Objective To determine the contents of matrix metalloproteinase 3 (MMP-3) and interleukin 1 (IL-1) in the tissues of the lumbar disc herniation and to investigate their roles in the pathogenesis. Methods The tissues of the herniated lumbar disc were obtained from 30 patients undergoing surgery for persistent radiculopathy from June 2003 to December 2004 and at the same time these samples were divided into the following three experimentalgroups: the bulge group (n=11), the protrusion group (n=9), and the prolapsus group (n=10)，14 males, 16 females, aged 33.64 years. As the control group, 9 lumbar disc specimens were harvested from 9 patients(4 males, 5 females, aged 21-58 years) suffering from bursting fracture of the lumbar spine. The specimens were analyzed by the ELISA method for the contents of MMP-3 and IL-1. Results The contents of MMP-3(14.25±1.32, 19.89±2.97,20.69±2.18 ng/ml in the bulge group, protrusion group and prolapsus group, separately) and IL-1(8.52±0.22， 11.88±0.52，11.90±0.73 pg/ml in the bulge group, protrusion group and prolapsus group, separately) in the experimental groups were significantly higher than those in the control group. The contents of MMP-3 and IL-1 in the protrusion group were not significantly higher than those in the prolapsus group, but they were significantly higher than those in the bulge group(P＜0.01). The contents of MMP-3 had a significant relationship with the contents of IL-1 in the three experimental groups and the control group(P＜0.01). Conclusion The result demonstrates that the tissues of the lumbar disc herniation can produce both MMP-3 and IL-1, which may have an unknown but important relationship with each other.
目的:观察胶原酶治疗腰椎间盘突出的疗效。方法:对1218例不同程度的腰椎间盘突出患者进行椎旁穿刺,注入胶原酶1200u进行溶解治疗。结果:91%的患者取得较好疗效,9%的患者疗效欠佳。结论:胶原酶是治疗腰椎间盘突出的一种有效方法。
摘要:目的:探讨联合应用激光汽化减压(percutaneous laser disc discompression,PLDD)、射频热凝靶点消融、臭氧注射治疗腰椎间盘突出症的的个体化选择。方法: 自2006年6月,在CT引导下选择性联合应用PLDD、射频和臭氧治疗腰椎间盘突出症患者267例,突出椎间盘的特点个体化选择穿刺路径和治疗方法;其中PLDD联合臭氧治疗92例(A组),射频联合臭氧治疗67例(B组),PLDD、射频和臭氧三者联合治疗108例(C组)。结果:所有患者均顺利完成手术,于术后1周、1个月,3个月及6个月随访记录VAS评分和Macanab优良率。三组患者VAS评分经方差分析,手术前、后有显著性差异(Plt;0.05),术后1周至6个月的VAS评分统计无显著性差异(Pgt;0.05);术后三组间VAS评分、Macanab优良率比较无显著性差异(Pgt;0.05)。结论: 选择性联合应用微创技术进行个体化的立体治疗,具有扩大微创手术适应症、提高手术疗效的优势,值得推广和利用。Abstract: Objective: To investigate the selectivity and individualization of using percutaneous laser disc discompression(PLDD) and ozone injection combined with radiofrequency thermocoagulation and target ablation curing lumbar intervertebral disc protrusion. Methods: From June 2006, 267 lumbar disc herniation cases were operated that guided by CT, the characteristic of the liable disc was confirmed by magnetic resonance imaging and CT before the procedure. 92 cases (A group) were treated by PLDD combined with ozone injection,67 case were treated by radiofrequency thermocoagulation and target ablation combined with ozone injection, 108 cases were treated by PLDD and ozone injection combined with radiofrequency thermocoagulation and target ablation. Results: All case been successfully operated, the theraptic effect was evaluated by comparing the value of VAS and excellent and good rate of therapy at preoperation and at 1 week, 1month,3 months, 6 months after operation. The value of VAS in three groups at postoperation were remarkably lower than preoperation (Plt;0.05). The excellent and good rate of therapy at 6 months was respectively 94.5％ in group A,94.0％ in group B and 95.4％ in group C,no significant difference was observed between the three groups(Pgt;0.05).Conclusion: The selectivity and individualization of using PLDD and ozone injection combined with radiofrequency thermocoagulation and target ablation curing lumbar intervertebral disc protrusion can enlarge the indication and improve the clinical curative effect, it should be spreaded in clinic.
