焦 偉 申才良 崔西龍 吳 昊 張 偉 梁成民 于海洋 董福龍
·臨床研究·
內(nèi)窺鏡下經(jīng)椎弓根肩上入路治療重度遠(yuǎn)端脫垂腰椎間盤突出癥
焦 偉①②申才良①崔西龍②吳 昊②張 偉②梁成民②于海洋②董福龍①
椎間孔鏡; 重度; 遠(yuǎn)端脫垂; 腰椎間盤突出; 經(jīng)椎弓根肩上入路
經(jīng)椎間孔入路經(jīng)皮內(nèi)鏡椎間盤切除術(shù)(percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy,PELD)具有創(chuàng)傷小、出血少、康復(fù)快等優(yōu)點(diǎn)[1],但對于向遠(yuǎn)端高度脫垂的椎間盤突出,因鏡下視野局限,很難徹底切除,導(dǎo)致髓核殘余,手術(shù)效果差,曾被視為椎間孔鏡技術(shù)手術(shù)禁忌證[2,3]。Hoogland設(shè)計的經(jīng)椎間孔關(guān)節(jié)突關(guān)節(jié)擴(kuò)大成形術(shù)TESSYS(Transforaminal Endoscopic Spine System)技術(shù),通過椎間孔鉸刀咬除部分上關(guān)節(jié)突下緣、擴(kuò)大椎間孔,達(dá)到對游離髓核的摘除[4]。但即使采用此項(xiàng)技術(shù),對于向遠(yuǎn)端高度游離脫垂型,亦不能確保無髓核殘留,易導(dǎo)致手術(shù)失敗。2012年11月~2015年8月,針對阜陽市人民醫(yī)院14例此類型椎間盤突出,我們采用經(jīng)椎弓根肩上入路,結(jié)合內(nèi)鏡技術(shù)磨除部分椎弓根,直視下徹底清除高度游離脫垂的髓核,獲得滿意的影像學(xué)及臨床效果,現(xiàn)探討其可行性及技術(shù)要點(diǎn)并報道如下。
1.1 一般資料
本組14例,男13例,女1例。年齡38~71歲,平均53歲。均有單側(cè)肢體放射痛,8例伴支配區(qū)麻木,病程20天~8年。術(shù)前MRI示游離髓核向遠(yuǎn)端脫垂,游離超過下位椎體椎弓根1/2以遠(yuǎn),突出節(jié)段L2/31例,L3/41例,L4/58例,L5/S14例。均為Lee分型[5]重度遠(yuǎn)端脫垂型(圖1)。復(fù)發(fā)性突出1例,為L4/5行開窗減壓髓核摘除術(shù)后復(fù)發(fā)。
病例納入標(biāo)準(zhǔn):有完整術(shù)前影像學(xué)資料并與臨床癥狀相符;主訴單側(cè)肢體放射痛或伴有支配區(qū)麻木等神經(jīng)根受壓癥狀;游離髓核向遠(yuǎn)端脫垂,游離超過下位椎體椎弓根1/2以遠(yuǎn)并與臨床體征符合;正規(guī)保守治療6周癥狀無改善或癥狀進(jìn)行性加重。
病例排除標(biāo)準(zhǔn):馬尾綜合征;合并椎管發(fā)育不良中央型狹窄(<10 mm);髂骨過高(側(cè)位片髂嵴高度超過L4椎弓根中線以上)的L5/S1椎間盤突出;責(zé)任節(jié)段伴滑脫、腰椎不穩(wěn)或畸形。
1.2 手術(shù)方法
俯臥位,局部麻醉,心電監(jiān)護(hù),C形臂X線機(jī)引導(dǎo)下完成穿刺及工作管道置入。棘突中央旁開12~16 cm局麻進(jìn)針(其中L2/3、L3/4旁開12~13 cm,L4/5旁開13~14 cm,L5/S1旁開14~15 cm,體胖者適度延長1 cm),水平10°~15°夾角穿刺向患側(cè)下位椎體椎弓根肩部,并根據(jù)術(shù)前測量患側(cè)椎弓根肩部與對側(cè)椎弓根下緣夾角調(diào)整為矢狀位角度(圖2)。皮膚、筋膜層與骨性結(jié)構(gòu)周圍采用0.5%利多卡因分層浸潤麻醉,術(shù)中輔助靜滴氟比洛芬酯100 mg。穿刺靶點(diǎn)正位透視位于患側(cè)下位椎弓根肩部并與對側(cè)椎弓根下緣連線為直線,側(cè)位透視位于椎弓根切際上,透視引導(dǎo)下先后將18號穿刺針、導(dǎo)絲置入靶點(diǎn),于進(jìn)針點(diǎn)做8 mm皮膚切口,導(dǎo)絲引導(dǎo)下逐級擴(kuò)張軟組織,為避免損傷腹腔臟器,先由擴(kuò)張引導(dǎo)棒潛行擴(kuò)張,后采用環(huán)鋸清除椎間孔內(nèi)韌帶軟組織,磨鉆或動力系統(tǒng)去除椎弓根肩上部分,在軟組織擴(kuò)張與磨除椎弓根肩部過程中可適時微調(diào)穿刺靶點(diǎn)至滿意位置,緊貼已磨除部分椎弓根肩部沿纖維環(huán)、后縱韌帶之后置入工作鞘管,行椎間盤髓核藍(lán)染造影,脫出髓核直接暴露于鏡下。