Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy compared with other surgeries for lumbar disc herniation

Abstract

Objective: This meta-analysis was performed to investigate whether percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) had a superior effect than other surgeries in the treatment of patients with lumbar disc herniation (LDH). Method: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science through February 2018 to identify eligible studies that compared the effects and complications between PELD and other surgical interventions in LDH. The outcomes included success rate, recurrence rate, complication rate, operation time, hospital stay, blood loss, visual analog scale (VAS) score for back pain and leg pain, 12-item Short Form Health Survey (SF12) physical component score, mental component score, Japanese Orthopaedic Association Score, Oswestry Disability Index. A random-effects or fixed-effects model was used to pool the estimate, according to the heterogeneity among the included studies. Results: Fourteen studies (involving 2,528 patients) were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with other surgeries, PELD had favorable clinical outcomes for LDH, including shorter operation time (weight mean difference, WMD=−18.14 minutes, 95%CI: −25.24, −11.05; P < .001) and hospital stay (WMD = −2.59 days, 95%CI: −3.87, −1.31; P < .001), less blood loss (WMD = −30.14 ml, 95%CI: −43.16, −17.13; P < .001), and improved SF12- mental component score (WMD = 2.28, 95%CI: 0.50, 4.06; P = .012)) and SF12- physical component score (WMD = 1.04, 95%CI: 0.37, 1.71; P = .02). However, it also was associated with a significantly higher rate of recurrent disc herniation (relative risk [RR] = 1.65, 95%CI: 1.08, 2.52; P = .021). There were no significant differences between the PELD group and other surgical group in terms of success rate (RR = 1.01, 95%CI: 0.97, 1.04; P = .733), complication rate (RR = 0.86, 95%CI: 0.63, 1.18; P = .361), Japanese Orthopaedic Association Score score (WMD = 0.19, 95%CI: −1.90, 2.27; P = .861), visual analog scale score for back pain (WMD = −0.17, 95%CI: −0.55, 0.21; P = .384) and leg pain (WMD = 0.00, 95%CI: −0.10, 0.10; P = .991), and Oswestry Disability Index score (WMD = −0.29, 95%CI: −1.00, 0.43; P = .434). Conclusion: PELD was associated with better effects and similar complications with other surgeries in LDH. However, it also resulted in a higher recurrence rate. Considering the potential limitations in the present study, further large-scale, well-performed randomized trials are needed to verify our findings.

S1 Transforaminal Epidural Anesthesia in Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Discectomy: A Case-Series Study

“…The advantages of this method include no bone removal, reduction of complications, minor wounds, reduction of bleeding, reduction of fluid requirements, no need for catheterization, reduction of hospitalization period, very low complication rate, rapid recovery, return to work, and reduction of costs. The safety and effectiveness of this treatment have been confirmed by several randomized studies (18)(19)(20). On the other hand, because this procedure is performed under LA or EA, the patient is conscious during surgery, and damage to the spinal cord is prevented (13,21).…”

Diagnostic Efficiency of Inflammatory Prognostic Index on Pain Scoring for Degenerated Intervertebral Disc

“…Low back pain is accepted as a derivative of multi-origin somatic pain with its physical, psychogenic and social aspects, and the problem of DIVD emerges as the most important source of this pain in the lumbar spine (11,12). An inflammatory condition in DIVD is a kind of antiinjury response to injury in the skeleton, and it plays a crucial efficiency in the development and worsening of DIVD (13).…”

Paper Plain: Making Medical Research Papers Approachable to Healthcare Consumers with Natural Language Processing

“…The scenarios for each paper were drawn from §3.0.2. For each scenario, we selected a single paper ( [98] for SLE and [8] for a herniated disc) for participants to read based on the most common papers readers selected in §3.…”

“…We adapted our GPT-3 prompt and generation parameters (e.g., length of generation and temperature) from one of the preset examples that OpenAI provides for summarizing text for a 2nd grader. 8 We changed the prompt to summarize for a 5th grader rather than 2nd grader after observing that using 2nd grader caused the model output to be too general and vague. We also tested later grades, up to college, but found that the generated text using the 5th grader prompt was the most consistent.…”