Objective To evaluate the efficacy of posterior approach discectomy with and without fusion in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation. Methods We searched MEDLINE (1950 to June 2007), OVID (1950 to April 2007), PUBMED, the China Biological Medicine Database (1978 to June 2007) and Wanfang Database (1981 to February 2007). We also handsearched several relevant journals for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomized controlled trials (quasi-RCTs) comparing posterior approach discectomy with and without fusion in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation. The quality of the included trials was assessed. The Cochrane Collaboration’s RevMan 4.2.8 software was used for statistical analysis. Results Nine eligible trials involving 1911 patients were included. The meta-analyses found no statistically significant differences between the two operative procedures in the incidence of postoperative leg pain [RR 0.94, 95%CI (0.69, 1.28)], the proportion of patients requiring re-operation [RR 0.77, 95% CI (0.57, 1.04)], the incidence of post-operative lumbar canal stenosis [RR 1.23, 95%CI (0.26, 5.86)], and the relapse rate at other intervertebral spaces [RR 1.05, 95%CI (0.49, 2.26)] (Pgt;0.05).There is statistically significant differences between the two group in the incidence of peri-operative complications [RR 1.46, 95%CI (1.06, 2.00)]. Discectomy plus fusion was superior to discectomy alone in incidence of postoperative back pain [RR 0.70, 95%CI (0.53, 0.94)], relapse rate at either intervertebral space [RR 0.30, 95%CI (0.18, 0.48)] and at the same intervertebral space [RR 0.12, 95%CI (0.04, 0.37)]. Conclusions Since all the included studies were controlled trials with a great potential for biases, high-quality, large-scale randomized controlled trials are required.
Objective To comprehensively investigate the incidence of resorption of lumbar disc herniation, and provide reference data for clinical decision-making. Methods Seven electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wangfang data and Chongqing VIP database) were searched for relevant studies that might have reported morphologic changes in lumbar disc herniation when reporting the follow-up results of patients with lumbar disc herniation treated non-surgically from inception to March, 2020. Articles were screened according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, and the total number of patients, number of patients with resorption, and other important data were extracted for analysis. Random effect models were used for meta-analysis, and subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis, meta-regression analysis, and Egger’s test were performed. Results A total of 15712 articles were identified from these databases, and 48 were eligible for analysis. A total of 2880 non-surgically treated patients with lumbar disc herniation were included in the meta-analysis, 1740 of whom presented resorption. Meta-analysis revealed that the incidence of resorption was 0.60 [95% confidence interval (CI) (0.46, 0.72)]. In subgroup analyses, studies that quantitatively measured the resorption of lumbar disc herniation yielded statistically higher pooled incidence [0.73, 95%CI (0.60, 0.85)] than those that used qualitative methods [0.51, 95%CI (0.34, 0.69)] (P=0.0252). The pooled incidence gradually increased in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) [0.50, 95%CI (0.15, 0.85)], non-RCT prospective studies [0.59, 95%CI (0.48, 0.70)] and retrospective studies [0.69, 95%CI (0.36, 0.95)], but the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.7523). The pooled incidence varied from 0.58 [95%CI (0.54, 0.71)] to 0.62 [95%CI (0.49, 0.74)] after the sequential omission of each single study. There was no significant change in the pooled incidence [0.62, 95%CI (0.43, 0.79)] when only low-risk RCTs and high-quality non-RCT studies were included, comparing with original meta-analysis results. Meta-regression showed that measurements partially caused heterogeneity (R2=15.34%, P=0.0858). Egger’s test suggested that there was no publication bias (P=0.4622). Conclusions According to current research, there is an overall incidence of resorption of 60% [95%CI (46%, 72%)] among non-surgically treated patients with lumbar disc herniation. The probability of resorption should be fully considered before making a decision on surgery.
