[Importance of the accurate diagnosis and treatment of patients with lumbar degenerative scoliosis].

Under the background of aging population, the incidence of degenerative lumbar scoliosis is increasing year by year. How to conduct reasonable clinical diagnosis and treatment has gradually become a hot topic in the field of spinal surgery. This article discusses the key issues in the diagnosis and treatment of degenerative spinal deformities, including symptom differentiation, spinal alignment reconstruction, fusion level selection, and clinical efficacy evaluation. The aim is to further promote the accurate diagnosis and treatment of degenerative spinal deformities.

Full endoscopic laminotomy decompression versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the treatment of single-segment cervical spinal stenosis: a retrospective, propensity score-matched study.

OBJECTIVE: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is the standard procedure for the treatment of cervical spinal stenosis (CSS), but complications such as adjacent segment degeneration can seriously affect the long-term efficacy. Currently, posterior endoscopic surgery has been increasingly used in the clinical treatment of CSS. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of single-segment CSS patients who underwent full endoscopic laminotomy decompression or ACDF. METHODS: 138 CSS patients who met the inclusion criteria from June 2018 to August 2020 were retrospectively analyzed and divided into endoscopic and ACDF groups. The propensity score matching (PSM) method was used to adjust the imbalanced confounding variables between the groups. Then, perioperative data were recorded and clinical outcomes were compared, including functional scores and imaging data. Functional scores included Visual Analog Scale of Arms (A-VAS) and Neck pain (N-VAS), Japanese Orthopedic Association score (JOA), Neck Disability Index (NDI), and imaging data included Disc Height Index (DHI), Cervical range of motion (ROM), and Ratio of grey scale (RVG). RESULTS: After PSM, 84 patients were included in the study and followed for 24-30 months. The endoscopic group was significantly superior to the ACDF group in terms of operative time, intraoperative blood loss, incision length, and hospital stay (P < 0.001). Postoperative N-VAS, A-VAS, JOA, and NDI were significantly improved in both groups compared with the preoperative period (P < 0.001), and the endoscopic group showed better improvement at 7 days postoperatively (P < 0.05). The ROM changes of adjacent segments were significantly larger in the ACDF group at 12 months postoperatively and at the last follow-up (P < 0.05). The RVG of adjacent segments showed a decreasing trend, and the decrease was more marked in the ACDF group at last follow-up (P < 0.05). According to the modified MacNab criteria, the excellent and good rates in the endoscopic group and ACDF group were 90.48% and 88.10%, respectively, with no statistically significant difference (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Full endoscopic laminotomy decompression is demonstrated to be an efficacious alternative technique to traditional ACDF for the treatment of single-segment CSS, with the advantages of less trauma, faster recovery, and less impact on cervical spine kinematics and adjacent segmental degeneration.

Short-term lumbar disc and lumbar stability changes of one-hole split endoscope technique treatment of spinal stenosis.

OBJECTIVE: Investigating the early biomechanical effects of the one-hole split endoscope (OSE) technique on lumbar spine after decompression surgery. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 66 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) who underwent OSE technique surgery at the affiliated hospital of Binzhou Medical University from September 2021 to September 2022. The patients had complete postoperative follow-up records. The mean age was (51.73 ± 12.42) years, including 33 males and 33 females. The preoperative and postoperative imaging data were analyzed, including disc height (DH), foraminal height (FH), lumbar lordosis angle (LLA), changes in disc angle, anterior-posterior translation distance, and lumbar intervertebral disc Pfirrmann grading. The visual analogue scale (VAS) was applied to evaluate the severity of preoperative, postoperative day 1, postoperative 3 months, and final follow-up for back and leg pain. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) was applied to assess the functionality at all the listed time points. The modified MacNab criteria were applied to evaluate the clinical efficacy at the final follow-up. RESULTS: In 66 patients, there were statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) in DH and FH at the affected segments compared to preoperative values, whereas no significant differences (p > 0.05) were found in DH and FH at the adjacent upper segments compared to preoperative values. There was no statistically significant difference in the LLA compared to preoperative values (p > 0.05). Both the affected segments and adjacent upper segments showed statistically significant differences in Pfirrmann grading compared to preoperative values (p < 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in the changes in disc angle or anterior-posterior translation distance in the affected or adjacent segments compared to preoperative values (p > 0.05). The VAS scores for back and leg pain, as well as the ODI, significantly improved at all postoperative time points compared to preoperative values. Among the comparisons at different time points, the differences were statistically significant (p < 0.05). The clinical efficacy was evaluated at the final follow-up using the modified MacNab criteria, with 51 cases rated as excellent, 8 cases as good, and 7 cases as fair, resulting in an excellent-good rate of 89.39%. CONCLUSIONS: The OSE technique, as a surgical option for decompression in the treatment of LSS, has no significant impact on lumbar spine stability in the early postoperative period. However, it does have some effects on the lumbar intervertebral discs, which may lead to a certain degree of degeneration.

