目的:通过Meta分析对比单通道内镜及单侧双通道内镜(UBE)在治疗腰椎管狭窄症的临床疗效。方法:检索PubMed、Cochrane Library、Embase和Web of Science等数据库(从建库到2023年10月)对单通道内镜和单侧双通道内镜治疗腰椎管狭窄症疗效...目的:通过Meta分析对比单通道内镜及单侧双通道内镜(UBE)在治疗腰椎管狭窄症的临床疗效。方法:检索PubMed、Cochrane Library、Embase和Web of Science等数据库(从建库到2023年10月)对单通道内镜和单侧双通道内镜治疗腰椎管狭窄症疗效的临床研究进行检索。提取纳入研究的结局指标,包括:腰部和腿部疼痛的VAS评分、术后ODI评分、手术时间、住院天数、并发症发生率、手术优良率。使用Revman 5.3软件对数据进行统计学分析,单个率采用优势比(odds ratios, OR),连续性变量采用加权平均差异(weighted mean difference, WMD),并给出可信区间(confidence interval, CI)为95%。结果:总共有6项研究,515名患者被纳入该Meta分析。UBE手术相对于单通道内镜有着更短的手术时间(WMD −12.37, 95%CI −22.15~−2.6, P = 0.01)。两组患者在腰痛VAS评分[术后第一天(WMD 0.27, 95%CI −0.29~0.82, P = 0.35)、末次随访(WMD −0.02, 95%CI −0.1~0.06, P = 0.63)]、腿痛VAS评分[术后第一天(WMD −0.17, 95%CI −0.43~0.09, P = 0.20)、末次随访(WMD 0.03, 95%CI −0.15~0.15, P = 0.51)、ODI评分(WMD −0.1, 95%CI −0.67~0.47, P = 0.73)、并发症(OR 0.72, 95%CI 0.37~1.41, P = 0.34)、住院天数(WMD −0.06, 95%CI −0.27~0.15, P = 0.56)、手术优良率(OR 1.32, 95%CI 0.69~2.53, P = 0.56)等方面均无明显差异。结论:UBE和单通道内镜治疗腰椎管狭窄症的临床疗效和并发症发生率无明显差异。而UBE与单通道内镜组相比有着更短的手术时间。Objective: To compare the clinical efficacy of uniportal endoscoppic and biportal endoscopic (UBE) decompression for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis through meta-analysis. Methods: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase and Web of Science databases were searched (from the establishment of the database to October 2023) to compare the clinical studies on the clinical efficacy of uniportal and biportal endoscopy in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. The outcome indicators included in the study were extracted, including VAS score of lumbar and leg pain, postoperative ODI score, operation time, length of hospital stay, complication rate, and surgical excellence rate. Statistical analysis was performed using Revman 5.3 software. A fixed or random effects model was used with odds ratios (OR) for single rate and weighted mean difference (WMD) for continuous variables, and confidence intervals CI was 95%. Results: A total of 6 studies with 515 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with uniportal endoscopy, UBE surgery had a shorter operation time (WMD −12.37, 95%CI −22.15~2.6, P = 0.01). There was no significant difference between groups in VAS scores for low back pain (first day after surgery (WMD 0.27, 95%CI 0.29~0.82, P = 0.35), final follow-up (WMD −0.02, 95%CI 0.1~0.06, P = 0.63), and leg pain first day after surgery (WMD −0.17, 95%CI −0.43~0.09, P = 0.20), final follow-up (WMD 0.03, 95%CI −0.15~0.15, P = 0.51), ODI score (WMD −0.1, 95%CI −0.67~0.47, P = 0.73), complications (OR 0.72, 95%CI 0.37~1.41, P = 0.34), length of hospital stay (WMD −0.06, 95%CI 0.27~0.15, P = 0.56), and rate of excellent operation (OR 1.32, 95%CI 0.69~2.53, P = 0.56). Conclusion: There is no significant difference in clinical efficacy and complication rate between UBE and single channel endoscopy in the treatment of lumbar stenosis. Compared with the single channel endoscopic group, UBE has a shorter operation time.展开更多
目的探讨单侧双通道脊柱内镜(UBE)治疗退行性腰椎疾病(DLD)术后疗效与影响因素关系。方法对2021年2月至2023年3月收治本科室的61例DLD患者进行回顾性分析,评价其术后疗效。随访时间12~38个月。男35个,女26个,年龄19~81岁,平均年龄54.4...目的探讨单侧双通道脊柱内镜(UBE)治疗退行性腰椎疾病(DLD)术后疗效与影响因素关系。方法对2021年2月至2023年3月收治本科室的61例DLD患者进行回顾性分析,评价其术后疗效。随访时间12~38个月。男35个,女26个,年龄19~81岁,平均年龄54.4岁。手术节段均为单节段,共61节段。记录患者围手术期及手术并发症情况;随访以末次随访为终止时间。采用疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)、Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)和改良MacNab标准评价临床疗效;手术前后行腰椎CT三维重建检查,观察并测量关节突关节切除内侧角(β角);椎间盘类型按照分类定位系统MSU(Michgan State University)基于MRI横断位分A、B、C区,依据区域定位法FSU(Functional Spine Unit)基于MRI或CT横断位、矢状位分级1~4级;统计采用配对t检验,及方差分析。结果61例患者均顺利完成手术。其中行腰椎间盘突出手术61例,其中合并中央管狭窄29例,合并侧隐窝狭窄54例。术中出现硬膜囊撕裂2例。术后出现短暂性下肢麻木3例,类脊髓综合征1例,感染1例。患者术后随访(12~38)个月。术后随访时,患者腿部VAS、ODI较术前明显下降(P值均<0.05)。术后末次随访时依据改良MacNab标准,优良率为65.6%(40/61)。腰椎三维CT影像学方面,测量β角均小于90°,平均值83.59°,范围(66.72°~89.32°)。基于MSU分区,A区37例,B区15例,C区9例;基于FSU位置分级,分别为1级1例,2级25例,3级2例,合并1和2级26例,2和3级4例,1和2、3级3例。方差分析显示术后满意度与椎间盘分区及分级、β角无关,与术后疼痛及功能障碍指数相关。结论单侧双通道脊柱内镜治疗退行性腰椎疾病术后疗效可能与术后β角及椎间盘分区、分级无关。分级、分区越复杂,手术难度越大,早期开展这项技术遇到的困难可能越多。展开更多
文摘目的:通过Meta分析对比单通道内镜及单侧双通道内镜(UBE)在治疗腰椎管狭窄症的临床疗效。方法:检索PubMed、Cochrane Library、Embase和Web of Science等数据库(从建库到2023年10月)对单通道内镜和单侧双通道内镜治疗腰椎管狭窄症疗效的临床研究进行检索。提取纳入研究的结局指标,包括:腰部和腿部疼痛的VAS评分、术后ODI评分、手术时间、住院天数、并发症发生率、手术优良率。使用Revman 5.3软件对数据进行统计学分析,单个率采用优势比(odds ratios, OR),连续性变量采用加权平均差异(weighted mean difference, WMD),并给出可信区间(confidence interval, CI)为95%。结果:总共有6项研究,515名患者被纳入该Meta分析。UBE手术相对于单通道内镜有着更短的手术时间(WMD −12.37, 95%CI −22.15~−2.6, P = 0.01)。两组患者在腰痛VAS评分[术后第一天(WMD 0.27, 95%CI −0.29~0.82, P = 0.35)、末次随访(WMD −0.02, 95%CI −0.1~0.06, P = 0.63)]、腿痛VAS评分[术后第一天(WMD −0.17, 95%CI −0.43~0.09, P = 0.20)、末次随访(WMD 0.03, 95%CI −0.15~0.15, P = 0.51)、ODI评分(WMD −0.1, 95%CI −0.67~0.47, P = 0.73)、并发症(OR 0.72, 95%CI 0.37~1.41, P = 0.34)、住院天数(WMD −0.06, 95%CI −0.27~0.15, P = 0.56)、手术优良率(OR 1.32, 95%CI 0.69~2.53, P = 0.56)等方面均无明显差异。结论:UBE和单通道内镜治疗腰椎管狭窄症的临床疗效和并发症发生率无明显差异。而UBE与单通道内镜组相比有着更短的手术时间。