽  
Endoscopic Discectomy ◽  
Posterior Neck ◽  
Nerve Root Pain ◽  
Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy

Background: Percutaneous endoscopic discectomy (PED) includes 2 main procedures: percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) and percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy (PEID), both of which are minimally invasive surgical procedures that effectively deal with lumbar degenerative disorders. Because of the challenging learning curve for the surgeon and the individual characteristics of each patient, preventing and avoiding complications is difficult. The most common complications, such as nucleus pulposus omission, nerve root injury, dural tear, visceral injury, nerve root induced hyperalgesia or burning-like nerve root pain, postoperative dysesthesia, posterior neck pain, and surgical site infection, are difficult to avoid; however, more focus on these issues perioperatively may be in order. Additionally, unique and unexpected complications can also occur, such as retroperitoneal hematoma (RPH), intraoperative seizures, and thrombophlebitis, among others. Objective: We aim to delineate unique complications during PED and accumulate strategies to prevent significant morbidity and improve surgical techniques. Study Design: A retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing PEID or PELD from October 2014 to January 2016. Setting: Affiliated hospitals of Qingdao University. Methods: Patients with lumbar disc herniation (LDH) who underwent PEID and PELD were retrospectively analyzed. Complications were recorded and analyzed pre and postoperatively. We assessed clinical outcomes using the visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and classified the results into “excellent,” “good,” “fair,” or “poor” based on the modified MacNab criteria. All of the patients were followed for more than one year to evaluate their recovery from complications. Results: From October 2014 to January 2016, 426 patients with LDH underwent PEID (106 cases) or PELD (320 cases). Common complications and occurrence rates were as follows: the incomplete removal of herniated discs was 1.4% (6/426), recurrence 2.8% (12/426), nerve root injury 1.2% (5/426), dural tear 0.9% (4/426), and nerve root induced hyperalgesia or burning-like nerve root pain 2.3% (10/426); no posterior neck pain or surgical site infection occurred. Unique complications included: passage of the working channel through the spinal canal into the disc space (one case), super-elastic nerve hook caught by exiting nerve root (one case), epidural hematoma (one case), radicular artery injury and massive bleeding (one case) which was revised by micro-endoscopic discectomy, and intraoperative seizure (one case). No serious consequences occurred after active medical intervention, and most patients had good recovery by 3 months postoperatively with physical therapy. Limitations: The main limitations of this study are the retrospective study design, limited case number, and short follow-up period. Conclusions: PEDs are effective and minimally invasive methods for the surgical treatment of LDH, causing fewer complications due to the very minimal operational trauma for the muscle-ligament complex and stability of the spine. Nevertheless, because of the difficult learning curve for surgeons, lack of experience with the requisite surgical techniques, and enhanced clinical responsibility, a variety of problems may occur. Especially concerning are the unique complications mentioned here, which potentially lead to severe injury for the patient and require diligent preventive measures. Key words: Unique complications, epidural, hematoma, interlaminar, transforaminal, PEID, PELD

scholarly journals Linical efficacy of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis in elderly patients: a retrospective study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
hua Li ◽  
Yufu Ou ◽  
Furong Xie ◽  
Weiguo Liang ◽  
Gang Tian ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Lumbar Spine Surgery ◽  
Decompression Surgery ◽  
Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Pain Scores ◽  
Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

Abstract Background: Although: percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) is increasingly being used to treat lumbar degenerative disease, the treatment of elderly patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) involves considerable uncertainty. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of PELD for the treatment of LSS in elderly patients aged 65 years or older. Methods: In this retrospective review, 136 patients aged 65 years or older who underwent PELD to treat LSS were evaluated. The patients were divided into two groups, group A (age 65-74) and group B (age ≥ 75), and perioperative data were analyzed. The Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, visual analog scale (VAS) score, and MacNab classification were used to evaluate postoperative clinical efficacy. Results: All patients successfully underwent the operation with satisfactory treatment outcomes. Compared to preoperative scores, the self-reported scores for pain while performing daily activities were significantly improved in both treatment groups (P<0.05). No statistically significant between-group differences were observed in operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative bed rest, and postoperative hospital stay (P > 0.05). The overall postoperative complication rate was similar between the two groups. Moreover, no statistically significant differences in VAS-back pain scores, VAS-leg pain scores, JOA scores, and MacNab classification were found between the groups at the 3-month and 1.5-year follow-up examinations (P>0.05). Conclusion: PELD is safe and effective for the treatment of LSS in elderly patients. Age is not a contraindication for decompressive lumbar spine surgery. PELD has advantages such as reduced trauma, fewer anesthesia-related complications, and a fast postoperative recovery. Elderly patients should be considered good candidates for lumbar decompression surgery using minimally invasive techniques.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document