COMPARISON OF ENDOSCOPIC AND MICROSURGICAL METHODS IN THE TREATMENT OF LUMBAR DISC HERNIATIONS
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2017 |
Outros Autores: | , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Coluna/Columna |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1808-18512017000300202 |
Resumo: | ABSTRACT Objective: The development of minimally invasive spine surgery leads us to reflect on the efficiency of new methods compared with older ones. In the case of endoscopic spine surgery, we always seek to compare our results using new techniques with the results of older and trusted microsurgical techniques. Unfortunately, there are few reliable studies measuring endoscopic and microsurgical approaches. We therefore decided to compare our treatment results with those of what are, in our opinion, the best and most thorough studies found. Furthermore, we found no illustrated experience in the usability of endoscopic methods. We therefore analyzed each step of the technique used, according to the practical experience with microsurgical discectomy. Methods: We compared our two-year experience of treatment of 183 patients with lumbar disc herniations using the endoscopic technique, with data reported in the literature on microsurgical minimally invasive methods. Results: Our group achieved good to excellent results in 92.9% of cases (170 patients) compared to 90% reported in the literature. We compared the capabilities of endoscopic discectomy with microsurgical methods, and concluded that the endoscopic method is sufficient to perform any movement inside the surgical field that is microscopically possible. It is also possible to perform any type of spinal cord decompression, with better visualization provided by the endoscope. Conclusions: We conclude that endoscopic microdiscectomy is a good and reliable alternative, with better outcomes and more efficient usage of the approach space. |
id |
SBCO-1_4abbe0aeb66bf4e11f52a92b49cdc53b |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S1808-18512017000300202 |
network_acronym_str |
SBCO-1 |
network_name_str |
Coluna/Columna |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
COMPARISON OF ENDOSCOPIC AND MICROSURGICAL METHODS IN THE TREATMENT OF LUMBAR DISC HERNIATIONSHerniated discEndoscopySpineSurgeryABSTRACT Objective: The development of minimally invasive spine surgery leads us to reflect on the efficiency of new methods compared with older ones. In the case of endoscopic spine surgery, we always seek to compare our results using new techniques with the results of older and trusted microsurgical techniques. Unfortunately, there are few reliable studies measuring endoscopic and microsurgical approaches. We therefore decided to compare our treatment results with those of what are, in our opinion, the best and most thorough studies found. Furthermore, we found no illustrated experience in the usability of endoscopic methods. We therefore analyzed each step of the technique used, according to the practical experience with microsurgical discectomy. Methods: We compared our two-year experience of treatment of 183 patients with lumbar disc herniations using the endoscopic technique, with data reported in the literature on microsurgical minimally invasive methods. Results: Our group achieved good to excellent results in 92.9% of cases (170 patients) compared to 90% reported in the literature. We compared the capabilities of endoscopic discectomy with microsurgical methods, and concluded that the endoscopic method is sufficient to perform any movement inside the surgical field that is microscopically possible. It is also possible to perform any type of spinal cord decompression, with better visualization provided by the endoscope. Conclusions: We conclude that endoscopic microdiscectomy is a good and reliable alternative, with better outcomes and more efficient usage of the approach space.Sociedade Brasileira de Coluna2017-09-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1808-18512017000300202Coluna/Columna v.16 n.3 2017reponame:Coluna/Columnainstname:Sociedade Brasileira de Coluna (SBCO)instacron:SBCO10.1590/s1808-185120171603182333info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessARESTOV,SERGEYKASHCHEEV,ALEXEYGUSHCHA,ARTEMeng2017-10-09T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1808-18512017000300202Revistahttps://www.revistacoluna.org/ONGhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpcoluna.columna@uol.com.br||revistacoluna@uol.com.br2177-014X1808-1851opendoar:2017-10-09T00:00Coluna/Columna - Sociedade Brasileira de Coluna (SBCO)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