One-hole split endoscope versus unilateral biportal endoscopy for lumbar spinal stenosis: a retrospective propensity score study.

BACKGROUND: The one-hole split endoscopy (OSE) was first proposed and clinically applied in China in 2019. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical efficacy of one-hole split endoscopy (OSE) and unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) for treating lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). METHODS: One hundred sixty patients with LSS who met the inclusion from November 2020 to August 2022 were analyzed and divided into OSE and UBE groups. The propensity score matching (PSM) method was used to adjust the imbalanced confounding variables between the two groups. After matching, surgical outcomes were recorded, and clinical data, including functional scores and imaging findings, were compared. Functional scores included the visual analog scale of leg pain (VAS-LP) and back pain (VAS-BP), the Japanese Orthopedic Association score (JOA), and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Imaging data included dural sac cross-sectional area (DCSA), lumbar range of motion (ROM), and sagittal translation (ST). RESULTS: After PSM, 104 LSS patients were included in the study, and all covariates were well-balanced between the two groups. Among the matched patients, the OSE showed advantages over the UBE regarding operative time (62.42 ± 4.86 vs. 68.96 ± 4.56) and incision length (2.30 ± 0.14 vs. 2.70 ± 0.15) (P < 0.001). However, differences between the two groups in intraoperative blood loss, hospital length of stay, and complication rates were not statistically significant (P > 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference regarding VAS-BP, VAS-LP, JOA, and ODI between the two groups (P > 0.05). However, all clinical and functional scores significantly improved postoperatively (P < 0.05). Postoperative DCSA of both groups was significantly found to be improved (P < 0.05), ROM and ST remained within the normal range, and no cases of lumbar instability were recorded. According to the modified MacNab criteria, the excellent and good rates in the OSE and UBE groups were 94.23% and 90.38%, respectively, with no statistically significant difference (P = 0.713). CONCLUSION: OSE is an alternative technique to UBE for the treatment of LSS, with similar satisfactory clinical outcomes, shorter operative time, and smaller incision length. Further studies are needed for long-term efficacy.

Postoperative complications after surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis, assessment using two different data sources.

PURPOSE: Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a prevalent disorder, and surgery for LSS is a common procedure. Postoperative complications occur after any surgery and impose costs for society and costs and additional morbidity for patients. Since complications are relatively rare, medical registries of large populations may provide valuable knowledge. However, recording of complications in registries can be incomplete. To better estimate the true prevalence of complications after LSS surgery, we reviewed two different sources of data and recorded complications for a sample of Norwegian LSS patients. METHODS: 474 patients treated surgically for LSS during 2015 and 2016 at four hospitals reported to a national spine registry (NORspine). Postoperative complications were recorded by patients in NORspine, and we cross-referenced complications documented in NORspine with the patients´ electronic patient records (EPR) to re-test the complication rates. We performed descriptive statistics of complication rates using the two different data sources above, and analyzed the association between postoperative complications and clinical outcome with logistic regression. RESULTS: The mean (95%CI) patient age was 66.3 (65.3-67.2) years, and 254 (53.6%) were females. All patients were treated with decompression, and 51 (10.7%) received an additional fusion during the index surgery. Combining the two data sources, we found a total rate for postoperative complications of 22.4%, the NORspine registry reported a complication rate of 15.6%, and the EPR review resulted in a complication rate of 16.0%. However, the types of complications were inconsistent across the two data sources. According to NORspine, the frequency of reoperation within 90 days was 0.9% and according to EPR 3.4%. The rates of wound infection were for NORspine 3.1% and EPR review 2.1%. There was no association between postoperative complication and patient reported outcome. CONCLUSION: Postoperative complications occurred in 22% of LSS patients. The frequency of different postoperative complications differed between the two data sources.

