| Literature DB >> 29991242 |
Jeong Hoon Kim1, Hyeun Sung Kim2, Ankur Kapoor2, Nitin Adsul2, Ki Joon Kim1, Sung Ho Choi1, Jee-Soo Jang1, Il-Tae Jang2, Seong-Hoon Oh3.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Degenerative spine disease, encompassing disc prolapse and stenosis, is a common ailment in old age. This prospective study was undertaken to evaluate the role of endoscopic spine surgery in elderly patients (above 70 years of age) with clinical and radiological follow-up.Entities:
Keywords: Decompression; Disc prolapse; Discectomy; Old age; Stenosis; Percutaneous endoscopic spine surgery
Year: 2018 PMID: 29991242 PMCID: PMC6104732 DOI: 10.14245/ns.1836046.023
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Neurospine ISSN: 2586-6591
Patient characteristics (n=53)
| Characteristic | Value |
|---|---|
| Age (yr) | 76 ± 4.4 (70–88) |
| Sex ratio, male:female | 2:1.3 |
| Surgical procedure | |
| Discectomy (PETLD/PEILD) | 24 (45.3) |
| Decompression (PESLD/PETLF) | 24 (45.3) |
| Combined | 5 (9.4) |
| Levels involved (n = 62) | |
| L1–2 | 1 (1.6) |
| L2–3 | 6 (9.7) |
| L3–4 | 15 (24.2) |
| L4–5 | 29 (46.8) |
| L5–S1 | 11 (17.7) |
| Follow-up (mo) | 17.2 ± 5.3 (9–29) |
| MacNab criteria | |
| Excellent | 9 (16.9) |
| Good | 38 (71.7) |
| Poor | 6 (11.3) |
| Complications (n = 6) | |
| Recurrent disc prolapse | 5 (9.4) |
| Neurological deficit | 1 (1.8) |
Values are presented as mean±standard deviation (range) or number (%).
PETLD, percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal lumbar discectomy; PEILD, percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar lumbar discectomy; PESLD, percutaneous endoscopic stenosis lumbar decompression; PETLF, percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal lumbar foraminotomy.
Clinical outcomes
| Score | Preoperative | Postoperative | p-value[ | 3 Months postoperative | p-value[ | Final follow-up | p-value[ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Visual analog scale leg score | 7.58 ± 1.06 | 3.11 ± 0.85 | < 0.0001 | 2.51 ± 0.89 | < 0.0001 | 2.21 ± 0.91 | < 0.0001 |
| Oswestry Disability Index Score | 73.40 ± 7.44 | 37.51 ± 7.95 | < 0.0001 | 31.40 ± 8.25 | < 0.0001 | 26.85 ± 6.16 | < 0.0001 |
Values are presented as mean±standard deviation.
Paired t-test. p<0.05, statistically significant differences.
Fig. 1.Graphs showing changes in visual analogue scale (VAS; A) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI; B).
Fig. 2.(A) Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of a case with severe lumbar canal stenosis with inferior migration of disc fragment at L3–4 level. (B) Postoperative MRI showing complete removal of inferiorly migrated herniated disc with bilateral decompression without violation of facet joints or muscle damage after percutaneous endoscopic stenosis lumbar decompression.
Fig. 3.(A) Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of a case with severe lumbar canal stenosis at L4–5 level. (B) Postoperative MRI showing complete bilateral decompression without violation of facet joints or muscle damage after percutaneous endoscopic stenosis lumbar decompression.
Fig. 4.(A) Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) showing high-grade inferior migration of disc at L2–3 level. (B) Postoperative MRI showing complete removal of high grade inferiorly migrated herniated disc at L2–3 level. (C) Preoperative and postoperative computed tomography images of suprapedicular circumferential drilling to approach inferior migrated disc fragment.
Fig. 5.(A) Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) showing inferior migration of disc at L3–4 level and postoperative MRI showing complete removal of inferiorly migrated herniated disc at L3–4 level. (B) Recurrence after 2 years: Preoperative MRI showing inferior migration of disc at L3–4 level and postoperative MRI showing complete removal of inferiorly migrated herniated disc at L3–4 level.