COMPARISON OF ENDOSCOPIC AND MICROSURGICAL METHODS IN THE TREATMENT OF LUMBAR DISC HERNIATIONS |
title |
COMPARISON OF ENDOSCOPIC AND MICROSURGICAL METHODS IN THE TREATMENT OF LUMBAR DISC HERNIATIONS |
spellingShingle |
COMPARISON OF ENDOSCOPIC AND MICROSURGICAL METHODS IN THE TREATMENT OF LUMBAR DISC HERNIATIONS ARESTOV,SERGEY Herniated disc Endoscopy Spine Surgery |
title_short |
COMPARISON OF ENDOSCOPIC AND MICROSURGICAL METHODS IN THE TREATMENT OF LUMBAR DISC HERNIATIONS |
title_full |
COMPARISON OF ENDOSCOPIC AND MICROSURGICAL METHODS IN THE TREATMENT OF LUMBAR DISC HERNIATIONS |
title_fullStr |
COMPARISON OF ENDOSCOPIC AND MICROSURGICAL METHODS IN THE TREATMENT OF LUMBAR DISC HERNIATIONS |
title_full_unstemmed |
COMPARISON OF ENDOSCOPIC AND MICROSURGICAL METHODS IN THE TREATMENT OF LUMBAR DISC HERNIATIONS |
title_sort |
COMPARISON OF ENDOSCOPIC AND MICROSURGICAL METHODS IN THE TREATMENT OF LUMBAR DISC HERNIATIONS |
author |
ARESTOV,SERGEY |
author_facet |
ARESTOV,SERGEY KASHCHEEV,ALEXEY GUSHCHA,ARTEM |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
KASHCHEEV,ALEXEY GUSHCHA,ARTEM |
author2_role |
author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
ARESTOV,SERGEY KASHCHEEV,ALEXEY GUSHCHA,ARTEM |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Herniated disc Endoscopy Spine Surgery |
topic |
Herniated disc Endoscopy Spine Surgery |
description |
ABSTRACT Objective: The development of minimally invasive spine surgery leads us to reflect on the efficiency of new methods compared with older ones. In the case of endoscopic spine surgery, we always seek to compare our results using new techniques with the results of older and trusted microsurgical techniques. Unfortunately, there are few reliable studies measuring endoscopic and microsurgical approaches. We therefore decided to compare our treatment results with those of what are, in our opinion, the best and most thorough studies found. Furthermore, we found no illustrated experience in the usability of endoscopic methods. We therefore analyzed each step of the technique used, according to the practical experience with microsurgical discectomy. Methods: We compared our two-year experience of treatment of 183 patients with lumbar disc herniations using the endoscopic technique, with data reported in the literature on microsurgical minimally invasive methods. Results: Our group achieved good to excellent results in 92.9% of cases (170 patients) compared to 90% reported in the literature. We compared the capabilities of endoscopic discectomy with microsurgical methods, and concluded that the endoscopic method is sufficient to perform any movement inside the surgical field that is microscopically possible. It is also possible to perform any type of spinal cord decompression, with better visualization provided by the endoscope. Conclusions: We conclude that endoscopic microdiscectomy is a good and reliable alternative, with better outcomes and more efficient usage of the approach space. |
publishDate |
2017 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2017-09-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1808-18512017000300202 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1808-18512017000300202 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/s1808-185120171603182333 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Sociedade Brasileira de Coluna |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Sociedade Brasileira de Coluna |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Coluna/Columna v.16 n.3 2017 reponame:Coluna/Columna instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Coluna (SBCO) instacron:SBCO |
instname_str |
Sociedade Brasileira de Coluna (SBCO) |
instacron_str |
SBCO |
institution |
SBCO |
reponame_str |
Coluna/Columna |
collection |
Coluna/Columna |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Coluna/Columna - Sociedade Brasileira de Coluna (SBCO) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
coluna.columna@uol.com.br||revistacoluna@uol.com.br |
_version_ |
1752126615555407872 |