首先摘除脫出髓核,顯露確認(rèn)鏡下解剖關(guān)系,進(jìn)一步清除鏡下遠(yuǎn)近端松動或游離髓核碎片,確認(rèn)硬膜囊搏動及其與纖維環(huán)后緣之間隙,如為旁中央型、中央型脫出,須顯露后縱韌帶并探查其深、淺面。等離子射頻消融、止血、纖維環(huán)成形,同時松解纖維環(huán)與硬膜囊之間隙,以利于根據(jù)脫出方向?qū)⒐ぷ髑使芟蝾^端或尾端于椎管內(nèi)傾斜,此時部分鞘管斜面位于椎體后方。先采用等離子刀頭松解脫出物周圍,盡可能將其大塊完整取出,如脫出物碎裂無法整塊取出,可先通過環(huán)鉆擴(kuò)大的椎弓根肩部,然后減少工作管道與棘突正中線夾角即調(diào)整矢狀位角度,同時結(jié)合漂浮擺動技術(shù)[6],使工作管道在椎管內(nèi)漂浮,反復(fù)用可屈曲等離子刀頭探查椎弓根內(nèi)側(cè)區(qū)域,聯(lián)合使用可彎曲Pocnch鉗摘除脫出髓核。如患者疼痛麻木癥狀消失、鏡下神經(jīng)根血管充盈、硬膜囊復(fù)膨良好、取出脫出物量與術(shù)前影像學(xué)相符,則可結(jié)束手術(shù)。
1.3 術(shù)后處理及觀察指標(biāo)
術(shù)后抗炎、脫水、營養(yǎng)神經(jīng)等常規(guī)治療,次日戴腰圍下床行走。術(shù)后即刻復(fù)查三維CT或MRI了解脫出髓核摘除和椎弓根肩部磨除情況,術(shù)后1~2天出院,戴腰圍6周。術(shù)后1個月、3個月、半年、1年、2年定期復(fù)查,采用MacNab療效評定、視覺模擬評分(visual analogue scale,VAS)、Oswestry功能障礙指數(shù)(Oswestry disability index,ODI)評價療效。
1.4 統(tǒng)計學(xué)分析
采用SPSS18.0進(jìn)行統(tǒng)計學(xué)分析,采用方差分析對術(shù)前、術(shù)后及末次隨訪時ODI、VAS評分進(jìn)行比較,P<0.05為差異有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義。
圖1 游離脫垂Lee分型[5] 圖2 常規(guī)TESSYS入路與經(jīng)椎弓根入路的穿刺路徑 圖3 患者男,38歲,L5/S1椎間盤脫垂。a、b.術(shù)前腰椎MRI示L5/S1椎間盤脫出向右后突出并向遠(yuǎn)端脫垂至下位椎體椎弓根及以遠(yuǎn)水平;c、d.術(shù)中穿刺至患側(cè)下位椎體椎弓根肩部,即靶點(diǎn)正位與對側(cè)椎弓根下緣連線為直線,側(cè)位透視位于椎弓根上切際水平;e. Pocnch鉗摘除髓核、減壓;f.鏡下顯示神經(jīng)減壓充分;g.術(shù)后第2天復(fù)查CT見下位椎弓根上切跡內(nèi)下壁被磨除;h、i.術(shù)后第2天復(fù)查MRI顯示脫垂的椎間盤消失,神經(jīng)減壓徹底;j. Pocnch鉗頭端設(shè)計便于髓核摘除 圖4 患者男,38歲,L4/5椎間盤脫垂。a、b.腰椎MRI顯示L4/5左側(cè)髓核脫垂至L5椎弓根,神經(jīng)根卡壓明顯;c、d.定位穿刺至L5椎弓根肩部;e.鏡下顯示神經(jīng)根游離,神經(jīng)減壓充分;f.術(shù)后第2天復(fù)查CT見椎弓根肩部及內(nèi)側(cè)緣磨除;g、h.術(shù)后第2天復(fù)查腰椎MRI顯示神經(jīng)減壓充分,脫垂的髓核消失
表1 手術(shù)前后腰、腿痛VAS評分及ODI比較(n=14)
3.1 內(nèi)鏡下重度遠(yuǎn)端脫垂型椎間盤突出的治療