Ultrasonic bone curette-assisted unilateral approach for bilateral decompression with MIS-TLIF for severe lumbar spinal stenosis.

PURPOSE: We aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of bilateral decompression with minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) assisted by an ultrasonic bone curette (UBC) for treating severe degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS) and traditional tool laminectomy decompression MIS-TLIF for treating severe DLSS. METHODS: The clinical data of 128 patients with single-segment severe DLSS who were admitted between January 2017 and December 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 67 patients were treated with unilateral fenestration and bilateral decompression MIS-TLIF using an ultrasonic bone curette (UBC group), whereas 61 patients were treated with unilateral fenestration and bilateral decompression MIS-TLIF using traditional tools (traditional group, control). A visual analog scale (VAS) was used to evaluate back and lower limb pain before the operation,immediate postoperative, and one week, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after the operation. Oswestry disability index (ODI) and Zurich claudication score (ZCQ) were employed to evaluate the improvement in low back and lower limb function. At the last follow-up, the Bridwell bone graft fusion standard was utilized to evaluate bone graft fusion. RESULTS: The decompression time of laminectomy was significantly shorter in the UBC group than in the traditional group (control group), and the intraoperative blood loss and postoperative drainage volume were significantly less in those in the control group (P < 0.05). The VAS, ODI, and ZCQ scores of the two groups after the operation were significantly improved compared to those before the operation (P < 0.05). The UBC group had better VAS back scores than the control group immediate postoperative and one week after the operation(P < 0.05). The UBC group had better VAS lower limb scores than the control group immediate postoperative (P < 0.05).The incidence of perioperative complications, hospitalization time, dural sac cross-sectional area (CSA), and dural sac CSA improvement rate did not differ significantly between the two groups (P > 0.05). VAS and ODI scores did not differ significantly between the two groups before,three, six months, one year, and two years after surgery (P > 0.05). The ZCQ scores did not differ significantly between the two groups before the operation at one week, six months, one year, and two years after the operation (P > 0.05). According to the Bridwell bone graft fusion standard, bone graft fusion did not occur significantly between the two groups (P > 0.05) at the last follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: UBC unilateral fenestration bilateral decompression MIS-TLIF in treating severe DLSS can achieve clinical efficacy as traditional tool unilateral fenestration bilateral decompression MIS-TLIF and reduce intraoperative blood loss and postoperative drainage. It can also shorten the operation time, effectively reduce the work intensity of the operator, and reduce the degree of low back pain during short-term follow-ups. Therefore, this is a safe and effective surgical method.

Recovery pattern after decompression of central lumbar spinal stenosis: a prospective observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Detailed preoperative information is associated with superior outcomes. We aimed to describe the recovery pattern after decompression of central lumbar spinal stenosis (CLSS). METHODS: 50 patients aged 51-85 years who underwent decompression without fusion due to CLSS were followed from before to after surgery (post-op day 1, 7, and 14). Back and leg pain were evaluated using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS; 0 = no pain 0, 10 = worst pain) and quality of life using the EuroQol-5D index (0 = death, 1 = best), and EQ-5D-visual analogue scale (VAS; 0 = worst, 100 = best). RESULTS: NRS leg pain was reduced from preoperative to first postoperative day by 5.2 (6.1, 4.3) (mean (95%CI)], and NRS back pain from postoperative day 1-7 by 0.6 (1.2, 0.03) and from day 7 to 14 by 0.7 (1.3, 0.2)]. In contrast, EQ-5D index increased from preoperative to first postoperative day by 0.09 (0.06, 0.13) and from day 1 to 7 by 0.05 (0.02,0.08), and EQ-5D VAS from preoperative to first postoperative day by 13.7 (9.1, 18.3) and from day 1 to 7 by 6.0 (2.0, 10.0). After two weeks, 51% of the patients had improved above the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in back pain and 71% in leg pain. CONCLUSIONS: Patients scheduled for decompression due to CLSS should be informed that improvement in leg pain and quality of life in general can be expected within one day of surgery, that quality of life improves a little further in the first postoperative week, and that back pain improves in the first 2 postoperative weeks. In most patients, decompression without fusion due to CLSS seems to achieve clinically relevant improvement within 2 weeks.

