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.

Comparison of full-endoscopic foraminoplasty and lumbar discectomy (FEFLD), unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) discectomy, and microdiscectomy (MD) for symptomatic lumbar disc herniation

Comparison of Discectomy Versus Sequestrectomy in Lumbar Disc Herniation: a Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies.

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

Unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy versus microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Comparative Study of Microendoscopic Disecetomy and Fenestration Discectomy for Mono-Segment Lumbar Disc Herniation

Surgical Strategy and Outcomes of Full Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy for Recurrent Lumbar Disk Herniation Following a Previous Full Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy

Clinical comparison of unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy with percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy for single l4/5‐level lumbar disk herniation

Comparison of the Outcomes of Microendoscopic Discectomy Versus Full-Endoscopic Discectomy for the Treatment of L4/5 Lumbar Disc Herniation

Comparison of microendoscopic discectomy and open discectomy for single-segment lumbar disc herniation

Clinical comparison of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy and unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy for single-level lumbar disc herniation

Comparison of one-hole split endoscopic discectomy and microendoscopic discectomy in the treatment of lumbar disk herniation: a one-year retrospective cohort study

Comparison of unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy versus percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Comparison of Percutaneous Endoscopic Transforaminal Discectomy, Chemonucleolysis, Microdiscectomy, and Microendoscopic Discectomy for Symptomatic Lumbar Disc Herniation: One-year Follow-up Clinical Results and Disc Degeneration

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

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

Limited discectomy versus aggressive discectomy by spinal endoscopy with the transforaminal approach for lumbar disc herniation: a retrospective study

Comparison of mid-term effects between microendoscopic discectomy and microsurgical lumbar discectomy for operatively treating lumbar disc herniation

Comparison of clinical outcomes and cost-utility between unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy and percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy for single-level lumbar disc herniation: a retrospective matched controlled study

Unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy versus percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation: a retrospective study

Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Discectomy versus Percutaneous Endoscopic Interlaminar Discectomy for Lumbar Disc Herniation

C-arm-guided versus ultrasound volumetric navigation-guided percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation: A retrospective study