UBE与PEID治疗腰椎间盘突出症的临床疗效  

Clinical efficacy of UBE and PEID in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation

作　　者：王震[1] 李玉前[1] 朱敏[1] 薛华伟[1] 孙郁雨[1] WANG Zhen;LI Yuqian;ZHU Min(Department of Orthopedic Surgery,Affiliated Nantong Third Hospital,Nantong University,Nantong 226000,CHINA)

机构地区：[1]南通大学附属南通第三医院骨科,江苏226000

出　　处：《江苏医药》2022年第8期817-820,共4页Jiangsu Medical Journal

摘　　要：目的 比较单边双通道内镜(UBE)与经皮内镜椎板间入路椎间盘切除术(PEID)治疗腰椎间盘突出症(LDH)的临床疗效。方法 LDH患者54例中27例行UBE,27例行PEID。比较两组手术相关资料并评估治疗效果。结果 UBE组术中透视次数少于PEID组(P<0.05)。两组术后1 d、1个月和3个月腰腿VAS疼痛评分均较术前改善(P<0.05),组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两组手术时间和术后住院时间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两组术后1个月和3个月Oswestry功能障碍指数评分均较术前改善(P<0.05),组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两组术后3个月时的改良MacNab标准评价疗效优良率相当(P>0.05)。两组均无明显并发症发生。结论 UBE与PEID治疗LDH临床疗效相近。Objective To compare the clinical efficacy of unilateral biportal endoscopy(UBE) and percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy(PEID) in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation(LDH).Methods Fifty-four patients with LDH were divided into two groups with 27 cases each.The UBE was performed in group A and PEID was performed in group B.The operation-related data were compared between the two groups.Results The fluoroscopy times were less in group A than those in group B(P<0.05).The VAS pain scores of waist and legs were less at the time points of on 1day, in the 1and 3month after surgery than those before operation(P<0.05),which of two groups were not significantly different(P>0.05).There were no significant differences in operation time and hospital stay between the two groups(P>0.05).Compared to before, the Oswestry disability index scores in the 1and 3month after operation were improved significantly in both groups(P<0.05),which of two groups were not significantly different(P>0.05).The good efficacy rates evaluated by modified MacNab scale in the 3month after operation were comparable(P>0.05).No significant complications occurred in both groups.Conclusion The clinical efficacy of UBE and PEID in the treatment of LDH is similar.

关 键 词：单边双通道内镜 经皮内镜椎板间入路椎间盘切除术 腰椎间盘突出症 

分 类 号：R681[医药卫生—骨科学]