Percutaneous biportal endoscopic decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: a technical note and preliminary clinical results

OBJECTIVE The use of conventional uniportal spinal endoscopic decompression surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis can be limited by technical difficulties and a restricted field of vision. The purpose of this study is to describe the technique for percutaneous biportal endoscopic decompression (PBED) for lumbar spinal stenosis and analysis of clinical postoperative results. METHODS The authors performed a unilateral laminotomy with bilateral foraminal decompression using a unilateral biportal endoscopic system in patients with single-level lumbar stenosis. The authors enrolled only patients who underwent follow-up for longer than 12 months after PBED. Fifty-eight patients were enrolled in this study. This approach was based on 2 portals: one portal was used for continuous irrigation and endoscopic viewing and the other portal was used to manipulate the instruments used in the decompression procedures. Clinical parameters such as the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Macnab criteria, and postoperative complications were analyzed. RESULTS Neural decompression was effectively performed in all enrolled patients. The mean ODI was significantly lower after PBED. Of 58 patients, 47 (81.0%) had a good or excellent result according to the Macnab criteria. Postoperative ODI and visual analog scale scores were significantly improved compared with preoperative values. CONCLUSIONS From a surgical point of view, percutaneous biportal endoscopy is very similar to microscopic spinal surgery, permitting good visualization of the contralateral sublaminar and medial foraminal areas. The authors suggest that the PBED, which is a minimally invasive procedure, is an alternative treatment option for degenerative lumbar stenosis.

Download Full-text

Degenerative central lumbar spinal stenosis: Is endoscopic decompression through bilateral transforaminal approach sufficient?

10.21203/rs.3.rs-25624/v2 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Bin Zhang ◽

Qingquan Kong ◽

Yuqing Yan ◽

Pin Feng

Keyword(s):

Spinal Stenosis ◽

Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽

Operation Time ◽

Decompression Surgery ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Endoscopic Decompression ◽

Dural Sac ◽

Transforaminal Approach ◽

The Mean ◽

Lumbar Spinal

Abstract Background: At present, few percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal decompression surgery has been reported to solve central lumbar spinal stenosis (CLSS). Whether endoscopic decompression through lateral transforaminal approach decompression is sufficient for degenerative CLSS.Methods: This retrospective study included 47 cases of CLSS patients who underwent percutaneous endoscopic decompression through a bilateral transforaminal approach. Clinical outcomes such as ODI, back and leg VAS, the Macnab criteria were evaluated. Surgical results including operative time, postoperative hospital stay, recurrence, and surgical complications were also studied. Radiologically, lumbar stability was assessed and lumbar dural sac dimension was compared preoperatively and postoperatively.Results：All 47 patients were followed up. The average follow-up period was 24.5 months. The average operation time was 116 minutes. The mean VAS of leg and back pain, and the mean ODI improved from 7.81, 2.53, and 77.03% at baseline to a final 1.94 (P=0.00), 2.47 (P=0.71), and 19.40 % (P=0.00), respectively. According to the Macnab criteria, 97.9% of patients achieved excellent and good results. There were 2 cases of dura tear and 3 cases of transient postoperative dysthesia. The cross sectional area of the dural sac was significantly enlargement at the last fellow up (74.28±13.08 mm2 vs.104.91±12.40 mm2, P=0.00).Conclusions: Except for the main pathogenic factors on the dorsal side of the dural sac, percutaneous endoscopic decompression through a bilateral transforaminal approach is sufficient for CLSS. It is a feasible, safe, and clinically effective minimally invasive procedure.

Download Full-text

Unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression by 30° endoscopy in lumbar spinal stenosis: Technical note and preliminary report

Journal of Orthopaedics ◽

10.1016/j.jor.2018.01.039 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 15 (2) ◽

pp. 366-371 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Ju-Eun Kim ◽

Dae-Jung Choi

Keyword(s):

Spinal Stenosis ◽

Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽

Preliminary Report ◽

Technical Note ◽

Endoscopic Decompression ◽

Lumbar Spinal

Download Full-text

Degenerative central lumbar spinal stenosis: is endoscopic decompression through bilateral transforaminal approach sufficient?

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders ◽

10.1186/s12891-020-03722-3 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 21 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Bin Zhang ◽

Qingquan Kong ◽

Yuqing Yan ◽

Pin Feng

Keyword(s):

Spinal Stenosis ◽

Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽

Operation Time ◽

Decompression Surgery ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Endoscopic Decompression ◽

