4.5 Article

Unilateral Laminectomy by Endoscopy in Central Lumbar Canal Spinal Stenosis Technical Note and Early Outcomes

Journal

SPINE
Volume 45, Issue 14, Pages E871-E877

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003478

Keywords

endoscopes; laminectomy; lumbar vertebrae; minimally invasive; spinal stenosis; surgical procedures

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Study Design. Retrospective study. Objective. To evaluate the outcomes and safety of endoscopic laminectomy for central lumbar canal spinal stenosis. Summary of Background Data.. Spinal endoscopy is mostly used in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation, while endoscopic laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis is rarely reported. Methods. From January 2016 to June 2017, 38 patients with central lumbar canal spinal stenosis were treated with endoscopic laminectomy. Clinical symptoms were evaluated at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months and the last follow-up after surgery. Functional outcomes were assessed by using the Japanese Orthopedic Association Scores (JOA) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). The decompression effect was assessed by using the dural sac cross-sectional area (DSCA). Lumbar stability was evaluated using lumbar range of motion (ROM), ventral intervertebral space height (VH), and dorsal intervertebral space height (DH). Results. The mean age of the cases was 60.8 years, the mean operation time was 66.3 minutes, the blood loss was 38.8 mL, and the length of incision was 19.6 mm. The mean time in bed was 22.3 hours, and the mean hospital stay was 8.8 days. JOA scores were improved from 10.9 to 24.1 (P < 0.05), ODI scores were improved from 79.0 to 27.9 (P < 0.05), DSCA was improved from 55.7 to 109.5 mm(2)(P < 0.05), ROM scores were improved from 5.6 degrees to 5.7 degrees (P < 0.05), and DH scores were reduced from 6.6 to 6.5 mm (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in VH before and after operation (P > 0.05). There were no serious complications during the follow-ups. Conclusion. Endoscopic laminectomy had the advantage of a wider view, which was effective, safe, and less invasive for lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available