Comparing percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy and micro-endoscopic discectomy in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort and RCT

比较经皮椎间孔镜下椎间盘切除术和微创椎间盘切除术治疗腰椎间盘突出症:队列研究和随机对照试验的最新系统评价和荟萃分析

阅读:1

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) and micro-endoscopic discectomy (MED) are common minimally invasive techniques for lumbar disc herniation (LDH). This updated systematic review and meta-analysis compare both procedures, incorporating studies published since 2019. METHODS: Following PRISMA guidelines, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar were searched for cohort studies and randomized controlled trials comparing PTED and MED. Primary outcomes were Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores. Secondary outcomes included hospital stay, intraoperative blood loss, complications, and recurrence. The review protocol was prospectively registered in the PROSPERO database (Registration ID: CRD42025110). RESULTS: Thirteen studies (n = 2453) were included in the meta-analysis. No significant differences were found in ODI at 6 months, 1 year, or 2 years. However, PTED consistently showed greater reduction in back pain (VAS), with significant differences at 6 months (MD = -0.34), 1 year (MD = -0.59), and 2 years (MD = -0.48). No significant differences were found for leg pain (VAS) at any time point. PTED was also associated with shorter hospital stays (MD = -2.69 days) and reduced intraoperative blood loss (MD = -12.94 ml). Complication and recurrence rates were comparable between groups (RR = 0.84 and 1.10, respectively). High heterogeneity was noted for VAS back pain, hospital stay, blood loss, and recurrence (I(2) = 60-99%). CONCLUSION: PTED and MED yield comparable long-term functional outcomes and safety. PTED provides more sustained back pain relief, faster recovery, less blood loss, and shorter hospitalization, whereas MED may offer advantages in lower radiation exposure and cost. Overall, PTED is a safe and effective alternative to MED, and the choice of technique should be guided by patient characteristics, resource availability, and surgeon expertise.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。