Objective To compare microsurgery lumbar discectomy (MSLD) via posterior approach with traditional open discectomy by fenestration for single-level lumbar disc protrusion in terms of methodology and therapeutic effect. Methods From January 2001 to January 2008, 230 patients with single-level lumbar disc protrusion were randomized into two groups. In group A, 114 patients underwent MSLD, including 77 males and 37 females aged 15-76 years old (average 41 years old); the duration of the disease ranged from 6 months to 28 years (average 51 months); the lumbar disc protrusion involved L4,5 level in 52 cases, and L5 - S1 level in 62 cases; there were 50 cases of lumbar disc protrusion on the left side, 54 onthe right side, and 10 of the central type; preoperative JOA score was 6-18 points (average 11.8 points). In group B, 116 patients underwent traditional posterior open discectomy by fenestration, including 78 males and 38 females aged 14-78 years old (average 42 years old); the duration of the disease ranged from 8 months to 26 years (average 52 months); the lumbar disc protrusion involved L4,5 level in 56 cases, and L5 - S1 level in 60 cases; there were 53 cases of lumbar disc protrusion on the left side, 52 on the right side, and 11 of the central type; preoperative JOA score was 5-19 points (average 12.3 points). No significant difference was evident between two groups in terms of general information (P gt; 0.01). Parameters of operative time, volume of blood loss during operation, length of operative incision, length of hospital stay after operation, and total medical cost of single disease were analyzed. Therapeutic effect was assessed by postoperative JOA score during follow-up period. Results The operative time was (40 ± 9) minutes in group A and (47 ± 11) minutes in group B. The volume of blood loss during operation was (26 ± 5) mL in group A and (60 ± 6) mL in group B. The length of operative incision was (2.6 ± 0.8) cm in group A and (5.6 ± 0.5) cm in group B. The length of hospital stay after operation was (4.0 ± 2.6) days in group A and (8.0 ± 2.9) days in group B. The total medical cost of single disease was (5 500 ± 1 800) ￥ in group A and (6 300 ± 1 500) ￥ in group B. Significant difference was evident between two groups in terms of the above parameters (P lt; 0.01). The incisions in two groups all healed by first intention.No compl ications such as wrong orientation, nerve root injury, cauda equina injury, and infection occurred. The follow-upperiod was 12-37 months (average 26 months) for 102 patients of group A and 12-35 months (average 24 months) for 98 patients of group B. The JOA score 12 months after operation was 21-28 points (average 24.8 points) in group A and 22-27 points (average 25.2 points) in group B, showing a significant difference when compared with preoperative score (P lt; 0.01), and no significant difference between two groups (P gt; 0.01). Conclusion Two methods have similar cl inical outcomes, but MSLD has merits of minimal invasion, less blood loss, shorter operative time, shorter length of hospital stay, and lower medical cost. It is one of ideal minimally invasive operations for single-level lumbar disc protrusion．
To compare the effectiveness of microdiscectomy and macrodiscectomy on the single-level lumbar disc protrusion (LDP). Methods Between November 2002 and October 2005, 241 patients with LDP underwent 2 surgical procedures: microdiscectomy (group A, 93 cases) and macrodiscectomy (group B, 148 cases). All patients had singlelevel LDP. In group A, there were 51 males and 42 females with an average age of 32.3 yeares (range, 18-47 years); there were 23cases of protrusion, 52 cases of prolapse, and 18 cases of sequestration with an average disease duration of 8.5 months (range, 1-18 months), including 8 cases at L2,3 level, 11 cases at L3,4 level, 35 cases at L4,5 level, and 39 cases at L5, S1 level. In group B, there were 81 males and 67 females with an average age of 31.8 years (range, 16-50 years); there were 37 cases of protrusion, 85 cases of prolapse, and 26 cases of sequestration with an average disease duration of 9.3 months (range, 1-20 months), including 9 cases at L2,3 level, 15 cases at L3,4 level, 63 cases at L4,5 level, and 61 cases at L5, S1 level. There was no significant difference in age, sex, segment level, type, or disease duration between 2 groups (P gt; 0.05). Results Immediate back and sciatic pain rel ief was achieved in 225 (93.4%) patients after operation. The