Objectives： This study aimed to compare the learning curves of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy （PELD） in a transforaminal approach at the L4/5 and L5/S1 levels. Methods： We retrospectively reviewed the f...Objectives： This study aimed to compare the learning curves of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy （PELD） in a transforaminal approach at the L4/5 and L5/S1 levels. Methods： We retrospectively reviewed the first 60 cases at the L4/5 level （Group I） and the first 60 cases at the L5/S1 level （Group II） of PELD performed by one spine surgeon. The patients were divided into subgroups A, B, and C （Group I： A cases 1-20, B cases 21-40, C cases 41-60; Group I1： A cases 1-20, B cases 21-40, C cases 41-60）. Operation time was thoroughly analyzed. Results： Compared with the L4/5 level, the learning curve of transforaminal PELD at the L5/S1 level was flatter. The mean operation times of Groups IA, IB, and IC were （88.75±17.02）, （67.75±6.16）, and （64.85±7.82） min, respectively. There was a significant difference between Groups A and B （P〈0.05）, but no significant difference between Groups B and C （P=-0.20）. The mean operation times of Groups IIA, liB, and IIC were （117.25±13.62）, （109.50±11.20）, and （92.15±11.94） rain, respectively. There was no significant difference between Groups A and B （P=0.06）, but there was a significant difference between Groups B and C （P〈0.05）. There were 6 cases of postoperative dysesthesia （POD） in Group I and 2 cases in Group IIA （P=-0.27）. There were 2 cases of residual disc in Group I, and 4 cases in Group II （P=0.67）. There were 3 cases of recurrence in Group I, and 2 cases in Group II （P〉0.05）. Conclusions： Compared with the L5/S1 level, the learning curve of PELD in a transforaminal approach at the L4/5 level was steeper, suggesting that the L4/5 level might be easier to master after short-term professional training.展开更多
文摘Objectives： This study aimed to compare the learning curves of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy （PELD） in a transforaminal approach at the L4/5 and L5/S1 levels. Methods： We retrospectively reviewed the first 60 cases at the L4/5 level （Group I） and the first 60 cases at the L5/S1 level （Group II） of PELD performed by one spine surgeon. The patients were divided into subgroups A, B, and C （Group I： A cases 1-20, B cases 21-40, C cases 41-60; Group I1： A cases 1-20, B cases 21-40, C cases 41-60）. Operation time was thoroughly analyzed. Results： Compared with the L4/5 level, the learning curve of transforaminal PELD at the L5/S1 level was flatter. The mean operation times of Groups IA, IB, and IC were （88.75±17.02）, （67.75±6.16）, and （64.85±7.82） min, respectively. There was a significant difference between Groups A and B （P〈0.05）, but no significant difference between Groups B and C （P=-0.20）. The mean operation times of Groups IIA, liB, and IIC were （117.25±13.62）, （109.50±11.20）, and （92.15±11.94） rain, respectively. There was no significant difference between Groups A and B （P=0.06）, but there was a significant difference between Groups B and C （P〈0.05）. There were 6 cases of postoperative dysesthesia （POD） in Group I and 2 cases in Group IIA （P=-0.27）. There were 2 cases of residual disc in Group I, and 4 cases in Group II （P=0.67）. There were 3 cases of recurrence in Group I, and 2 cases in Group II （P〉0.05）. Conclusions： Compared with the L5/S1 level, the learning curve of PELD in a transforaminal approach at the L4/5 level was steeper, suggesting that the L4/5 level might be easier to master after short-term professional training.