Safety and efficacy of apixaban vs. enoxaparin in thromboprophylaxis after spinal stenosis and degenerative spine surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Degenerative spine surgeries often require postoperative immobilization or reduced mobility, predisposing patients to the formation of thrombosis and higher risk of thromboembolic complications. Despite the significance of this issue, there remains a lack of consensus on the optimal anticoagulant agent for postoperative thromboprophylaxis in spinal stenosis and degenerative spine surgeries. Low molecular weight heparins and direct Xa inhibitors represent two anticoagulant groups with high chemoprophylactic potential. METHODS: This study included a prospective cohort of patients undergoing posterior decompressive surgery with or without instrumentation for degenerative spine disease and/or spinal stenosis. Patients receiving postoperative prophylactic Enoxaparin and Apixaban were selected to evaluate the rate of complications, as assessed by Clavien-Dindo classification, thromboembolic events, and 30-day mortality, readmission, and reoperation rate between the two anticoagulants. RESULTS: 130 patients were included in the analysis. 65 patients received Apixaban and Enoxaparin in each group. Mean age of the participants was 57.6±11.0. 83.1% underwent laminectomy and posterior spinal fusion, while 22 patients underwent decompressive surgery only. The incidence of venous thromboembolism (P-value=0.403), deep vein thrombosis (p-value=0.999), hematoma formation (p-value=0.403), surgical site infection (p-value=0.901), readmission (p-value=0.545), reoperation (p=0.510), mortality (p=0.648), and complications rate (p-value=0.232) were not statistically different between Enoxaparin and Apixaban. DISCUSSION: Both Apixaban and Enoxaparin may be viable options for postoperative thromboprophylaxis in spine surgeries with comparable efficacy and safety profile. Future research endeavors should investigate the efficacy of these agents in comparison to placebo in a randomized setting.

[Comparison of effectiveness between unilateral biportal endoscopic and uniportal interlaminar endoscopic decompression in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis].

Objective: To compare the effectiveness between unilateral laminotomy and bilateral decompression (ULBD) with unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) and uniportal interlaminar endoscopy (UIE) in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. Methods: A clinical data of 52 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis, who met the selection criteria and treated with ULBD between March 2021 and November 2022, was retrospectively analyzed. The patients were allocated into UBE group (23 cases) and UIE group (29 cases) according to the surgical methods. There was no significant difference ( P>0.05) in age, gender, body mass index, surgical segment, type of lumbar stenosis, and preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) score of low back pain, VAS score of leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI), disc height, and dural sac area between the two groups. Perioperative indexes (incision length, operation time, hospital stay, and surgical complications), clinical indicators (VAS score of low back pain, VAS score of leg pain, and ODI before operation and at 3 days, 1 month, 6 months, and 12 months after operation), and imaging indicators (disc height and dural sac area before operation and at 1, 12 months after operation, and dural sac expansion area) were recorded and compared between the two group. Results: All operations in both groups were successfully completed. Compared with the UIE group, the UBE group had shorter operation time and longer incision length, with significant differences ( P<0.05). But there was no significant difference in hospital stay and incidence of complications between the two groups ( P>0.05). All patients were followed up 12-20 months (mean, 14 months). The VAS scores of low back pain and leg pain and ODI after operation significantly improved when compared with preoperative values ( P<0.05), and there was no significant difference in the above indicators between different time points after operation ( P>0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups at different time points ( P>0.05). Imaging examination showed that there was no significant difference in disc height between the two groups at different time points after operation ( P>0.05). However, the dural sac area and dural sac expansion area were significantly larger in the UBE group than in the UIE group ( P<0.05). Conclusion: ULBD with UBE and UIE can achieve satisfactory effectiveness in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. But the former has more thorough decompression and better dural sac expansion than the latter.

[Analysis of effectiveness of one-hole split endoscopy technique in treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis].