椎間盤游離脫垂占椎間盤突出的35%~72%,重度游離脫垂為13%~25%,以向下游離居多[7]。按Lee等[5]的分類法,脫出位于下位椎體上終板與下位椎弓根中段之間為輕度遠(yuǎn)端脫垂,超過下位椎弓根中部為重度遠(yuǎn)端脫垂。重度遠(yuǎn)端脫垂曾一度被認(rèn)為是椎間孔鏡手術(shù)禁忌證。隨著內(nèi)窺鏡技術(shù)的發(fā)展,雙工作通道技術(shù)使手術(shù)指征擴(kuò)大,能解決部分脫垂型椎間盤,但明顯增加手術(shù)時間及放射量,且到達(dá)椎弓根中部時管道無法擺動[8,9],容易殘留部分髓核。經(jīng)椎板間入路治療重度游離脫垂型椎間盤突出可取得不錯的療效,但在黃韌帶咬除后無黃韌帶保護(hù)下該入路對硬膜損傷風(fēng)險大,容易出現(xiàn)腦脊液漏[10]。Choi等[11]通過L5/S1椎板間入路治療L4/5髓核向下重度游離,但前提是L5/S1患側(cè)椎間孔足夠大,至少7 mm方能容納工作管道,且仍然有損傷硬膜囊及神經(jīng)根的風(fēng)險。Choi等[12]認(rèn)為椎板間入路摘除游離髓核,要求病變側(cè)神經(jīng)根肩部空間也足夠?qū)挘ㄟ^內(nèi)鏡監(jiān)視,特別是L5神經(jīng)根更容易損傷,且手術(shù)時間長。Ahn等[13]報道硬膜囊及神經(jīng)根損傷率分別為1.1%和2%。為避免患側(cè)椎間孔狹窄及椎弓根阻擋,采用經(jīng)對側(cè)椎間孔入路治療游離脫垂髓核,但硬膜及神經(jīng)根直接暴露在工作區(qū)內(nèi),仍有擠壓正常區(qū)域內(nèi)硬膜囊及神經(jīng)根可能[2,14]。椎板間入路可以達(dá)到理想的治療效果[15],但是對于脫垂的位置偏中央的病例療效不佳,其鏡下工作通道擺動能力差,在黃韌帶咬除后無黃韌帶保護(hù)下該入路對硬膜損傷風(fēng)險大,容易出現(xiàn)腦脊液漏[10]。因此,臨床上需要一種遠(yuǎn)離神經(jīng)根,同時能直視下徹底清除脫出髓核組織的方法。
3.2 經(jīng)椎弓根肩上入路治療重度遠(yuǎn)端脫垂型腰椎間盤突出的可行性分析
內(nèi)窺鏡下治療重度遠(yuǎn)端脫垂型腰椎間盤突出癥主要困難在于工作通道窄小,工作距離短。Lee等[5]認(rèn)為對于游離脫垂的椎間盤突出,采用常規(guī)椎間孔入路失敗率高達(dá)3.7%~15.7%。為擴(kuò)大工作通道,Rutten等[15]設(shè)計椎間鉸刀,通過逐級切除部分上關(guān)節(jié)突前下緣及骨贅,直接取出游離髓核,但是術(shù)后神經(jīng)根痛覺過敏及燒灼樣神經(jīng)根疼痛發(fā)生率為7%~25%,可能原因?yàn)楣ぷ魈坠馨仓梦恢锰拷甸g孔近端,擠壓脊神經(jīng)節(jié)導(dǎo)致神經(jīng)損傷,另外,椎間孔成形后可能損傷關(guān)節(jié)突關(guān)節(jié),遠(yuǎn)期可能導(dǎo)致小關(guān)節(jié)退變,影響脊柱穩(wěn)定性。因此,經(jīng)常規(guī)的椎間孔入路具有局限性,改變常規(guī)穿刺途徑及管道位置非常重要。下腰椎矢狀面及冠狀面安全三角顯示低位椎間盤及椎管空間小,椎管內(nèi)操作不方便,所以通過磨除部分椎弓根肩部更進(jìn)一步加大空間,有利于椎管內(nèi)操作。我們通過將穿刺點(diǎn)下移至椎弓根肩上,磨除部分椎弓根,以增大工作通道,由于遠(yuǎn)離神經(jīng)根,因此減少神經(jīng)損傷的可能性,同時更接近靶點(diǎn),有利于徹底清除脫出的髓核。本組14例術(shù)后癥狀消失,隨訪期間恢復(fù)滿意,無手術(shù)相關(guān)并發(fā)癥。目前對于磨除椎弓根的范圍尚不清楚,我們的經(jīng)驗(yàn)是不超過椎弓根1/4是安全的。另外,由于穿刺點(diǎn)固定,不會因體位改變而穿刺點(diǎn)位移,減少術(shù)中醫(yī)患射線暴露次數(shù),且對于髂骨高的患者,仍然通過加大矢狀位穿刺角度,靶點(diǎn)止于椎弓根,可有效避開高髂骨,同時因穿刺點(diǎn)下移,有效避開近端出行根,減少術(shù)后感覺異常這一經(jīng)皮椎間孔鏡下髓核摘除術(shù)(perculaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy,PELD)最常見并發(fā)癥。
3.3 技術(shù)要點(diǎn)
