[1]李悦洋,李海音,常献,等.经皮内镜髓核摘除术治疗腰椎间盘突出症长期随访研究[J].陆军军医大学学报(原第三军医大学学报),2021,43(22):2455-2461.
　LI Yueyang,LI Haiyin,CHANG Xian,et al.Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy in treatment of lumbar disc herniation: a long-term follow-up study [J].J Amry Med Univ (J Third Mil Med Univ),2021,43(22):2455-2461.
点击复制

经皮内镜髓核摘除术治疗腰椎间盘突出症长期随访研究(/HTML )
分享到：

陆军军医大学学报（原第三军医大学学报）[ISSN:1000-5404/CN:51-1095/R]

卷:
43卷
期数:
2021年第22期
页码:
2455-2461
栏目:
临床医学
出版日期:
2021-11-30

文章信息/Info

Title:
Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy in treatment of lumbar disc herniation: a long-term follow-up study
 
作者:
李悦洋; 李海音; 常献; 胡志雷; 刘晨浩; 高小新; 张雨尧; 李长青
陆军军医大学（第三军医大学）第二附属医院骨科
Author(s):
LI Yueyang;  LI Haiyin;  CHANG Xian;  HU Zhilei;  LIU Chenhao;  GAO Xiaoxin;  ZHANG Yuyao;  LI Changqing

Department of Orthopedics, Second Affiliated Hospital, Army Medical University (Third Military Medical University), Chongqing, 400037, China

关键词:
腰椎间盘突出症; 经皮内镜髓核摘除术; 手术疗效; 并发症
Keywords:
 ; 
分类号:
R181.37; R616; R681.53
文献标志码:
A
摘要:

目的评估经皮内镜髓核摘除术治疗腰椎间盘突出症的临床疗效。方法选取2012年1月至2015年12月我科诊断为单节段腰椎间盘突出症并行经皮内镜髓核摘除手术的病例，完成至少5年的术后随访。观测患者术前，术后3个月、6个月、1年及末次随访的腰椎疾病的功能评分（the Oswestry disability index，ODI）及腰、腿部疼痛视觉模拟评分(visual analogue scale，VAS)评分变化；记录术后并发症及其治疗方式。结果共纳入病例1 807例，完成随访病例1 706例，失访101例，随访率为94.08%。随访时间（6.36±1.08）年。术后3个月、6个月、1年及最终随访ODI评分分别为（26.01±7.48）、（20.87±7.50）、（17.25±7.77）及（17.26±13.53）分，较术前[（58.23±13.06）分]均明显下降；术后1年ODI评分较术后3、6个月明显下降。腰部VAS评分术后3个月、6个月、1年及最终随访分别为（2.50±0.83）、（1.93±0.84）、（1.54±0.82）、（1.46±1.28）分，均较术前[（5.48±1.24）分]明显下降；腰部术后1年VAS评分较术后3、6个月明显下降。术后3个月、6个月、1年及最终随访腿部VAS评分分别为（2.00±1.07）、（1.43±1.02）、（1.01±1.01）、（0.89±1.39）分，较术前[（4.73±1.84）分]均有下降。术后并发症发生率为0.53%（9/1 706）,包括椎间盘囊肿2例，椎间隙感染2例，邻近节段突出5例。术后症状未缓解11例。术后复发177例，复发率10.38%。术后1年为患者复发高峰时间，61～90岁患者复发率较高。复发再手术率为50.85%，全部再手术率5.98%。复发治疗方式：手术治疗90例，保守治疗87例。 结论经皮内镜髓核摘除术治疗腰椎间盘突出症长期随访结果良好。

Abstract:

ObjectiveTo evaluate the clinical efficacy of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation. MethodsPatients who received single-level percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy for lumbar disc herniation in our department from January 2012 to December 2015 were recruited and followed up for at least 5 years. Oswestry disability index (ODI) and visual analogue scale (VAS) scores of waist and leg were evaluated preoperatively, 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively, and at the last follow-up. Postoperative complications and their treatment were recorded and analyzed. ResultsA total of 1 807 cases were included, of which, 1 706 cases were followed up and 101 cases were lost to follow-up, with a follow-up rate of 94.08%. The mean follow-up time was 6.36±1.08 years. The ODI scores at 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively and last follow-up were 26.01±7.48, 20.87±7.50, 17.25±7.77 and 17.26±13.53, respectively, which were significantly lower than that preoperatively (58.23±13.06). The ODI score at 12 months postoperatively was significantly lower than those at 3 and 6 months postoperatively. The VAS scores of low back at 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively and last follow-up were 2.50±0.83, 1.93±0.84, 1.54±0.82 and 1.46±1.28, respectively, and all these scores were significantly lower than that preoperatively (5.48±1.24). The score at 12 months postoperatively was obviously lower than those at 3 and 6 months. The VAS scores of leg at 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively and last follow-up were 2.00±1.07, 1.43±1.02, 1.01±1.01 and 0.89±1.39, respectively, and all of them were significantly lower than the preoperative score (4.73±1.84). The incidence of postoperative complications was 0.53% (9/1 706), including 2 cases of intervertebral disc cyst, 2 of intervertebral space infection and 5 of adjacent segment disease. Eleven patients do not relieve postoperatively. The recurrence rate was 10.38% in 177 cases. One year postoperatively was the peak time of disc recurrence, and the patients aged 61 to 90 years had a higher recurrence rate. The reoperation rate for recurrence was 50.85% and total reoperation rate was 5.98%. For the recurrence, 90 cases were treated with surgery and 87 cases were treated conservatively. ConclusionPercutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy has good long-term follow-up outcomes in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation.

