Lightning Podiums: Spinal Potpourri - 803B

Presented by: J. Zeng


J. Zeng(1,2)

(1) Sichuan University, Orthopaedics, Chengdu, China
(2) Sichuan University, Chengdu, China


Objectives: To assess the clinic results of percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis.

Methods: From January 2014 to August 2014, 126 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis accepted percutaneous endoscope interlaminar decompression. The mean age was 65.8 years old (range: 46-83 years ). There were 82 males and 44 females, including 73 stenosis in L4-5 and 53 stenosis in L5-S1. Preoperatively and at the follow-up, Visual Analogue Score (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and modified MacNab were applied to evaluate clinical outcomes.

Results: All the patients had a average follow up of 14.5 months (range: 12-20 months). Average operation time is 61.4±12.6min, and average intraoperation time is 0.5±0.3s. 126 patients with intermittent claudication, lumbocrural pain, decreased feeling and muscle strength all have different degrees of improvement. In preoperation and postoperative 1 day, 1 month, 3 months, 6months, and 12months, waist pain VAS score respectively are 6.00±1.46,3.81±0.75,1.88±1.15,0.81±1.05,0.63±0.62,0.25±0.45, and leg pain VAS score respectively are 7.88±0.81,2.88±1.45,2.13±1.02,1.38±0.62,0.88±0.62,0.81±0.54, and ODI score ,not involving postoperative 1 day, respectively are 47.63±9.91,38.4±10.46,26.75±6.88,13.81±5.95,9.19±6.04. Difference of lumbocrural pain scores and ODI scores in preoperative and postoperative multi-period was statistically significant (P< 0.01). With evaluation to clinical effect in 12 months after surgery by modified MacNab, the fineness rate was 90.5%.

Conclusions: Percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar decompression have advantages in little trauma and bleeding, short intraoperative radiation exposure time, fast recovery after surgery and clear view for protecting nerve and thorough decompression. The recent efficacy is satisfactory, but its long term result is up to further followup.

Keywords: Lumbar spinal stenosis; Microsurgery; Percutaneous interlaminar; Endoscopic decompression