Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Full-Endoscopic Ventral Facetectomy vs Open Laminectomy for Lumbar Lateral Recess Stenosis: A Comparative Study and Brief Literature Review.
Kapetanakis, Stylianos; Gkantsinikoudis, Nikolaos; Charitoudis, Georgios.
Afiliação
  • Kapetanakis S; Spine Department and Deformities, Interbalkan European Medical Center, Thessaloniki, Greece stkapetanakis@yahoo.gr.
  • Gkantsinikoudis N; Department of Minimally Invasive and Endoscopic Spine Surgery, Athens Medical Center, Athens, Greece.
  • Charitoudis G; Spine Department and Deformities, Interbalkan European Medical Center, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Int J Spine Surg ; 16(2): 361-372, 2022 Apr.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35444044
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Lateral recess stenosis (LRS) represents a major etiology of pain and disability in recent years. The aim of the present study was to compare the clinical outcomes of full-endoscopic ventral facetectomy (FEVF) vs conventional open laminectomy (OL) for surgical treatment of lumbar LRS.

METHODS:

Ninety individuals with diagnosed LRS according to clinical and radiological criteria were included in this study. Patients were appropriately classified into 2 distinct groups according to received treatment. Group A was constituted from 48 patients subjected to FEVF. Contrariwise, the 42 patients of Group B underwent OL. All patients were consecutively evaluated with particular clinical scores preoperatively and at 6 weeks, 3, months, 6 months, 12 months, and 2 years postoperatively. Clinical assessment was conducted with the visual analog scale for leg pain (VAS-LP) and back pain (VAS-BP) and with the Short-Form 36 (SF-36) medical questionnaire.

RESULTS:

Values of all studied indices in both groups featured a major clinical improvement in 6 weeks with subsequent quantitatively minor albeit still statistically significant amelioration until the end of follow-up at 2 years. Comparative evaluation of recorded parameters between the 2 groups disclosed that VAS-BP, bodily pain, and role emotional indices of SF-36 were quantitatively and statistically differentiated in favor of Group A in 6 weeks, featuring an amelioration that persisted until the end of follow-up. Registered values of the other parameters were not found to demonstrate a quantitatively and clinically noteworthy differentiation between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS:

FEVF represents a feasible, safe, and beneficial alternative for surgical therapy of patients with LRS, featuring comparable outcomes with conventional OL. CLINICAL RELEVANCE Lumbar LRS represents a frequent entity with remarkable clinical sequelae. FEVF represents a novel, groundbreaking and minimally invasive technique that should be considered as a safe and efficacious alternative over conventional open surgery in specific patients with LRS.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Int J Spine Surg Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Int J Spine Surg Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article