Clinical spine surgery · 2023
Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy: An Outcome Comparison With the Full-endoscopic Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zhong Zhuolin, Hu Qingfeng, Huang Leyi, Zhang Shaohua, Zhou Menghui
Аннотация
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective control study.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the curative effects of unilateral biportal endoscopic posterior cervical foraminotomy (UBE-PCF) with full-endoscopic posterior cervical foraminotomy (FPCF).
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There are few studies directly comparing outcomes between UBE-PCF and FPCF. The objective of this study was to compare outcomes between UBE-PCF and FPCF.
METHODS: A retrospective control study was conducted for 69 patients of cervical radiculopathy from July 2019 to December 2021. Clinical outcomes scores, including neck disability index, visual analog scale (VAS)-arm, and VAS-neck were evaluated. Serum creatine kinase levels and the size of the operating hole were measured.
RESULTS: Postoperative neck disability index, VAS-neck, and VAS-arm scores showed statistically significant improvement over preoperative scores ( P <0.01). The operating time was significantly shorter in the UBE-PCF group ( P <0.001). No significant differences were found in serum creatine kinase levels between the 2 groups ( P >0.05). The mean area of the operating hole was 1.47+0.05 cm 2 in the FPCF group and 1.79+0.11 cm 2 in the UBE-PCF group. The difference was statistically significant ( P <0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Both UBE-PCF and FPCF are safe and effective procedures for cervical radiculopathy. Predictable and sufficient decompression could be achieved by UBE-PCF in a shorter operation time.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Treatment Benefits Level III.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the curative effects of unilateral biportal endoscopic posterior cervical foraminotomy (UBE-PCF) with full-endoscopic posterior cervical foraminotomy (FPCF).
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There are few studies directly comparing outcomes between UBE-PCF and FPCF. The objective of this study was to compare outcomes between UBE-PCF and FPCF.
METHODS: A retrospective control study was conducted for 69 patients of cervical radiculopathy from July 2019 to December 2021. Clinical outcomes scores, including neck disability index, visual analog scale (VAS)-arm, and VAS-neck were evaluated. Serum creatine kinase levels and the size of the operating hole were measured.
RESULTS: Postoperative neck disability index, VAS-neck, and VAS-arm scores showed statistically significant improvement over preoperative scores ( P <0.01). The operating time was significantly shorter in the UBE-PCF group ( P <0.001). No significant differences were found in serum creatine kinase levels between the 2 groups ( P >0.05). The mean area of the operating hole was 1.47+0.05 cm 2 in the FPCF group and 1.79+0.11 cm 2 in the UBE-PCF group. The difference was statistically significant ( P <0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Both UBE-PCF and FPCF are safe and effective procedures for cervical radiculopathy. Predictable and sufficient decompression could be achieved by UBE-PCF in a shorter operation time.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Treatment Benefits Level III.