Yongcun Geng, n/a: No financial relationships to disclose
Objective: Unilateral and double portal vein endoscopy has the advantages of less trauma, less blood loss, large operation range, clear vision and other advantages, and endplate preparation can be completed under direct vision during fusion. The purpose of this study is to determine whether these advantages can bring better clinical efficacy and fusion results. Summary of Background data. Lumbar fusion is a promising treatment for degenerative changes in the lumbar spine and minimally invasive spinal surgery is becoming more and more widely used.
Methods: A total of 150 patients with UBE-TILF (71 cases) and O-TLIF (79 cases) underwent lumbar fusion were enrolled. Perioperative indexes, including estimated operative blood loss and operative time, were observed in the three groups. The clinical outcome and imaging results of the patients were observed, and the clinical effect was evaluated by VAS (visual analog score), ODI (Oswestry disability Index) and JOA (Japanese Orthopaedic Association Scores). A BSF (Brantigan -- Steffee-Fraser) scale was used to evaluate interbody fusion. The patients were followed up at 7 days, 1 month, 3 months, and 1 year, respectively.
Results: All patients showed significant improvement after operation. At 7 days of follow-up, the improvement of VAS(waist) score in UBE-TLIF group was more obvious than that in O-TLIF group, but there was no significant difference in VAS leg pain score. There were no significant differences in VAS leg pain score, VAS leg pain score and ODI in the remaining follow-up period (all P >0.05), and no significant differences in fusion rate at the last follow-up. The operation time of UBE-TLIF is longer. The estimated blood loss was significantly reduced (P < 0.05).
Conclusion: In the long term, both surgical methods can obtain good clinical efficacy, UBE-TLIF can recover faster.