①靠近靶點(diǎn):椎間孔鏡的局限性是造成無法確保徹底摘除重度脫出椎間盤突出的根本原因之一,脫垂型髓核大部分位于下位椎弓根周圍,因此應(yīng)最大限度接近靶點(diǎn)游離髓核,常規(guī)穿刺抵向關(guān)節(jié)突關(guān)節(jié)尖部,因肩上入路穿刺點(diǎn)下移,抵至椎弓根肩部同時減少軀體與矢狀位角度,因此要比常規(guī)穿刺增加1~2 cm(圖2)。Kim等[16]采用穿刺點(diǎn)下移至椎弓根上入路以增大視野,但仍有殘留散落髓核,可能原因?yàn)槟コ倒暇壊糠止琴|(zhì)不夠,工作套管擺動困難,另外,術(shù)前并沒有測量椎弓根肩部與脫出髓核遠(yuǎn)端距離及矢狀位角度。我們的經(jīng)驗(yàn)是,穿刺點(diǎn)盡量靠近靶點(diǎn),直視下徹底清除脫垂的髓核,同時避開上位神經(jīng)根以免導(dǎo)致感覺異常,最遠(yuǎn)距離可到達(dá)椎弓根下緣,甚至達(dá)到下位椎體的下終板。②徹底清除脫垂的髓核:Wagner等[17]直接通過椎弓根直視下摘除游離髓核,但是因工作管道固定,無法擺動,對于手術(shù)視野遠(yuǎn)近端脫出髓核仍有局限性,特別是對于脫垂至神經(jīng)根腋下甚至硬膜囊背側(cè)的髓核摘除困難,且對椎弓根破壞較大,仍有不足之處。我們的經(jīng)驗(yàn)是,術(shù)前精心測量,磨除部分椎弓根肩部,獲得足夠的管道空間,結(jié)合漂浮擺動技術(shù),徹底清除脫垂的髓核。對于脫垂至神經(jīng)根腋下甚至硬膜囊背側(cè)摘除困難者,可通過擴(kuò)大的椎孔下壓擺動摘除,以徹底清除脫出的髓核,保證臨床效果。③磨除椎弓根對術(shù)者手感及手術(shù)設(shè)備要求較高,尤其年輕患者椎弓根骨質(zhì)較硬,常規(guī)環(huán)鉆可能磨除椎弓根困難,可改用動力系統(tǒng)。④術(shù)前設(shè)計尤為重要,結(jié)合影像學(xué)設(shè)計穿刺角度及路線,術(shù)中嚴(yán)格按設(shè)計進(jìn)行,準(zhǔn)確把握穿刺角度及方向。⑤術(shù)中要讓患者保持清醒,醫(yī)患交流,及時了解患者不適,通過患者反饋適時調(diào)整,有效避免相關(guān)并發(fā)癥。Ying等[18]比較經(jīng)椎弓根肩上入路與標(biāo)準(zhǔn)PELD技術(shù)治療遠(yuǎn)端脫垂型椎間盤,結(jié)果顯示經(jīng)椎弓根肩上入路手術(shù)時間短,且同樣安全、有效。Lee等[5]同樣證實(shí)通過環(huán)鋸磨除椎弓根上緣,可有效摘除向遠(yuǎn)端脫垂的髓核,同時可有效避免高髂嵴的阻擋。
與其他內(nèi)窺鏡手術(shù)相同,該技術(shù)難度大,學(xué)習(xí)曲線陡峭[19]。本研究不足之處是選擇病例為下腰椎且髓核向遠(yuǎn)端脫垂,對于上腰椎及向近端游離脫垂者,本手術(shù)方式可能并不適合;另外,本研究樣本量較少,需要更多中心及更大樣本量的進(jìn)一步研究驗(yàn)證本術(shù)式的臨床療效及并發(fā)癥,尚需更長時間隨訪,證實(shí)本術(shù)式的長期臨床療效。
1 Wang H,Zhou Y,Li C,et al.Riskfactors for failure of single-level percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy.J Neurosurg Spine,2015,23(3):320-325.
2 Kim JS,Choi G,Lee SH.Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy via contralateral approach:a technical case report.Spine,2011,36(17):E1173-1178.
3 Choi KC,Lee JH,Kim JS,et al.Unsuccessful percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy: a single-center experience of 10228 cases.Neurosurgery,2015,76(4):372-380.
4 Hoogland T,Schubert M,Miklitz B,et al.Transforaminal posterolateral endoscopic discectomy with or without the combination of a low-dose chymopapain:a prospective randomized study in 280 consecutive cases.Spine,2006,31(24):E890-897.
