Comparison of unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus minimally invasive tubular transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar degenerative disease


Objective:

To compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (UBE-TLIF) and minimally invasive tubular TLIF (MT-TLIF) in treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases.


Methods:

A clinical data of 75 patients with lumbar degenerative diseases, who met the selection criteria between August 2019 and August 2020, was retrospectively analyzed, including 35 patients in the UBE- TLIF group and 40 patients in the MT-TLIF group. There was no significant difference in general data such as gender, age, body mass index, disease type and duration, and surgical segment between the two groups ( P>0.05), which was comparable. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, hemoglobin (Hb) before operation and at 1 day after operation, the length of hospital stay, incidence of complications, and visual analogue scale (VAS) score of low back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Short-Form 36 Health Survey Scale (SF-36 scale), intervertebral disc height (IDH), sagittal Cobb angle, lumbar lordosis (LL), and the intervertebral fusion were compared between the two groups.


Results:

Compared with MT-TLIF group, UBE-TLIF group had significantly longer operation time but less intraoperative blood loss and shorter length of hospital stay ( P<0.05). The Hb levels in both groups decreased at 1 day after operation, but there was no significant difference in the difference before and after operation between the two groups ( P>0.05). All patients were followed up, and the follow-up time was (14.7±2.5) months in the UBE-TLIF group and (15.0±3.4) months in the MT-TLIF group, with no significant difference ( t=0.406, P=0.686). In both groups, the VAS score of low back pain, VAS score of leg pain, SF-36 scale, and ODI after operation significantly improved when compared with those before operation ( P<0.05). There was no significant difference between 1 month after operation and last follow-up ( P>0.05). There was no significant difference in the VAS score of low back pain, VAS score of leg pain, and SF-36 scale between the two groups before and after operation ( P>0.05). At 1 month after operation, the ODI in the UBE-TLIF group was significantly better than that in the MT-TLIF group ( P<0.05). At 1 month after operation, IDH, Cobb angle, and LL in both groups recovered when compared with those before operation ( P<0.05), and were maintained until last follow-up ( P>0.05). There was no significant difference in the IDH, Cobb angle, and LL between the two groups at each time point ( P>0.05). Thirty-three cases (89.2%) in the UBE-TLIF group and 35 cases (87.5%) in the MT-TLIF group achieved fusion, and the difference was not significant ( χ 2=0.015, P=0.901). In the UBE-TLIF group, 1 case of intraoperative dural tear and 1 case of postoperative epidural hematoma occurred, with an incidence of 5.7%. In the MT-TLIF group, 1 case of intraoperative dural tear, 1 case of postoperative epidural hematoma, and 1 case of superficial infection of the surgical incision occurred, with an incidence of 7.5%. There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications between the two groups ( χ 2=1.234, P=1.000).


Conclusion:

Compared with MT-TLIF, UBE-TILF can achieve similar interbody fusion in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases, and has the advantages of smaller incision, less bleeding, and shorter length of hospital stay.


目的:

比较单侧双通道内镜下经椎间孔腰椎间融合术(unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion,UBE-TLIF)与微创通道下TLIF(minimally invasive tubular TLIF, MT-TLIF)治疗腰椎退行性疾病的疗效。.


方法:

回顾分析2019年8月—2020年8月符合选择标准的75例腰椎退行性疾病患者临床资料,其中 UBE-TLIF组35例、MT-TLIF组40例。两组患者性别、年龄、身体质量指数、疾病类型及病程、手术节段等一般资料比较,差异均无统计学意义( P>0.05),具有可比性。比较两组手术时间、术中失血量、术前及术后1 d血红蛋白(hemoglobin,Hb)、住院时间、并发症发生情况,以及腰痛疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)评分、腿痛VAS评分、Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)、简明健康调查量表(SF-36量表)评分,手术节段椎间盘高度(intervertebral disc height,IDH)、矢状面Cobb角和腰椎前凸角(lumbar lordosis,LL),椎间融合情况。.


结果:

与MT-TLIF组相比,UBE-TLIF组手术时间更长,但术中失血量减少、住院时间缩短( P<0.05)。术后1 d两组Hb均有下降,但组间手术前后差值差异无统计学意义( P>0.05)。两组患者均获随访,UBE-TLIF组随访时间为(14.7±2.5)个月,MT-TLIF组为(15.0±3.4)个月,差异无统计学意义( t=0.406, P=0.686)。临床疗效评价指标:术后两组腰痛VAS评分、腿痛VAS评分、SF-36量表评分及ODI均较术前改善( P<0.05);术后1个月及末次随访间比较差异无统计学意义( P>0.05)。手术前后各时间点两组腰痛VAS评分、腿痛VAS评分及SF-36评分比较,差异均无统计学意义( P>0.05);术后1个月UBE-TLIF组ODI优于MT-TLIF组( P<0.05)。影像学评价指标:两组术后1个月IDH、Cobb角及LL均较术前改善( P<0.05),且维持至末次随访时( P>0.05)。手术前后各时间点两组IDH、Cobb角、LL比较,差异均无统计学意义( P>0.05)。UBE-TLIF组33例(89.2%)、MT-TLIF组35例(87.5%)达植骨融合,差异无统计学意义( χ 2=0.015, P=0.901)。UBE-TLIF组发生术中硬膜撕裂1例、术后硬膜外血肿形成1例,并发症发生率为5.7%;MT-TLIF组发生术中硬膜撕裂1例、术后硬膜外血肿形成1例、切口浅表感染1例,并发症发生率为7.5%。两组并发症发生率比较,差异无统计学意义( χ 2=1.234, P=1.000)。.


结论:

与MT-TLIF相比,UBE-TILF治疗腰椎退行性疾病除能获得相似椎间融合效果外,还具有切口小、术中出血少、住院周期短等优点。.


Keywords:

Unilateral biportal endoscopy; lumbar degenerative disease; transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on vk
VK
Share on pinterest
Pinterest
Close Menu