Objective: To investigate the effectiveness of one-hole split endoscope (OSE) technique in the treatment of single segment lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). Methods: The clinical data of 32 single segment LSS patients treated with OSE technique for simple spinal canal decompression between January 2022 and December 2022, who met the selection criteria, were retrospectively analysed. There were 18 males and 14 females, the age ranged from 45 to 82 years, with an average of 65.1 years. The disease duration was 9-72 months, with an average of 34.9 months. The surgical segments included L 3, 4 in 3 cases, L 4, 5 in 19 cases, and L 5, S 1 in 10 cases. The incision length, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative radiation exposure frequency, postoperative mobilization time, and the area of the patient's lesion segment dural sac before operation and at 1 month after operation were recorded. Low back pain and leg pain were assessed by visual analogue scale (VAS) score before operation and at 3 days, 3 months, and 12 months after operation; functional recovery was assessed by Oswestry disability index (ODI) before operation and at 3 months and 12 months after operation; the effectiveness was assessed by modified MacNab criteria at last follow-up. Results: All 32 patients successfully completed the operation, with an average incision length of 2.05 cm, an average operation time of 88.59 minutes, an average intraoperative blood loss of 46.72 mL, an average intraoperative radiation exposure frequency of 3.84 times, and an average postoperative mobilization time of 11.66 hours. All patients were followed up 12-16 months, with an average of 13.5 months. One patient experienced lower limb numbness, pain, and decreased muscle strength after operation, while the remaining patients did not experience complications such as dural tear or important nerve damage. The VAS scores of low back pain and leg pain and ODI in patients at various time points after operation were significantly better than preoperative ones, and each indicator further improved with time. The differences between time points were significant ( P<0.05). At 1 month after operation, the area of the patient's lesion segment dural sac was (123.13±19.66) mm 2, which significantly increased compared to preoperative (51.25±9.50) mm 2 ( t=-18.616, P<0.001). At last follow-up, the improved MacNab criteria were used to evaluate the effectiveness, with 18 cases achieving excellent results, 11 cases being good, and 3 cases being fair, with an excellent and good rate of 90.6%. Conclusion: The effectiveness of using OSE technique for simple spinal canal decompression treatment of single segment LSS is satisfactory, with the advantages of minimal surgical trauma and fast recovery.

Minimizing Tissue Injury and Incisions in Multilevel Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery: Technical Note and Preliminary Results.

Background and Objectives: Biportal endoscopic spine surgery (BESS) is a promising technique that can be applied for the treatment of various spinal diseases. However, traditional BESS procedures require multiple, separate incisions. We present, herein, various techniques to reduce the number of incisions in multi-level surgery and their clinical outcomes. Materials and Methods: Three different techniques were used to reduce the number of incisions for the preservation of normal tissue associated with BESS: the step-ladder technique, employing a common portal for the scope and instruments; the portal change technique employing a two-level procedure with two incisions; and the tilting technique, employing more than three levels. Pain (Visual Analog Scale), disability (Oswestry Disability Index), and patient satisfaction were evaluated before and 12 months after the procedure. Results: Among the 122 cases of multilevel spine surgery, 1.43 incisions per level were employed for multilevel BESS. Pain and disability showed significant improvement. Patient satisfaction showed favorable results. Conclusions: Combining multiple techniques during biportal surgery could decrease the number of incisions needed and preserve musculature with favorable clinical outcomes.

Surgical outcome after treatment of thoracolumbar spinal stenosis in adults with achondroplasia.

PURPOSE: To describe the complications and the outcome of patients with achondroplasia undergoing thoracolumbar spinal surgery. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of all patients with achondroplasia undergoing surgery within the years 1992-2021 at the thoracic and/or lumbar spine. The outcome was measured by analyzing the surgical complications and revisions. The patient-rated outcome was assessed with the COMI score from 2005 onwards. RESULTS: A total of 15 patients were included in this study undergoing a total of 31 surgeries at 79 thoracolumbar levels. 12/31 surgeries had intraoperative complications consisting of 11 dural tears and one excessive intraoperative bleeding. 4/18 revision surgeries were conducted due to post-decompression hyperkyphosis. The COMI score decreased from 7.5 IQR 1.4 (range 7.1-9.8) preoperatively to 5.3 IQR 4.1 (2.5-7.5) after 2 years (p = 0.046). CONCLUSION: Patients with achondroplasia, the most common skeletal dysplasia condition with short-limb dwarfism, are burdened with a congenitally narrow spinal canal and are commonly in need of spinal surgery. However, surgery in these patients is often associated with complications, namely dural tears and post-decompression kyphosis. Despite these complications, patients benefit from surgical treatment at a follow-up of 2 years after surgery.

