Abstract:Objective To compare the clinical results between minimally invasive percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy(PELD) and microsurgical lumbar discectomy(MSLD) for lumbar disc herniation(LDH). Methods From June 2013 to December 2014, 256 patients with LDH in the Affiliated Provincial Hospital of Anhui Medical University underwent discectomy were enrolled in the research. One hundred and thirty-two patients were treated with MSLD and 124 cases with the PELD. The following measuring instruments were used: Visual analog scale for pain, the Oswestry Disability Index for patients′function and modified MacNab method for clinical outcome. The perioperative index, relief of the low back and leg pain, and clinical evaluation of each group were documented and compared respectively. Results All patients had been followed up for 5 to 35 months, averaged (20. 3 ± 4. 8) months and (19. 5 ± 5. 0) months in the MSLD group and PELD group, respectively. Overall, the PELD group had shorter surgical incision, shorter hospital stay and faster return to work than the MSLD group; however, operating time and radiation exposure were more than MSLD (all P values < 0. 01). The postoperative ODI and VAS score were significantly improved compared with preoperative ones in 2 groups (all P values < 0. 05); the VAS of back and leg pain in MSLD group were significantly better than those in the PELD group at 1 and 3 months (all P values < 0. 01), but no significant difference was found at 6 months and last follow-up (P > 0. 05). There was no significant difference in the main clinical outcome criteria ODI between the PELD and the MSLD group. According to the modified MacNab criteria, the excellent and good rates were 94. 7% (125 / 132)and 94. 3% (117 / 124) in the MSLD and PELD groups in the latest follow-up, respectively, and the differences between the 2 groups were not statistically significant (χ2 = 0. 015, P > 0. 05). There was no incidence of greater artery injury in each group. In MSLD group, there were 2 patients with nerve root traction injury, 1 patient with dural tear. In PELD group, there were 5 patients with postoperative dysesthesia of exiting root, 1 patient with neck pain during operation, and remnant disc fragment was found in one patient with highly migrated disc herniation. There were 2 patients of recurrence with disc herniations in each group, and were all treated with minimally invasive transforaminal lumber iterbody fusion. Conclusions Both PELD and MSLD are effective treatments for patients with LDH, and can get satisfactory clinical results. PELD have some advantages of less trauma, less pain, less duration of hospital stay, local anesthesia and early function recovery. However, it needs more radiation exposure and operation time, and it is difficult in some special patients (such as large, calcified and highly migrated disc herniations), PELD may be helpful for these patients.

Percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy versus microendoscopic discectomy for lumbar disc herniation:a prospective randomized controlled study

Therapeutic effect analysis of targeted percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy for lumbar disc herniation

Clinical application of microendoscopic discectomy for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation

Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Discectomy Compared with Microendoscopic Discectomy for Lumbar Disc Herniation: 1-Year Results of an Ongoing Randomized Controlled Trial

Outcomes Of Microendoscopic Discectomy And Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Discectomy For The Treatment Of Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Comparative Retrospective Study

Comparison of Three Common Intervertebral Disc Discectomies in the Treatment of Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Based on Multiple Data

Evaluation of Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Discectomy in the Treatment of Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Retrospective Study

Short-term outcomes of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation in 30 patients

Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy for L5-S1 Disc Herniation Via an Interlaminar Approach Versus a Transforaminal Approach: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Study With 2-Year Follow Up.

Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy for L5–S1 Disc Herniation Via an Interlaminar Approach Versus a Transforaminal Approach

The long-term therapeutic effect of central lumbar intervertebral disc herniation: a comparison between microendoscopy discectomy and percutaneous lumbar discectomy

Minimally invasive targeted percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy for lumbar disc herniation

Comparison of minimally invasive percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy and microsurgical lumbar discectomy for lumbar disc herniation

Comparasion of the tissue invasiveness and the clinical effects of lumbar disc herniation treated by microendoscopic discectomy and traditional open operation

Long-Term Outcomes of Patients with Lumbar Disc Herniation Treated with Percutaneous Discectomy: Comparative Study with Microendoscopic Discectomy

Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy <i>via</i> the medial foraminal and interlaminar approaches: A comparative study with 2-year follow-up

Comparison of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy and open lumbar discectomy for lumbar disc herniations: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Comparative study of clinical effect between microendoscopic discectomy and microsurgical lumbar discectomy for lumbar disc herniations

Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Discectomy Versus Microendoscopic Discectomy for Lumbar Disk Herniation: Five-year Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial

Minimum 2-Year Efficacy of Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy Versus Microendoscopic Discectomy: A Meta-Analysis

Different Approaches to Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy for L5/S1 Lumbar Disc Herniation: a Retrospective Study.