Objective: To compare the clinical efficacy of uniportal endoscoppic and biportal endoscopic (UBE) decompression for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis through meta-analysis. Methods: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase and Web of Science databases were searched (from the establishment of the database to October 2023) to compare the clinical studies on the clinical efficacy of uniportal and biportal endoscopy in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. The outcome indicators included in the study were extracted, including VAS score of lumbar and leg pain, postoperative ODI score, operation time, length of hospital stay, complication rate, and surgical excellence rate. Statistical analysis was performed using Revman 5.3 software. A fixed or random effects model was used with odds ratios (OR) for single rate and weighted mean difference (WMD) for continuous variables, and confidence intervals CI was 95%. Results: A total of 6 studies with 515 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with uniportal endoscopy, UBE surgery had a shorter operation time (WMD −12.37, 95%CI −22.15~2.6, P = 0.01). There was no significant difference between groups in VAS scores for low back pain (first day after surgery (WMD 0.27, 95%CI 0.29~0.82, P = 0.35), final follow-up (WMD −0.02, 95%CI 0.1~0.06, P = 0.63), and leg pain first day after surgery (WMD −0.17, 95%CI −0.43~0.09, P = 0.20), final follow-up (WMD 0.03, 95%CI −0.15~0.15, P = 0.51), ODI score (WMD −0.1, 95%CI −0.67~0.47, P = 0.73), complications (OR 0.72, 95%CI 0.37~1.41, P = 0.34), length of hospital stay (WMD −0.06, 95%CI 0.27~0.15, P = 0.56), and rate of excellent operation (OR 1.32, 95%CI 0.69~2.53, P = 0.56). Conclusion: There is no significant difference in clinical efficacy and complication rate between UBE and single channel endoscopy in the treatment of lumbar stenosis. Compared with the single channel endoscopic group, UBE has a shorter operation time.
文摘目的探讨单侧双通道脊柱内镜(UBE)治疗退行性腰椎疾病(DLD)术后疗效与影响因素关系。方法对2021年2月至2023年3月收治本科室的61例DLD患者进行回顾性分析,评价其术后疗效。随访时间12~38个月。男35个,女26个,年龄19~81岁,平均年龄54.4岁。手术节段均为单节段,共61节段。记录患者围手术期及手术并发症情况;随访以末次随访为终止时间。采用疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)、Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)和改良MacNab标准评价临床疗效;手术前后行腰椎CT三维重建检查,观察并测量关节突关节切除内侧角(β角);椎间盘类型按照分类定位系统MSU(Michgan State University)基于MRI横断位分A、B、C区,依据区域定位法FSU(Functional Spine Unit)基于MRI或CT横断位、矢状位分级1~4级;统计采用配对t检验,及方差分析。结果61例患者均顺利完成手术。其中行腰椎间盘突出手术61例,其中合并中央管狭窄29例,合并侧隐窝狭窄54例。术中出现硬膜囊撕裂2例。术后出现短暂性下肢麻木3例,类脊髓综合征1例,感染1例。患者术后随访(12~38)个月。术后随访时,患者腿部VAS、ODI较术前明显下降(P值均<0.05)。术后末次随访时依据改良MacNab标准,优良率为65.6%(40/61)。腰椎三维CT影像学方面,测量β角均小于90°,平均值83.59°,范围(66.72°~89.32°)。基于MSU分区,A区37例,B区15例,C区9例;基于FSU位置分级,分别为1级1例,2级25例,3级2例,合并1和2级26例,2和3级4例,1和2、3级3例。方差分析显示术后满意度与椎间盘分区及分级、β角无关,与术后疼痛及功能障碍指数相关。结论单侧双通道脊柱内镜治疗退行性腰椎疾病术后疗效可能与术后β角及椎间盘分区、分级无关。分级、分区越复杂,手术难度越大,早期开展这项技术遇到的困难可能越多。