Retrospective Study to Compare the Effectiveness of Minimally Invasive Microscopic Unilateral Laminotomy with Microscopic Bilateral Laminotomy for Bilateral Decompression in the Early Postoperative Period in 142 Patients with Single-Level Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.

BACKGROUND We aimed to compare the effectiveness of microscopic unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (ULBD) and microscopic bilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (BLBD) in the early postoperative period among patients with single-level lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). MATERIAL AND METHODS A retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients with LSS who underwent ULBD or BLBD between January 2020 and December 2023, including 94 patients who underwent ULBD and 58 who underwent BLBD. Patient demographics, comorbidities, smoking status, and data related to LSS were reviewed. Preoperative and postoperative assessments on day 10 included back pain visual analog scale (VAS), walking distance, and Odom criteria. Disability was evaluated using the self-assessment Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) preoperatively and on day 30. Additionally, wound infection, postoperative modified MacNab criteria, and pain (back, leg, and hip) were recorded. RESULTS Age and sex were similar in the 2 groups. Both surgeries significantly reduced low back pain, increased walking distance, and improved Odom category on day 10, compared with baseline (P<0.001 for all). A significant decrease in 30-day ODI, compared with baseline, was observed in both groups (P<0.001 for both). The ULBD group had a significantly higher percentage of patients with wound infection (P=0.014); however, the ODI score among ULBD recipients was significantly lower (better) on day 30 (P=0.047). CONCLUSIONS ULBD may represent a less invasive, more effective, and safer surgical alternative than BLBD and classical laminectomy in patients with single-level LSS, but precautions are essential concerning wound infection.

Clinical effects of arthroscopic-assisted uni-portal spinal surgery and unilateral bi-portal endoscopy on unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the clinical effectiveness of Arthroscopic-assisted Uni-portal Spinal Surgery (AUSS) in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. METHODS: A total of 475 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis from January 2019 to January 2023 were included in this study. Among them, 240 patients were treated with AUSS (AUSS group); the other 235 patients were treated with unilateral bi-portal endoscopy treatment (UBE group). The differences in surgery-related clinical indicators, pain degree before and after surgery, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), CT imaging parameters of spinal stenosis, and clinical efficacy were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Patients in the AUSS group had a shorter operative time than those in the UBE group, and the length of incision and surgical bleeding were less than those in the UBE group, with statistically significant differences (P < 0.05). Before operation, there was no significant difference in the VAS score of low back pain and leg pain between the two groups (P > 0. 05). After operation, patients in both groups showed a significant reduction in low back and leg pain, and their VAS scores were significantly lower than before the operation (P < 0.05). Three months after surgery, the results of CT re-examination in both groups showed that the spinal stenosis of the patients was well improved, and the measurements of lumbar spinal interspace APDC, CAC, ICA, CAD and LAC were significantly higher than those before surgery (P < 0. 05). Besides, the lumbar function of patients improved significantly in both groups, and ODI measurements were significantly lower than those before surgery (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Both AUSS and UBE with unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression can achieve good clinical results in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis, but the former has the advantages of simpler operation, shorter operation time, shorter incision length, and less surgical blood loss.

Comparison of Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Decompression and Full Endoscopic Lamina Fenestration Decompression in the Treatment of Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis with Unilateral Radicular Pain: A Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic decompression of the spinal canal is an emerging procedure for the treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis, but there are few reports of comparative studies of endoscopic techniques for transforaminal and non-transforaminal approaches. OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical application of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic decompression (PTED) and full endoscopic lamina fenestration decompression (Endo-LOVE) for treating degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis with unilateral radicular pain. METHODS: A total of 58 patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS) with unilateral radicular pain in the lower extremities who underwent endoscopic decompression treatment from June 2020 to December 2021 were retrospectively identified and divided into two groups (PTED vs Endo-LOVE). The two groups' perioperative data were analyzed according to surgical modalities. The Visual Analogue Score (VAS) for pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), modified MacNab criteria, and dural sac cross-sectional area (DSCSA) were used to assess the post-operative outcomes of the two groups. RESULTS: All 58 patients completed the operation and received more than 12 months of follow-up. There was no significant difference in the operation time, number of intraoperative fluoroscopies, intraoperative bleeding, or postoperative hospitalization time between the two groups (p > 0.05); VAS scores and ODIs of the two groups at all postoperative time points were significantly lower than before the operation (p < 0.05), and there was no significant difference in the comparison of the clinical efficacy between the two groups (p > 0.05); the DSCSA of the two groups at the last postoperative follow-up was significantly larger than before the operation (p < 0.05), and there was no significant difference in the improvement of DSCSA between them (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Both procedures are safe and effective in the treatment of DLSS with unilateral lower extremity radicular pain, and we should be specific about the choice of spinal stenosis treatment.