satisfactory rates were 91.4% in group A and 87.8% in group B at 1 week after operation, showing no significant difference (P gt; 0.05). The length of incision, amount of bleeding, amount of drainage, and hospital ization time in group A were significantly fewer than those in group B (P lt; 0.05); while the operative time in group A was longer than that in group B, but showing no significant difference (P gt; 0.05). Dural laceration occurred in 4 cases of groupA and 5 cases of group B, superficial infections of incision occurred in 5 cases of group B and intervertebral space nfections occurred in 4 cases of group B, and epidural hematoma occurred in 1 case of group A. The perioperative compl ication rate (5.4%, 5/93) in group A was significantly lower (P lt; 0.05) than that in group B (9.5%, 14/148). LDP recurred in 4 cases (4.3%) of group A and in 9 cases (6.1%) of group B postoperatively, showing no significant difference (P gt; 0.05); of them, 11 cases received second operation and 2 cases were treated conservatively. All cases were followed up 36-77 months (mean, 51.4 months). There were significant differences in visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry disabil ity index (ODI) between 2 groups at the last follow-up and preoperation (P gt; 0.05), but there was significant difference in VAS at 1 week postoperatively between 2 groups (P lt; 0.05). VAS and ODI were obviously improved at 1 week and last follow-up when compared with preoperation (P lt; 0.05). There was no significant difference in the improvement rates of VAS and ODI between 2 groups at last follow-up (P gt; 0.05). According to cl inical evaluation of Modified Macnab criteria, the excellent and good rate was 90.3% in group A and 86.5% in group B at final follow-up (P gt; 0.05). Conclusion Both macrodiscectomy and microdiscectomy are effective for LDP, furthermore microdiscectomy is less invasive than macrodiscectomy. Microdiscectomy is recommended to treat single-level LDP.
To assess long-term outcomes of reoperation for recurrent lumbar disc herniation, and to compare results of different methods. Methods There were 95 patients who had reoperation for recurrent lumbar discherniation between February 1998 to February 2003, among whom a total of 89 (93.7%) were followed up and their primary data were reviewed. There were 76 patients, with the mean age of 42 years (range from 23 to 61), who met the inclusion criteria and were included. Among them, there were 55 males and 21 females. All patients had the history of more than one sciatic nervepain. The mean recurrent time was 69 months(range from 8 to 130 months). There were 48 patients in L4,5 and 28 patients in L5, S1, of whom we chose 30 to undergo larger vertebral plate discectomy (or two-side fenestration) and nucleus pulpose discectomy (group A), 24 to undergo the whole vertebral discectomy (group B) and 22 to undergo the whole vertebral discectomy and 360degrees intervertebral fusion(group C). The patients’ cl inical results in the three groups were compared, and the cl inical curative effects were evaluated by using cl inical functional assessment standard. Results Cl inical outcomes were excellent or good in 80.3% of the patients, including 80.0% of group A, 79.2% of group B and 81.8% of group C. There was no significant difference in each group (P gt; 0.05). These three groups were not different in age, pain-free interval and follow-up duration (P gt; 0.05). The mean intraoperative blood losses in the three groups were (110.7 ± 98.8), (278.7 ± 256.3), (350.7 ± 206.1) mL, respectively. The mean surgery time were (65.9 ± 22.8), (111.6 ± 24.3), (127.3 ± 26.7) minutes, respectively, and the mean hospital ization time were (6.7 ± 1.4), (10.2 ± 1.8), (12.2 ± 2.3) days, respectively. Group A was significantly less than group B or C (P lt; 0.05) and there was no significant difference between group B and C. All the patients were followed up for 36 to 96 months with an average of 86 months, and with (87.6 ± 27.0), (84.5 ± 19.8), (83.6 ± 13.5) months of group A, B and C, respectively. At the endof the follow-up, there were more cases of spinal instabil ity at the same level in group B (19 patients) than in group A (1 patient) or group C (no patient) in X-ray, and the difference was significant (P lt; 0.05). Conclusion Reoperation for recurrent lumbar disc herniation is effective. Larger vertebral plate discectomy or tow-side fenestration is recommended for managing recurrent lumbar disc herniation.
