OBJECTIVE: To analyze differences in feasibility and efficacy between the paravertebral approach and microtubular tumorectomy (PAMT) or percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic tumorectomy (PTET) for the treatment of lumbar dumbbell-shaped tumors. METHODS: Clinical data of dumbbell-shaped lumbar tumors in patients treated with PAMT or PTET in our hospital between June 2015 and November 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. The gross total resection (GTR) rate, operation time, estimated blood loss, postoperative hospital stay (PHS), postoperative neurological function, and spinal stability were compared between the 2 surgical methods. Neurological improvement was assessed using the pain visual analogue scale (VAS) and the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score. RESULTS: Fifteen cases of GTR (93.8%) and 1 case of subtotal resection were included in the PTET group, whilst all 18 patients in the PAMT group achieved GTR. There was no significant difference in the GTR rate, operation time, and PHS between the PAMT and PTET groups. The estimated blood loss was significantly lower in the PTET group than in the PAMT group. At the last follow-up, there was no significant difference in the VAS or JOA scores between PTET and PAMT. No tumor recurrence or spinal instability was observed in either group during the follow-up period. CONCLUSION: Both PAMT and PTET can achieve Eden type III-IV lumbar 1-stage tumor resection without additional spinal internal fixation due to reduced muscle, ligament, and facet joint damage. No lumbar instability and tumor recurrence occurred, and neurological function was improved.
OBJECTIVE: To analyze differences in feasibility and efficacy between the paravertebral approach and microtubular tumorectomy (PAMT) or percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic tumorectomy (PTET) for the treatment of lumbar dumbbell-shaped tumors. METHODS: Clinical data of dumbbell-shaped lumbar tumors in patients treated with PAMT or PTET in our hospital between June 2015 and November 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. The gross total resection (GTR) rate, operation time, estimated blood loss, postoperative hospital stay (PHS), postoperative neurological function, and spinal stability were compared between the 2 surgical methods. Neurological improvement was assessed using the pain visual analogue scale (VAS) and the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score. RESULTS: Fifteen cases of GTR (93.8%) and 1 case of subtotal resection were included in the PTET group, whilst all 18 patients in the PAMT group achieved GTR. There was no significant difference in the GTR rate, operation time, and PHS between the PAMT and PTET groups. The estimated blood loss was significantly lower in the PTET group than in the PAMT group. At the last follow-up, there was no significant difference in the VAS or JOA scores between PTET and PAMT. No tumor recurrence or spinal instability was observed in either group during the follow-up period. CONCLUSION: Both PAMT and PTET can achieve Eden type III-IV lumbar 1-stage tumor resection without additional spinal internal fixation due to reduced muscle, ligament, and facet joint damage. No lumbar instability and tumor recurrence occurred, and neurological function was improved.
Entities:
Keywords:
Dumbbell-shaped tumor; Eden grade; Gross total resection; Lumbar spine; Microtubular technique; Spinal endoscopy
Authors: Michael Safaee; Andrew T Parsa; Nicholas M Barbaro; Dean Chou; Praveen V Mummaneni; Philip R Weinstein; Tarik Tihan; Christopher P Ames Journal: Neurosurg Focus Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 4.047
Authors: Chen Chunmei; Cai Gangfeng; Wang Rui; Zhang Weiqiang; Chen Yan; Li Feng; Wang Chunhua; Wang Fan; Chen Zhijie; Shi Songsheng; Yang Weizhong Journal: Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi Date: 2015-04-07