[Comparative study of percutaneous transfacet screw and pedicle screw in oblique lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of single-level lumbar spinal stenosis].

Objective: To conduct a comparative study of radiological and clinical outcomes between percutaneous transfacet screw (TFS) and pedicle screw (BPS) in oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) for single-level lumbar spinal stenosis. Methods: A retrospective cohort study. Patients who underwent OLIF with TFS or BPS for the treatment of single-level lumbar spinal stenosis at Beijing Jishuitan Hospital from January 2019 to June 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. Radiological parameters and clinical indicators were compared between the two groups. Radiological parameters included preoperative, immediate postoperative (within 5 days), and 1-year postoperative measurements of disc height and segmental lordosis angle, as well as interbody fusion status at 1 year postoperatively. Clinical indicators included operative time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, complications, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for back pain, and leg pain before and 1 year after surgery. Results: Four male and 10 female patients with an average age of (61.0±11.2) years underwent OLIF with TFS, while 9 male and 12 female patients underwent OLIF with BPS, with a mean age of (60.9±6.7) years. There was no statistically significant difference in preoperative disc height between the TFS and BPS groups (P>0.05). The immediate postoperative disc height was (12.9±2.1) mm and it was (10.4±1.7) mm at 1-year follow-up in the TFS group; in the BPS group, it was (12.9±2.1) mm immediately postoperatively and (11.9±2.1) mm at 1-year follow-up; there was statistically significant difference between the two groups at 1-year follow-up (P=0.037). The segmental lordosis angle showed no significant differences within each group or between the two groups at preoperative, immediate postoperative, or 1-year postoperative follow-up (all P>0.05). At 1-year postoperative follow-up, the fusion rates was 92.9%(13/14) in the TFS group and 95.2%(20/21) in the BPS group, with no statistically significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05). The TFS group had a significantly shorter operative time and less blood loss compared to the BPS group [(164.3±33.9) minutes vs (191.7±31.8) minutes and (74.3±46.9) ml vs (124.8±54.0) ml, respectively] (both P<0.05). Both groups showed significant improvement in ODI and VAS scores at 1 year postoperatively compared to those preoperatively, but with no statistically significant difference was found between the groups (both P>0.05). Conclusions: OLIF with TFS fixation can effectively restore disc height and alleviate back and leg pain in patients with single-level lumbar spinal stenosis. Compared to the OLIF with BPS procedure, OLIF with TFS has shorter operative time and less blood loss.

Radiological Analysis of Cerebrospinal Fluid Dynamics at the Craniovertebral Junction Using Time-Spatial Labeling Inversion Pulse Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Patients with Cervical Spinal Canal Stenosis.

OBJECTIVE: Spondylotic changes in the cervical spine cause degeneration, leading to cervical spinal canal stenosis. This stenotic change can affect cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) dynamics by compressing the dural sac and reducing space in the subarachnoid space. We examined CSF dynamics at the craniovertebral junction (CVJ) using time-spatial labeling inversion pulse magnetic resonance imaging (Time-SLIP MRI) in patients with cervical spinal canal stenosis. METHODS: The maximum longitudinal movement of the CSF at the CVJ was measured as length of motion (LOM) in the Time-SLIP MRI of 56 patients. The sum of ventral and dorsal LOM was defined as the total LOM. Patients were classified into 3 groups depending on their spinal sagittal magnetic resonance imaging findings: control (n = 27, Kang classification grades 0 and 1), stenosis (n = 14, Kang classification grade 2), and severe stenosis (n = 15, Kang classification grade 3). RESULTS: Time-SLIP MRI revealed pulsatile movement of the CSF at the CVJ. The mean total, ventral, and dorsal LOM was 14.2 ± 9, 8.1 ± 5.7, and 3.8 ± 2.9 mm, respectively. The ventral LOM was significantly larger than the dorsal LOM. The total LOM was significantly smaller in the severe stenosis group (6.1 ± 3.4 mm) than in the control (16.0 ± 8.4 mm) or stenosis (11 ± 5.4 mm) groups (P < 0.001, Kruskal-Wallis H-test). In 5 patients, postoperative total LOM was improved after adequate decompression surgery. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that CSF dynamics at the CVJ are influenced by cervical spinal canal stenosis. Time-SLIP MRI is useful for evaluating CSF dynamics at the CVJ in patients with spinal canal stenosis.

