摘要
目的比较经皮内窥镜下腰椎间盘切除术(PELD)和开放手术治疗腰椎间盘突出症患者的疗效及其炎性因子水平。方法将240例腰椎间盘突出症患者根据治疗方法分为开放组(采用传统开窗治疗,115例)和PELD组(采用PELD治疗,125例)。比较两组患者术后3个月疼痛VAS评分;术后3个月的Mac Nab疗效评分;术前及术后24 h的炎性因子水平变化情况。结果两组术后3个月疼痛VAS评分均较术前1 d降低,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);术后3个月PELD组VAS评分低于开放组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组Mac Nab评分优良率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。术后24 h PELD组3项炎性因子水平均低于开放组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论 PELD创伤小、疗效确切且恢复快,是治疗腰椎间盘突出症的有效方法。
Objective To compare the clinical efficacy and inflammatory factor levels of patients with lumbar disc herniation treated with percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy.Methods Total 240 patients with lumbar disc herniation were divided into two groups to conduct retrospective analysis.The 115 patients in open group were treated with conventional treatment,and the 125 patients were treated with percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy （ PELD） as PELD group.The following data were compared between the two groups at the visual analogue scale （ VAS） of 3 months postoperation,MacNab efficacy scores of postoperative 3 months,and inflammatory factor levels in the preoperative and postoperative 24 h.Results The VAS of two groups at 3 months after the operation were ob-viously decreased,compared with 1 d before surgery,and the difference was significant （P〈0.05）.The postopera-tive 3 months VAS of the PELD group were lower than that of the open group,and the difference was significant （ P〈0.05）.And there was no statistical difference between the two groups with excellent-good rate of MacNab scores （P〉0.05）.At 24 h after operation,the 3 items levels of inflammatory factors in PELD group were lower than those in the open group,and the difference was significant （P〈0.05）.Conclusions PELD has advantages of small trau-ma,definite curative effect and quick recovery,which is an effective method in treatment of lumbar disc herniation,it is worthy of clinical application.
出处
《临床骨科杂志》
2017年第3期297-300,共4页
Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics
