Early outcomes of 270-degree spinal canal decompression by using TESSYS-ISEE technique in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis combined with disk herniation
Traditional open approach is an efficient way to treat lumbar spinal stenosis (SS) combined with disk herniation (DH); however, risk factors such as advanced age, osteoporosis etc. are associated with the complications after the surgery. This study aims to analyze the early clinical and radiological outcomes of treatment on SS&DH by using newly developed minimal invasive TESSYS-ISEE technique.
Patients with limp and unilateral lower limb radiculopathy underwent minimal invasive surgery by using TESSYS-ISEE technique. The visual analogue scale score (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were evaluated before operation and 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery. The clinical global outcomes were also evaluated using modified MacNab criteria after surgery.
A total of 32 cases underwent operation by using TESSYS-ISEE technique from December 2016 to December 2017. The mean age for the study group was 53.9 ± 11.14 years and the ratio between male and female was 1.29:1; Mean follow-up of the study was 7.78 ± 3.48 months and mean estimated blood loss was 11.41 ± 4.79 mL per-level. VAS leg score improved from 8.44 ± 0.98 to 2.18 ± 0.75 (P < 0.001), VAS back score improved from 4.44 ± 0.95 to 1.57 ± 0.54 (P < 0.001), and ODI improved from 73.88 ± 5.95 to 29.04 ± 7.48 (P < 0.001). The success rate was 90.7%. There were no serious complications during follow-up. Two patients experienced dysesthesia and one patient required revision surgery.
It is safe and minimal-invasively to treat SS&DH by using TESSYS-ISEE technique. However, potential complications still require careful consideration and further evaluation.
KeywordsEndoscopy Disk herniation Lateral recess stenosis Central stenosis Nerve root decompression
This work is supported by the Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No 81401802) and the funds from National Health and Family Planning Commission of Wuhan Municipality and China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (Grant No 2016M593043).
CX and FX worked on conception and study design. HK and HH performed the operation. CX played a role in data analysis and interpretation. TL and JH drafted the manuscript. All authors played a role in critical review and revision of final manuscript for important intellectual content.
Conflict of interest
No conflict of interest was declared.
- 3.Foley KT (1997) Microendoscopic discectomy. Tech Neurosurg 3:301–307Google Scholar
- 6.Yoon SM, Ahn S-S, Kim KH, Kim YD, Cho JH, Kim D-H (2012) Comparative study of the outcomes of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy and microscopic lumbar discectomy using the tubular retractor system based on the VAS, ODI, and SF-36. Korean J Spine 9:215–222CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 8.Kim HS, Patel R, Paudel B, Jang J-S, Jang I-T, Oh S-H, Park JE, Lee S (2017) Early outcomes of endoscopic contralateral foraminal and lateral recess decompression via an interlaminar approach in patients with unilateral radiculopathy from unilateral foraminal stenosis. World Neurosurg 108:763–773CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 10.Wiltse LL, Newman PH, Macnab I (1976) Classification of spondylolisis and spondylolisthesis. Clin Orthop 117:23–29Google Scholar
- 14.Daffner SD, Vaccaro AR (2003) Adult degenerative lumbar scoliosis. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead, NJ) 32:77–82; discussion 82Google Scholar
- 20.Manfrè L, Cartolari R, Trasimeni G, Cristaudo C (2007) Spinal instability—axial loaded imaging of the spine. In: Van Goethem JWM, van den Hauwe L, Parizel PM (eds) Spinal imaging. Medical radiology (Diagnostic imaging). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 211–233Google Scholar
- 22.Postacchini FCG, Perugia D, Gumina S (1993) The surgical treatment of central lumbar stenosis. Multiple laminotomy compared with total laminectomy. Bone Joint J 75:386–392Google Scholar
- 25.Ruetten SKM, Godolias G (2006) A new full-endoscopic technique for the interlaminar operation of lumbar disc herniations using 6-mm endoscopes: prospective 2-year results of 331 patients. min-Minimally Invasive. Neurosurgery 49:80–87Google Scholar
- 26.Choi KCKJRK et al (2013) Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy for L5-S1 disc herniation: transforaminal versus interlaminar approach. Pain Phys 16:547–556Google Scholar
- 27.Hamanishi C, Matukura N, Fujita M, Tomihara M, Tanaka S (1994) Cross-sectional area of the stenotic lumbar dural tube measured from the transverse views of magnetic resonance imaging. J Spinal Disord Tech 7:388–393Google Scholar
- 30.Parker SL, Adogwa O, Paul AR, Anderson WN, Aaronson O, Cheng JS, McGirt MJ (2011) Utility of minimum clinically important difference in assessing pain, disability, and health state after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. J Neurosurg Spine 14:598–604CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 31.Komp M, Hahn P, Merk H, Godolias G, Ruetten S (2011) Bilateral operation of lumbar degenerative central spinal stenosis in full-endoscopic interlaminar technique with unilateral approach: prospective 2-year results of 74 patients. Clin Spine Surg 24:281–287Google Scholar