Percutaneous Endoscopic Unilateral-Approach Bilateral Decompression for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) involves the narrowing of the spinal canal due to degenerative changes in the vertebral joints, intervertebral discs, and ligaments. LSS encompasses central canal stenosis (CCS), lateral recess stenosis (LRS), and intervertebral foramen stenosis (IFS). The utilization of lumbar endoscopic unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (LE-ULBD) has gained popularity in the treatment of CCS and LRS. This popularity is attributed to the rapid development of endoscopic instruments and the progress of endoscopic philosophy. In this technical report, a detailed introduction to the steps and key points of LE-ULBD is provided. Simultaneously, a retrospective review of 132 consecutive patients who underwent LE-ULBD for central canal and/or lateral recess stenosis was conducted. The outcomes after more than two years of follow-up were assessed using the visual analogue score (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores, and the modified MacNab criteria to evaluate surgical efficacy. All 132 patients underwent LE-ULBD successfully. Among them, 119 patients were rated as "excellent," while 13 patients were rated as "good" based on the modified MacNab criteria during the last follow-up. Incidental dural tears occurred in four cases, but there were no post-operative epidural hematomas or infections. The experience demonstrates that LE-ULBD is a less invasive, effective, and safe approach. It can be considered as an alternative option for treating patients with lumbar central canal stenosis and/or lateral recess stenosis.

Risk Factors of Hidden Blood Loss in Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Surgery for Patients with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.

OBJECTIVE: Unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) surgery has recently been used as a minimally invasive procedure for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis and is associated with less perioperative blood loss. However, perioperative hidden blood loss (HBL) may be neglected during UBE. This study aimed to examine the volume of HBL and discuss the influential risk factors for HBL during unilateral biportal endoscopic surgery. METHODS: From January 2022 to August 2022, 51 patients underwent percutaneous unilateral biportal endoscopic surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis at the Department of Spinal Surgery of the Affiliated Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital of Southwest Medical University and were enrolled in this study. The data included general indicators (age, sex and body mass index [BMI]), underlying disease (hypertension and diabetes), laboratory test results (prothrombin time [PT], activated partial thromboplastin time [APTT], fibrinogen [Fbg]), and preoperative and postoperative hematocrit and hemoglobin), related imaging parameters (severity of intervertebral disc [IVD] degeneration and soft tissue thickness of the interlaminar approach), number of operated vertebrae and operation time. Total blood loss (TBL) and HBL during surgical procedures were measured via the Gross formula. Influential factors were further analyzed by multivariate linear regression analysis and t-tests. RESULTS: The mean HBL was 257.89 ± 190.66 mL for single-operation patients and 296.58 ± 269.75 mL for two-operation patients. Patients with lower PT (p = 0.044), deeper tissue thickness (p = 0.047), and diabetes mellitus were determined to have more HBL during UBE. The operation time might also be an important factor (p = 0.047). However, sex (p = 0.265), age (p = 0.771/0.624), BMI (p = 0.655/0.664), APTT (p = 0.545/0.751), degree of degenerated IVD (p = 0.932/0.477), and hypertension (p = 0.356/0.896) were not related to HBL. CONCLUSION: This study determined the different influential factors of HBL during UBE. PT, tissue thickness, and diabetes mellitus are the independent risk factors that affect HBL incidence. Long PT may decrease the volume of HBL within a certain range. Tissue thickness and diabetes mellitus can lead to an increased volume of HBL.