A retrospective comparative study of robot-assisted unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar decompression and fusion surgery versus percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression and fusion surgery
Yan Dong Liu,Qiang Deng,Li Xia Han,Kai Dong Zhang,Yan Jun Zhang,Ran Dong Peng,Hai Yun Yang,Tie Feng Guo,Jun Jie Li,Bo Chen,Sheng Tan
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000039664
2024-09-27
Abstract:The objective of this study is to illustrate the advantages of robot-assisted unilateral biportal endoscopy in lumbar decompression fusion and internal fixation surgery. According to the different surgical methods, we divided the 26 patients into 2 groups, robot-assisted unilateral biportal endoscopy for lumbar interbody fusion (R-ULIF) group and percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression and interbody fusion (Endo-LIF) group, with a 1:1 ratio. Gender, disease course, lesion site, fluoroscopy times, operative time, blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, screw placement success rate, fusion rate, complications rate, postoperative pain visual analog scale (VAS) (The VAS score is used only to evaluate pain in the lower back and legs.) Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) (The ODI score can serve as a reference indicator for evaluating the effectiveness of treatment for patients with low back pain, and has good responsiveness in assessing patients with chronic low back pain), and MacNab (The MacNab standard is divided into 4 levels: excellent, good, fair, and poor, which can be used to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of certain spinal surgeries) standard efficacy evaluation were analyzed and compared between the 2 groups. All patients successfully completed the surgery. Compared with the Endo-LIF group, the R-ULIF group had fewer fluoroscopy procedures, less intraoperative blood loss, and shorter postoperative hospital stay (P < .05). The VAS scores and ODI scores of both groups significantly decreased at all-time points (P < .05). The ODI scores of the R-ULIF group were better than the Endo-LIF group at 1 month and 3 months after surgery (P = .017/P = .047), but there was no statistically significant difference between the groups before surgery and 1 week after surgery (P > .05). The efficacy was evaluated using the MacNab criteria at 6 months after surgery. The R-ULIF group has an excellent and good rate of 84.6%, while the Endo-LIF group has an excellent and good rate of 76.9% (P = 1.000). Robot-assisted unilateral biportal endoscopy for lumbar interbody and fusion surgery has shown short-term clinical efficacy in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation combined with lumbar instability, surpassing endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion surgery. Robot-assisted unilateral biportal endoscopy for lumbar interbody and fusion surgery has demonstrated high success rate in screw placement, minimal radiation exposure, less intraoperative blood loss, shorter hospital stay, and thus deserves further clinical promotion.