5 Lee CW,Yoon KJ,Ha SS,et al.Foraminoplastic superior vertebral notch approach with reamers in percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy:technical note and clinical outcome in limited indications of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy.J Korean Neurosurg Soc,2016,59(2):172-181.
6 Kim CH,Chung CK,Woo JW.Surgical outcome of percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar lumbar discectomy for highly migrated disc herniation.J Spinal Disord Tech,2012,29(5):E259-266.
7 Lee S,Kim SK,Lee SH,et al.Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy for migrated disc herniation: classification of disc migration and surgical approaches.Eur Spine J,2007,16(3):431-437.
8 Wu X,Fan G,Guan X,et al.Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar disecotomy for far-migrated disc herniation through two working channels.Pain Physician,2016,19(4):E675-680.
9 Ahn Y,Jang IT,Kim WK.Transforaminal percutaneous endocopic lumbar discectomy for very high-grade migrated disc herniation.Clin Neurol Neurosurg,2016,147:11-17.
10 Du J,Tang X,Jing X,et al.Outcomes of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy via a translaminar approach,especially for soft,highly down-migrated lumbar disc herniation.Int Orthop,2016,40(6):1247-1252.
11 Choi G,Prada N,Modi HN,et al.Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar herniectomy for high-grade down-migrated L4-L5 disc through an L5-S1 interlaminar approach:a technical note.Minim Invasive Neurosurg,2010,53(3):147-152.
12 Choi KC,Kim JS,Ryu KS,et al.Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discecotomy for L5-S1 disc herniation: transforaminal versus interlaminar approach.Pain Physician,2013,16(6):547-556.
13 Ahn Y,Lee HY,Lee SH,et al.Dural tears in percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy.Eur Spine J,2011,20(1):58-64.
14 石 磊,楚 磊,陳 亮,等.經(jīng)皮對側(cè)椎間孔入路內(nèi)窺鏡下椎間盤切除術(shù)治療游離型腰椎間盤突出癥.中國脊柱脊髓雜志,2014,24(5):412-414.
