Title |
Application of transiliac approach to intervertebral endoscopic discectomy in L5/S1 intervertebral disc herniation
|
---|---|
Published in |
European Journal of Medical Research, April 2017
|
DOI | 10.1186/s40001-017-0254-0 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Jiayue Bai, Wei Zhang, Yapeng Wang, Jilong An, Jian Zhang, Yapeng Sun, Wenyuan Ding, Yong Shen |
Abstract |
To discuss the significance and the short-term effect of bone puncture technique in transiliac approach to intervertebral endoscopic discectomy for the treatment of L5/S1 intervertebral disc herniation. Nineteen patients were diagnosed as L5/S1 disc herniation and treated using transiliac approach to endoscopic discectomy (group I), and 20 patients were diagnosed as non-L5/S1 disc herniation and underwent conventional approach (group R). Leg pain was evaluated by VAS. MacNab ratings of the last follow-up were recorded to evaluate early clinical efficacy, and postoperative complications were recorded to evaluate surgical safety. The imaging changes of the patients 3 months after surgery were observed. One patient in group I, who felt abnormal in nerve roots, underwent symptomatic treatments, such as rehydration and hormone, and the abnormalities disappeared 3 days after treatment. There were no significant significances in operative time and intraoperative fluoroscopy times between groups I and R (p > 0.05), but there was a higher tendency in group I. The VAS scores of post-operation were significantly lower than that of pre-operation in the two groups (p < 0.05), but there were no significant differences between the two groups (p > 0.05). The MacNab score of the last follow-up showed excellent rate (95%) and good rate (90%) in groups I and R, respectively. Bone puncture-combined transiliac approach to intervertebral endoscopic surgery could locate iliac puncture point individually, and establish a good iliac channel, which is safe, effective, and minimally invasive. |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 33 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Bachelor | 6 | 18% |
Researcher | 4 | 12% |
Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 9% |
Other | 2 | 6% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 3% |
Other | 3 | 9% |
Unknown | 14 | 42% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 42% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 9% |
Neuroscience | 1 | 3% |
Engineering | 1 | 3% |
Unknown | 14 | 42% |