Bernhard Rieger1, Kerim Hakan Sitoci-Ficici2, Clemens Reinshagen3, Uta Brautferger4, Gabriele Schackert2, Radovan Hudak5, Jozef Zivcak5, Marek Molcanyi6, Thomas Pinzer2. 1. Short Care Clinic, Greifswald, Germany; Department of Neurosurgery, Dresden University Hospital, Germany; University Comprehensive Spine Center, Dresden University Hospital, Germany. Electronic address: biokinemetrie@gmail.com. 2. Department of Neurosurgery, Dresden University Hospital, Germany; University Comprehensive Spine Center, Dresden University Hospital, Germany. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 4. Task Force Prospective Spine, Cologne, Germany. 5. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Technical University of Košice, Košice, Slovakia. 6. Department of Neurosurgery, Medical University Graz, Austria; Institute of Neurophysiology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: For effective minimally invasive lumbar decompression, we changed the routine of segmental decompression. Using a high-speed drill or an ultrasound knife, we created a working channel, starting at the base of the spinous process of the upper vertebra slightly above the disc level, to target and decompress the contralateral recess, and termed it the translaminar crossover decompression (TCD). We evaluated the feasibility and compared the outcomes of a navigation-guided endoscopic translaminar crossover approach for segmental decompression (eTCD) in elderly patients with microscopic decompression using the same approach (mTCD). METHODS: A total of 740 elderly patients were enrolled in a prospective cohort study. Of the 740 patients, 297, who had undergone mTCD, and 253, who had undergone eTCD, completed a 1-year follow-up visit. In addition to the surgical data, numerical rating scales (NRSs) for back and leg pain, the Core Outcome Measures Index and Oswestry Disability Index were recorded preoperatively and 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. The MacNab criteria were supplemented by qualitative assessment of the patients' postoperative pain-free walking distance. RESULTS: A comparison of the preoperative and postoperative clinical scores showed significant improvement after TCD in both cohorts (P < 0.01): Oswestry Disability Index, from 50.3% ± 12.6% to 15.5% ± 7.43%; NRS (back), from 6.9 ± 1.9 to 2.5 ± 1.3; NRS (leg), from 8.0 ± 0.85 to 1.6 ± 0.33; Core Outcome Measures Index (back), from 7.8 ± 2.0 to 2.7 ± 1.5. No statistically significant differences were found in the outcomes between the 2 cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: TCD inherently eliminated central stenosis and facilitated decompression of both recesses via mutual undercutting, with preservation of facet joint integrity.
OBJECTIVE: For effective minimally invasive lumbar decompression, we changed the routine of segmental decompression. Using a high-speed drill or an ultrasound knife, we created a working channel, starting at the base of the spinous process of the upper vertebra slightly above the disc level, to target and decompress the contralateral recess, and termed it the translaminar crossover decompression (TCD). We evaluated the feasibility and compared the outcomes of a navigation-guided endoscopic translaminar crossover approach for segmental decompression (eTCD) in elderly patients with microscopic decompression using the same approach (mTCD). METHODS: A total of 740 elderly patients were enrolled in a prospective cohort study. Of the 740 patients, 297, who had undergone mTCD, and 253, who had undergone eTCD, completed a 1-year follow-up visit. In addition to the surgical data, numerical rating scales (NRSs) for back and leg pain, the Core Outcome Measures Index and Oswestry Disability Index were recorded preoperatively and 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. The MacNab criteria were supplemented by qualitative assessment of the patients' postoperative pain-free walking distance. RESULTS: A comparison of the preoperative and postoperative clinical scores showed significant improvement after TCD in both cohorts (P < 0.01): Oswestry Disability Index, from 50.3% ± 12.6% to 15.5% ± 7.43%; NRS (back), from 6.9 ± 1.9 to 2.5 ± 1.3; NRS (leg), from 8.0 ± 0.85 to 1.6 ± 0.33; Core Outcome Measures Index (back), from 7.8 ± 2.0 to 2.7 ± 1.5. No statistically significant differences were found in the outcomes between the 2 cohorts. CONCLUSIONS:TCD inherently eliminated central stenosis and facilitated decompression of both recesses via mutual undercutting, with preservation of facet joint integrity.