PURPOSE: To compare the clinical effects of endoscopic surgeries with traditional open surgeries in the treatment of gluteal muscle contracture and discuss their indications and value. METHODS: In this retrospective study, 50 patients received traditional open surgeries and 52 received endoscopic surgeries. The 2 groups were compared in terms of surgery duration, incision lengths, postsurgical pain, complications, off-bed activity times, hospitalization duration, clinical outcome, and 1-year recurrence rates. RESULT: The endoscopic surgery group was significantly superior to the open surgery group in regard to incision length, postsurgical pain, off-bed activity time, hospitalization duration, and patient cosmetic satisfaction. Differences were not statistically significant for the surgery duration, complications, clinical outcome, or the 1-year recurrence rate. All the endoscopic surgery group patients stated that they would choose endoscopic surgery again. CONCLUSIONS: The endoscopic release of gluteal muscle contracture is safe and reliable, with the advantages of less trauma and pain, shorter operative time, earlier rehabilitation, and return of functional activities. Its application, though, should be carefully controlled based on the indications. It is applicable to degree I and II patients, but may be used only very cautiously in degree III patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.
PURPOSE: To compare the clinical effects of endoscopic surgeries with traditional open surgeries in the treatment of gluteal muscle contracture and discuss their indications and value. METHODS: In this retrospective study, 50 patients received traditional open surgeries and 52 received endoscopic surgeries. The 2 groups were compared in terms of surgery duration, incision lengths, postsurgical pain, complications, off-bed activity times, hospitalization duration, clinical outcome, and 1-year recurrence rates. RESULT: The endoscopic surgery group was significantly superior to the open surgery group in regard to incision length, postsurgical pain, off-bed activity time, hospitalization duration, and patient cosmetic satisfaction. Differences were not statistically significant for the surgery duration, complications, clinical outcome, or the 1-year recurrence rate. All the endoscopic surgery group patients stated that they would choose endoscopic surgery again. CONCLUSIONS: The endoscopic release of gluteal muscle contracture is safe and reliable, with the advantages of less trauma and pain, shorter operative time, earlier rehabilitation, and return of functional activities. Its application, though, should be carefully controlled based on the indications. It is applicable to degree I and II patients, but may be used only very cautiously in degree III patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.