OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare the learning curves of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) in a transforaminal approach at the L4/5 and L5/S1 levels. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the first 60 cases at the L4/5 level (Group I) and the first 60 cases at the L5/S1 level (Group II) of PELD performed by one spine surgeon. The patients were divided into subgroups A, B, and C (Group I: A cases 1-20, B cases 21-40, C cases 41-60; Group II: A cases 1-20, B cases 21-40, C cases 41-60). Operation time was thoroughly analyzed. RESULTS: Compared with the L4/5 level, the learning curve of transforaminal PELD at the L5/S1 level was flatter. The mean operation times of Groups IA, IB, and IC were (88.75±17.02), (67.75±6.16), and (64.85±7.82) min, respectively. There was a significant difference between Groups A and B (P<0.05), but no significant difference between Groups B and C (P=0.20). The mean operation times of Groups IIA, IIB, and IIC were (117.25±13.62), (109.50±11.20), and (92.15±11.94) min, respectively. There was no significant difference between Groups A and B (P=0.06), but there was a significant difference between Groups B and C (P<0.05). There were 6 cases of postoperative dysesthesia (POD) in Group I and 2 cases in Group IIA (P=0.27). There were 2 cases of residual disc in Group I, and 4 cases in Group II (P=0.67). There were 3 cases of recurrence in Group I, and 2 cases in Group II (P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the L5/S1 level, the learning curve of PELD in a transforaminal approach at the L4/5 level was steeper, suggesting that the L4/5 level might be easier to master after short-term professional training.
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare the learning curves of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) in a transforaminal approach at the L4/5 and L5/S1 levels. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the first 60 cases at the L4/5 level (Group I) and the first 60 cases at the L5/S1 level (Group II) of PELD performed by one spine surgeon. The patients were divided into subgroups A, B, and C (Group I: A cases 1-20, B cases 21-40, C cases 41-60; Group II: A cases 1-20, B cases 21-40, C cases 41-60). Operation time was thoroughly analyzed. RESULTS: Compared with the L4/5 level, the learning curve of transforaminal PELD at the L5/S1 level was flatter. The mean operation times of Groups IA, IB, and IC were (88.75±17.02), (67.75±6.16), and (64.85±7.82) min, respectively. There was a significant difference between Groups A and B (P<0.05), but no significant difference between Groups B and C (P=0.20). The mean operation times of Groups IIA, IIB, and IIC were (117.25±13.62), (109.50±11.20), and (92.15±11.94) min, respectively. There was no significant difference between Groups A and B (P=0.06), but there was a significant difference between Groups B and C (P<0.05). There were 6 cases of postoperative dysesthesia (POD) in Group I and 2 cases in Group IIA (P=0.27). There were 2 cases of residual disc in Group I, and 4 cases in Group II (P=0.67). There were 3 cases of recurrence in Group I, and 2 cases in Group II (P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the L5/S1 level, the learning curve of PELD in a transforaminal approach at the L4/5 level was steeper, suggesting that the L4/5 level might be easier to master after short-term professional training.
Authors: Jingchi Li; Wenqiang Xu; Qingfeng Jiang; Zhipeng Xi; Xiaoyu Zhang; Nan Wang; Lin Xie; Yang Liu Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2020-02-07 Impact factor: 3.411