| Objective : To investigate the clinical effect of percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy and Mini-invasive channel system technology for the treatment of L5/S1 disc herniation,and provide reference for clinical treatmentMethods:53 patients with L5/S1 segmental LDH were assigned by different surgical treatments to the ocular group and the channel group.There were 21 cases in the hole mirror group and 32 cases in the channel group.The operation time,hospitalization days,operation cost,and surgical complications as well as lumbar stability(lumbar spine Cobb angle and lumbar curvature index)were compared and analyzed.Surgical efficacy was assessed using visual pain simulation score(VAS),Japanese Orthopaedic Association Low Back Pain Score(JOA),Oswestry Dysfunction Index(ODI),and modified Mac Nab criteria.Results:it is not significantly different from legend of stay,lumbar spine Cobb angle and lumbar curvature index between the two groups(P>0.05).However,the operation cost in the channel group were more than those in the orifice group(P<0.05).The operation time of the channel group was lower than that of the orifice group,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).The VAS,JOA and ODI scores of the two groups were improved after operation(P<0.05)?There was no significant difference in JOA and ODI scores between the two groups at the follow-up time.(P>0.05).However,the VAS score of the lumbar group was significantly lower than that of the channel group at 3 days after surgery and 1 month after surgery(P<0.05).According to the modified Mac Nab standard efficacy evaluation,there was no significant difference between the two groups(P>0.05)?Conclusion::Both PEID and Mini-invasive channels can achieve satisfactory clinical results in the treatment of LDH with minimally invasive surgery,but the amount of bleeding in PEID is less,the trauma is smaller,and it is more minimally invasive?... |
PDF Full Text Request