Original Designed Uniportal-Bichannel Spinal Endoscopic System (UBiSES) for Foraminoplasty in Percutaneous Endoscopic Transforaminal Discectomy.

OBJECTIVE: The study introduced uniportal-bichannel spinal endoscopic system (UBiSES) and explored the feasibility of applying UBiSES to conduct lumbar foraminoplasty in percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy (PETD). METHODS: This is a cohort study. 36 patients confirmed as L5/S1 lumbar disc herniation (LDH) in our hospital from March, 2019 to November, 2019 were enrolled. 36 patients were divided into two groups named the UBiSES group (n = 18, male: female = 8:10) and the TESSYS group (n = 18, male: female = 10:8). The average age of the UBiSES group and the TESSYS group were 40.94 ± 12.39 years old and 39.78 ± 13.02 years old respectively. PETD via uniportal-bichannel foraminoplasty assisted by UBiSES was adopted on the UBiSES group while PETD via conventional foraminoplasty was performed on the TESSYS group. One experienced surgeon with more than 4000 cases of lumbar surgery performed PETD on all patients. The demographic data, the duration of working cannula placement (minutes), decompression time (minutes), radiation exposure time (seconds), complications, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores and modified MacNab criteria were recorded and analyzed. The magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT) were conducted to evaluate the radiographic improvement. RESULTS: PETD via lumbar foraminoplasty was successfully performed in all cases. The follow-up points were 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months. The average follow-up period of all patients was 15.78 ± 2.29 months. There was no statistic difference in age (P = 0.81), sex (P = 0.51) and follow-up (P = 0.14) between two groups. The duration of working cannula placement was 19.08 ± 2.30 min in the UBiSES group and 24.90 ± 4.71 min in the TESSYS group and there was significant difference between two groups (P < 0.05). There was no statistic difference in decompression time between the UBiSES group (44.18 ± 5.70 min) and the TESSYS group (47.46 ± 5.96 min) (P = 1.70). The radiation exposure time was 28.00 ± 4.70 s in the UBiSES group and 40.50 ± 5.73 s in the TESSYS group respectively, and has significant difference between two groups (P < 0.05). Furthermore, there was significant different in the duration of working cannula placement and radiation exposure time in male or female between the UBiSES group and the TESSYS group (P < 0.05). For male or female, no difference observed in decompression time and follow-up period between two groups. Postoperative VAS of low back and leg at every follow-up point (1 day, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months) was improved significantly in both groups compared with their preoperative VAS (P < 0.05). The postoperative ODI (3 months, 6 months, 12 months) has decreased significantly in both the UBiSES group and the TESSYS group compared with their preoperative ODI (P < 0.05). 94.44% patients received an excellent or good recovery in the UBiSES group and 88.89% for the TESSYS group. There was no poor result reported in both groups. The radiographic images showed satisfactory foraminoplasty and sufficient decompression of nerve in both groups. No postoperative complications were observed during follow-ups in the UBiSES group. Two patients in the TESSYS group experienced postoperative dysesthesia and the symptom was disappeared in 5 days and 7 days respectively with dexamethasone and neurotrophic drugs treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The original designed UBiSES could effectively and safely enlarge the foramen with an extensive surgical view and space under full-time and real-time visualization and get satisfactory efficacy.

Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy via Transforaminal Approach Combined with Interlaminar Approach for L4/5 and L5/S1 Two-Level Disc Herniation.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the present study was to discuss a new surgical strategy that combines percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy (PETD) with percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy (PEID) for L4/5 and L5/S1 two-level disc herniation. METHODS: This was a retrospective study. A total of 19 patients with L4/5 and L5/S1 two-level lumbar disc herniation (LDH) who underwent percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) in our hospital from January 2015 to June 2016 were retrospectively examined. The average age of these 19 patients was 42.21 ± 14.88 years old, including 12 men and 7 women. One experienced surgeon who had carried out more than 3000 lumbar surgeries performed PELD for these patients. During the PELD surgery, the transforaminal approach was adopted for L4/5 level disc herniation and the interlaminar approach was adopted for L5/S1 level disc herniation. The demographic data, operation time (min), fluoroscopy times, hospital stay (days), and complications were recorded and analyzed. The visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores, and the modified MacNab criteria were used to evaluate the surgical outcomes. MRI was conducted to evaluate the radiographic improvement. RESULTS: All patients underwent PELD via the transforaminal approach combined with the interlaminar approach successfully and achieved satisfactory efficacy. The follow-up points were 3, 12, and 18 months. The average hospital stay (days) and the average follow up (months) were 3.32 ± 0.98 and 18.63 ± 3.84, respectively. The operation time and fluoroscopy times were 85.79 ± 12.90 min and 39.05 ± 4.59 times, respectively. The fluoroscopy times (frequency) for L4/5 and L5/S1 were 26.95 ± 6.41 and 12.11 ± 3.49 (t = 7.00, P < 0.05). Furthermore, there was no significant difference for fluoroscopy times between male and female patients (t = 0.89, P = 0.99). The preoperative back pain (VAS-Back) and the last follow-up VAS-Back were 5.58 ± 2.01 and 2.37 ± 1.01, respectively (t = 7.14, P < 0.05). The preoperative leg pain (VAS-Leg) and the last follow-up VAS-Leg were 7.00 ± 1.56 and 1.63 ± 1.01, respectively (t = 20.97, P < 0.05). There were significant differences between preoperative VAS-Back and the last follow-up VAS-Back in men (t = 4.61, P < 0.05) and women (t = 6.57, P < 0.05). In addition, there was significant differences between preoperative VAS-Leg and the last follow-up VAS-Leg in men (t = 13.48, P < 0.05) and women (t = 26.87, P < 0.05). There were significant differences between preoperative ODI scores (44.84 ± 10.82%) and the last follow-up ODI scores (11.12 ± 5.80%) (t = 10.92, P < 0.05). Preoperative ODI scores and the last follow-up ODI scores were significantly different for men (t = 8.80, P < 0.05) and women (t = 6.63, P < 0.05). All patients received significant pain relief and functional improvement after the surgery. Except for two cases of postoperative dysesthesia and one dural tear, no severe complications occurred. The dysesthesia symptoms of these two patients disappeared within 1 week with the application of dexamethasone and neurotrophic drugs and the dural tear case also recovered well as the dural laceration was small. No poor results were reported and 89.47% of patients achieved excellent or good recovery. CONCLUSION: Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy via the transforaminal approach combined with the interlaminar approach under epidural anesthesia can treat L4/5 and L5/S1 two-level disc herniation safely and effectively.