The purpose of this study is to report on intra- and peri-operative complications associated with working channel endoscopic spine surgery.
This study is a retrospective chart review of a multi-institutional patient cohort operated on by surgeons within the Endoscopic Spine Study Group (ESSG) between May, 2010 and June, 2017.
Our study cohort consisted of a total of 553 consecutive cases with an average age of 57 years. The most common procedure was an endoscopic discectomy (n = 377, 68%) followed by foraminotomy (n = 156, 28.2%), laminectomy (n = 55, 9.9%), and medial facetectomy (n = 29, 5.2%). Overall, the rate of intra- and perioperative complications was 2.7%. There were 3 durotomies (0.54%), 2 epidural hematomas (0.36%), 2 patients developed a complex pain disorder (0.36%), 4 recurrent disc herniations within 3 months (1.1%), 4 systemic complications (1.1%) and no wound infections. No risk factors were identified with regards to age, gender, approach or number of segments.
Endoscopic spine surgery is associated with favorable rates of intra- and peri-operative complications compared to literature reports of comparable MIS and open surgeries. Our report proposes safe and effective strategies for management of these complications.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 September 2018.
All research outputs
#19,954,338
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from World Neurosurgery
#4,321
of 7,047 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#254,943
of 347,727 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Neurosurgery
#137
of 266 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,047 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 347,727 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 266 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