参考文献/References:

[1]DEEN H G. Posterolateral endoscopic excision for lumbar disc herniation: surgical technique, outcome, and complications in 307 consecutive cases[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2002, 27(18): 2081-2082;authorreply2081-2.DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200209150-00027.
 
[2]HOOGLAND T, SCHUBERT M, MIKLITZ B, et al. Transforaminal posterolateral endoscopic discectomy with or without the combination of a low-dose chymopapain: a prospective randomized study in 280 consecutive cases[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2006, 31(24): E890-E897. DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000245955.22358.3a. 
 
[3]KIM M, LEE S, KIM H S, et al. A comparison of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy and open lumbar microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation in the Korean: a meta-analysis[J]. Biomed Res Int, 2018, 2018: 9073460. DOI: 10.1155/2018/9073460. 
 
[4]RUAN W F, FENG F, LIU Z Y, et al. Comparison of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy versus open lumbar microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation: a meta-analysis[J]. Int J Surg, 2016, 31: 86-92. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.05.061. 
 
[5]KIM H S, PAUDEL B, JANG J S, et al. Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy for all types of lumbar disc herniations (LDH) including severely difficult and extremely difficult LDH cases[J]. Pain Physician, 2018, 21(4): E401-E408. 
 
[6]CHOI K C, KIM J S, RYU K S, et al. Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy for L5-S1 disc herniation: transforaminal versus interlaminar approach[J]. Pain Physician, 2013, 16(6): 547-556. 
 
[7]RUETTEN S, KOMP M, MERK H, et al. Full-endoscopic interlaminar and transforaminal lumbar discectomy versus conventional microsurgical technique: a prospective, randomized, controlled study[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2008, 33(9): 931-939. DOI: 10.1097/brs.0b013e31816c8af7. 
 
[8]YAO Y, LIU H, ZHANG H Y, et al. Risk factors for recurrent herniation after percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy[J]. World Neurosurg, 2017, 100: 1-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2016.12.089. 
 
[9]MAYER H M, BROCK M. Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD)[J]. Neurosurg Rev, 1993, 16(2): 115-120. DOI: 10.1007/BF00258242.
 
[10]TENENBAUM S, ARZI H, HERMAN A, et al. Percutaneous posterolateral transforaminal endoscopic discectomy: clinical outcome, complications, and learning curve evaluation[J]. Surg Technol Int, 2011, 21: 278-283.
 
[11]EUN S S, LEE S H, SABAL L A. Long-term follow-up results of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy[J]. Pain Physician, 2016, 19(8): E1161-E1166. 
 
[12]AHN Y, LEE U, KIM W K, et al. Five-year outcomes and predictive factors of transforaminal full-endoscopic lumbar discectomy[J]. Medicine (Baltimore), 2018, 97(48): e13454. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000013454. 
 
[13]CHEN X L, CHAMOLI U, VARGAS CASTILLO J, et al. Complication rates of different discectomy techniques for symptomatic lumbar disc herniation: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Eur Spine J, 2020, 29(7): 1752-1770. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-020-06389-5. 
 
[14]AHN S S, KIM S H, KIM D W. Learning curve of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy based on the period (early vs. late) and technique (in-and-out vs. in-and-out-and-in): a retrospective comparative study[J]. J Korean Neurosurg Soc, 2015, 58(6): 539-546. DOI: 10.3340/jkns.2015.58.6.539. 
 
[15]HA S W, JU C I, KIM S W, et al. Clinical outcomes of percutaneous endoscopic surgery for lumbar discal cyst[J]. J Korean Neurosurg Soc, 2012, 51(4): 208-214. DOI: 10.3340/jkns.2012.51.4.208. 
 
[16]AYDIN S, ABUZAYED B, YILDIRIM H, et al. Discal cysts of the lumbar spine: report of five cases and review of the literature[J]. Eur Spine J, 2010, 19(10): 1621-1626. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-010-1395-9. 
 
[17]KIM J S, CHOI G, LEE C D, et al. Removal of discal cyst using percutaneous working channel endoscope via transforaminal route[J]. Eur Spine J, 2009, 18(Suppl 2): 201-205. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-008-0815-6. 
 
[18]CARRAGEE E J, SPINNICKIE A O, ALAMIN T F, et al. A prospective controlled study of limited versus subtotal posterior discectomy: short-term outcomes in patients with herniated lumbar intervertebral discs and large posterior anular defect[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2006, 31(6): 653-657. DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000203714.76250.68. 
 
[19]AHN Y, LEE S H. Outcome predictors of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy and thermal annuloplasty for discogenic low back pain[J]. Acta Neurochir (Wien), 2010, 152(10): 1695-1702. DOI: 10.1007/s00701-010-0726-2. 
 
[20]HUANG W, HAN Z, LIU J, et al. Risk factors for recurrent lumbar disc herniation: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Medicine (Baltimore), 2016, 95(2): e2378. DOI: 10.1097/md.0000000000002378. 
 
[21]KIM C H, CHUNG C K, CHOI Y, et al. The selection of open or percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy according to an age cut-off point: nationwide cohort study[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2015, 40(19): E1063-E1070. DOI: 10.1097/brs.0000000000001053. 
 
[22]SHIMIA M, BABAEI-GHAZANI A, SADAT B E, et al. Risk factors of recurrent lumbar disk herniation[J]. Asian J Neurosurg, 2013, 8(2): 93-96. DOI: 10.4103/1793-5482.116384. 
 
[23]CHEN B L, GUO J B, ZHANG H W, et al. Surgical versus non-operative treatment for lumbar disc herniation: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Clin Rehabil, 2018, 32(2): 146-160. DOI: 10.1177/0269215517719952. 
 

更新日期/Last Update: 2021-11-23