Dural Sac ◽

Transforaminal Approach ◽

The Mean ◽

Lumbar Spinal

Abstract Background At present, few reports of percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal decompression surgery have been reported to solve central lumbar spinal stenosis (CLSS). Is endoscopic decompression through bilateral transforaminal approach decompression sufficient for degenerative CLSS? Methods This retrospective study included 47 cases of CLSS patients who underwent percutaneous endoscopic decompression through bilateral transforaminal approach. Clinical outcomes such as ODI, back and leg VAS, the Macnab criteria were evaluated. Surgical results including operative time, postoperative hospital stay, recurrence, and surgical complications were also studied. Radiologically, lumbar stability was assessed and lumbar dural sac dimension was compared preoperatively and postoperatively. Results All 47 patients were followed up. The average follow-up period was 24.5 months. The average operation time was 116 min. The mean VAS of leg and back pain, and the mean ODI improved from 7.81, 2.53, and 77.03% at baseline to a final 1.94 (P = 0.00), 2.47 (P = 0.71), and 19.40% (P = 0.00), respectively. According to the Macnab criteria, 97.9% of patients achieved excellent and good results. There were 2 cases of dural tear and 3 cases of transient postoperative dysthesia. The cross-sectional area of the dural sac was significant enlargement at the last fellow up (74.28 ± 13.08 mm2 vs.104.91 ± 12.40 mm2, P = 0.00). Conclusions Except for the main pathogenic factors on the dorsal side of the dural sac, percutaneous endoscopic decompression through a bilateral transforaminal approach is sufficient for CLSS. It is a feasible, safe, and clinically effective minimally invasive procedure.

Download Full-text

Degenerative central lumbar spinal stenosis: Is endoscopic decompression through lateral transforaminal approach sufficient?

10.21203/rs.3.rs-25624/v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Bin Zhang ◽

Qingquan Kong ◽

Yuqing Yan ◽

Pin Feng

Keyword(s):

Spinal Stenosis ◽

Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽

Operation Time ◽

Decompression Surgery ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Endoscopic Decompression ◽

Dural Sac ◽

Transforaminal Approach ◽

The Mean ◽

Lumbar Spinal

Abstract Background: At present, no percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal decompression surgery has been reported to solve central lumbar spinal stenosis (CLSS). Whether endoscopic decompression through lateral transforaminal approach decompression is sufficient for degenerative CLSS. Methods: This retrospective study included 47 cases of CLSS patients who underwent percutaneous endoscopic decompression through a bilateral transforaminal approach. Clinical outcomes such as ODI, back and leg VAS, the Macnab criteria were evaluated. Surgical results including operative time, postoperative hospital stay, recurrence, and surgical complications were also studied. Radiologically, lumbar stability was assessed and lumbar dural sac dimension was compared preoperatively and postoperatively. Results ： All 47 patients were followed up. The average follow-up period was 24.5 months. The average operation time was 116 minutes. The mean VAS of leg and back pain, and the mean ODI improved from 7.81, 2.53, and 77.03% at baseline to a final 1.94 (P=0.00), 2.47 (P=0.71), and 19.40 % (P=0.00), respectively. According to the Macnab criteria, 97.9% of patients achieved excellent and good results. There were 2 cases of dura tear and 3 cases of transient postoperative dysthesia. The cross sectional area of the dural sac was significantly enlargement at the last fellow up (74.28±13.08 mm 2 vs. 104.91±12.40 mm 2 , P=0.00). Conclusions: Except for the main pathogenic factors on the dorsal side of the dural sac, percutaneous endoscopic decompression through a bilateral transforaminal approach is sufficient for CLSS. It is a feasible, safe, and clinically effective minimally invasive procedure.

Download Full-text

Degenerative central lumbar spinal stenosis: Is endoscopic decompression through bilateral transforaminal approach sufficient?

10.21203/rs.3.rs-25624/v3 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Bin Zhang ◽

Qingquan Kong ◽

Yuqing Yan ◽

Pin Feng

Keyword(s):

Spinal Stenosis ◽

Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽

Operation Time ◽

Decompression Surgery ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Endoscopic Decompression ◽

Dural Sac ◽

Transforaminal Approach ◽

The Mean ◽

Lumbar Spinal

Abstract Background: At present, few reports of percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal decompression surgery have been reported to solve central lumbar spinal stenosis (CLSS). Is endoscopic decompression through bilateral transforaminal approach decompression sufficient for degenerative CLSS?Methods: This retrospective study included 47 cases of CLSS patients who underwent percutaneous endoscopic decompression through bilateral transforaminal approach. Clinical outcomes such as ODI, back and leg VAS, the Macnab criteria were evaluated. Surgical results including operative time, postoperative hospital stay, recurrence, and surgical complications were also studied. Radiologically, lumbar stability was assessed and lumbar dural sac dimension was compared preoperatively and postoperatively.Results：All 47 patients were followed up. The average follow-up period was 24.5 months. The average operation time was 116 minutes. The mean VAS of leg and back pain, and the mean ODI improved from 7.81, 2.53, and 77.03% at baseline to a final 1.94 (P=0.00), 2.47 (P=0.71), and 19.40 % (P=0.00), respectively. According to the Macnab criteria, 97.9% of patients achieved excellent and good results. There were 2 cases of dural tear and 3 cases of transient postoperative dysthesia. The cross-sectional area of the dural sac was significant enlargement at the last fellow up (74.28±13.08 mm2 vs.104.91±12.40 mm2, P=0.00).Conclusions: Except for the main pathogenic factors on the dorsal side of the dural sac, percutaneous endoscopic decompression through a bilateral transforaminal approach is sufficient for CLSS. It is a feasible, safe, and clinically effective minimally invasive procedure.

Download Full-text

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

Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research ◽

10.1186/s13018-020-01968-0 ◽

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.

Download Full-text