A case-control study on the treatment of protrusion of lumbar intervertebral disc through PELD and MED
- Authors:
- Published online on: August 14, 2017 https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2017.4929
- Pages: 3708-3712
-
Copyright: © Song et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.
Metrics: Total
Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Abstract
We compared the clinical effects between the percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) and microendoscopic discectomy (MED) treatments for protrusion of lumbar intervertebral disc. We conducted a retrospective analysis on 60 patients who were diagnosed with single-segment protrusion of lumbar intervertebral disc during the period from January 2009 to June 2016. Patients were divided into two groups, the PELD and MED groups, which contained 30 cases each. We evaluated the operation results according to oswestry dysfunction index (ODI), visual analogue scale (VAS) and the improved MacNab standard. The average follow-up visit period after the operation was 18 months and the operation time of the two groups was not statistically different. The cadaverine quantity of bleeding in the PELD group is less than that in the MED group. Moreover, the average length of incision and the length of stay were shortened for the PELD group compared to the MED group. The ODI and VAS after operation for the two groups improved significantly compared to that before operation (P<0.05). The qualified rates of the PELD and MED groups were 93.0 and 90.0%, respectively, as of the improved MacNab method. The complication occurrence rates for the two groups during perioperative period were not different. Therefore, the short-term efficacy of the two minimally invasive operation methods (PELD and MED) on the treatment of protrusion of lumbar intervertebral disc is satisfactory. In cases where operation indications are chosen strictly, PELD can be regarded as a method of safety and efficiency due to the advantages of minimal incision, less bleeding, minimal trauma and faster postoperative recovery.