Objective To investigate the effectiveness of unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy (UBED), percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD), and traditional fenestration discectomy (FD) in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation (LDH). Methods The clinical data of 347 LDH patients who met the selection criteria and underwent discectomy between January 2017 and December 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. They were divided into FD group (160 cases), PELD group (86 cases), and UBED group (101 cases) according to operation methods. There was no significant difference in gender, age, surgical level distribution, disease duration, and preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) score and Oswestry disability index (ODI) between groups (P>0.05). The operation time, hospitalization stay, treatment cost, and incidence of surgery-related complications were recorded and compared between groups. The patients’ pain and functional recovery were evaluated by VAS score and ODI before and after operation. Results The operation time of FD group was significantly shorter than that of PELD group and UBED group, and the hospitalization stay was significantly longer than that of PELD group and UBED group (P<0.05); there was no significant difference between PELD group and UBED group (P>0.05). The treatment cost in UBED group was significantly higher than that in PELD group, and in PELD group than in FD group (P<0.05). All the patients were followed up 6-24 months, with an average of 14.6 months. VAS score of lower extremity and ODI in 3 groups significantly improved after operation when compared with that before operation (P<0.05). At 1 day after operation, VAS score of lower extremity of UBED group was significantly better than that in PELD group and FD group (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference between PELD group and FD group (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in VAS scores of lower extremity between the 3 groups at 1 and 3 months after operation (P>0.05). The difference of ODI before and after operation in FD group and UBED group was slightly better than that in PELD group (P<0.05), and there was no significant difference between FD group and UBED group (P>0.05). Incidence of surgery-related complications in FD group (20.0%) was significantly higher than that in PELD group (12.8%) and UBED group (6.9%), and PELD group was significantly higher than UBED group (P<0.05). All the incision infection occurred in FD group (12 cases), symptomatic disc cyst and myeloid hypertension-like occurred in 1 case each in PELD group.Conclusion UBED, PELD, and FD have similar effectiveness on lower extremity pain in early LDH. Compared with FD, UBED and PELD have the advantage of shorter hospitalization stay and fewer complications.
ObjectiveTo investigate the difference between four transforaminal endoscopic approaches in the treatment of serious lumbar disc herniation.MethodsBetween October 2010 and February 2015, a total of 122 patients with serious lumbar disc herniation were enrolled and treated with discectomy under transforaminal endoscope. The patients were divided into 4 groups according to the different approaches. The transforaminal endoscopic spine system (TESSYS) technology was used in group A (31 cases), Yeung endoscopic spine system (YESS) technology was used in group B (30 cases), improved transforaminal endoscopic access (ITEA) technology was used in group C (31 cases), and interlaminar dorsal access (IDA) technology was used in group D (30 cases). There was no significant difference in gender, age, disease duration, lesion segment, and preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) score of low back pain, VAS score of bilateral lower extremities pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI), intervertebral height, lumbar curvature index (LCI), and disc degeneration grading between groups (P>0.05). The removal volume of nucleus pulposus was compared; after operation, VAS score, ODI score, LCI, intervertebral height, and disc degeneration grading were used to evaluate the effectiveness.ResultsThe removal volumes of nucleus pulposus in groups A, B, C, and D were (3.6±0.9), (3.5±0.7), (4.6±1.0), (3.1±1.1) cm3, respectively. There were significant differences between groups (P<0.05). All incisions healed by first intention, and no early postoperative complications was found. All cases were followed up 12-35 months, with an average of 24 months. During follow-up, there was no recurrence of nucleus pulposus herniation, infection of intervertebral space, cerebrospinal fluid leakage, epidural hematoma, or other complications. At last follow-up, the VAS scores of low back pain and bilateral lower extremities pain, and ODI scores in each group significantly improved when compared with those before operation (P<0.05); there was no significant difference in the scores and improvements between groups after operation (P>0.05). At last follow-up, the disc degeneration grading in group B significantly improved when compared with that before operation (P<0.05); there was no significant difference between groups (P>0.05). At last follow-up, there was no significant difference in LCI of each group when compared with that before operation (P>0.05); and there was no significant difference in LCI and loss value between groups (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in the intervertebral height of the 4 groups at immediate after operation and last follow-up when compared with preoperative value (P>0.05), and there was no significant difference between groups at immediate after operation and last follow-up (P>0.05).ConclusionApplication of transforaminal endoscope in the treatment of serious lumbar disc herniation has great clinical outcomes. The ITEA technology can obtain a wider field of view and be more convenient to find and remove the degenerative nucleus pulposus. However, the appropriate approach should be selected according to the symptoms and characteristics of lumbar disc herniation.