15 Ruetten S,Komp M,Merk H,et al.Recurrent lumbar disc herniation after conventional discectomy:a prospective,randomized study comparing full endoscopic interlaminar and transforaminal versus microsurgical revision.J Spinal Disord Tech,2009,22(2):122-129.
16 Kim HS,Ju CI,Kim SW,et al.Endoscopic transforaminal suprapedicular approach in high grade inferior migrated lumbar disc herniation.J Korean Neurosurg Soc,2009,45(2):67-73.
17 Wagner R,Telfeian AE,Iprenburg M,et al.Transforaminal endoscopic forminoplasty and discectomy for the treatment of a thoracic disc herniation.Technical Note Neurosurg,2016,90:194-198.
18 Ying J,Huang K,Zhu M,et al.The effect and feasibility study of transforaminal percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy via superior border of inferior pedicle approach for down-migrated intracanal disc herniations.Medicine,2016,95(8):e2899.
19 Ahn SS,Kim SH,Kim DW.Learning curve of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy based on the period (early vs.late) and technique (in-and-out vs.in-and-out-and-in): a retrospective comparative study.J Korean Neurosurg Soc,2015,58(6):539-546.
(修回日期:2017-01-13)
(責(zé)任編輯:王惠群)
Transforaminal Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy via Superior Border of Inferior Pedicle Approach for Severe Down-migrated Disc Herniations
JiaoWei①②,ShenCailiang①,CuiXilong②,etal.
①DepartmentofOrthopaedics,FirstAffiliatedHospitalofAnhuiMedicalUniversity,Hefei230022,China;②DepartmentofOrthopaedics,FirstPeople’sHospitalofFuyang,Fuyang236003,China
Correspondingauthor:ShenCailiang,E-mail:shengcailiang1616@163.com
Objective To investigate the feasibility of transforaminal percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy via superior border of inferior pedicle approach for severe down-migrated intracanal disc herniations. Methods From November 2012 to August 2015, a total of 14 patients with severe down-migrated disc herniations were treated with transforaminal percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy via superior border of inferior pedicle approach in the First People’s Hospital of Fuyang. There were 1 case of L2/3disc herniation, 1 case of L3/4disc herniation, 8 cases of L4/5, and 4 cases of L5/S1. Among them 1 case was reherniation after open window decompression. During the surgery, the vertebral pedicle was removed partially with abrasive drilling via superior border of inferior pedicle approach. The pulposus was removed under direct vision. The data of back/leg pain VAS and ODI before surgery, immediately after operation, the 2ndday after operation and last follow-up were collected and analyzed. The clinical effect was evaluated with the MacNab standard. Results The mean operation time was 105 min, ranged from 65 min to 210 min. One patient had right leg numbness and was recovered after conservative treatment. One patient suffered from left thumb dorsal extension asthenia and got fully recovered 1 month later. No surgery related complications were noted in other patients. All the 14 patients were followed up for 11-43 months (mean,27.3 months). The preoperative VAS of back and leg pain was 6.0±2.1 and 7.4±1.9, respectively, on the 2ndday after surgery was 2.1±0.8 and 1.8±1.1, respectively,and at last follow-up was 1.9±0.8 and 1.7±0.9, respectively. The ODI before surgery, on the 2ndday after operation and last follow-up was (19.3±7.4)%, (10.5±4.1)%, and (6.5±2.3)%, respectively. According to the MacNab classification, 12 cases were excellent and 2 cases were good on the 2ndday after operation. At the most recent follow-up, 13 cases got excellent and 1 got good results. Conclusion Transforaminal percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy via superior border of inferior pedicle approach is an effective and safe alternative for severe down-migrated disc herniations.
Transforaminal percutaneous endoscopy; Severe; Down-migrated; Disc herniation; Superior border of inferior pedicle approach
A
1009-6604(2017)05-0441-05
10.3969/j.issn.1009-6604.2017.05.015
2016-08-24)
* 通訊作者,E-mail:shencailiang1616@163.com
①安徽醫(yī)科大學(xué)第一附屬醫(yī)院骨科,合肥 230022)
②(安徽省阜陽市人民醫(yī)院骨科,阜陽 236003)