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.
Keywords:
Herniated disc; Endoscopy; Spine; Surgery
