Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Comparison of full-endoscopic foraminoplasty and lumbar discectomy (FEFLD), unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) discectomy, and microdiscectomy (MD) for symptomatic lumbar disc herniation
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Comparison of full-endoscopic foraminoplasty and lumbar discectomy (FEFLD), unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) discectomy, and microdiscectomy (MD) for symptomatic lumbar disc herniation
Do you wish to request the book?
Comparison of full-endoscopic foraminoplasty and lumbar discectomy (FEFLD), unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) discectomy, and microdiscectomy (MD) for symptomatic lumbar disc herniation
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Comparison of full-endoscopic foraminoplasty and lumbar discectomy (FEFLD), unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) discectomy, and microdiscectomy (MD) for symptomatic lumbar disc herniation
2023
Overview
PurposeThis study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of full-endoscopic foraminoplasty and lumbar discectomy (FEFLD), unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) discectomy, and microdiscectomy (MD) in the treatment of symptomatic lumbar disc herniation (LDH).MethodsFrom January 2020 and May 2021, 128 patients with single-level LDH at L4-5 or L5-S1 received FEFLD, UBE discectomy or MD. Patients were divided into three groups according to surgical method: the FEFLD group (n = 43), the UBE group (n = 42), and the MD group (n = 43). Operative time, fluoroscopy frequency, in-bed time, length of hospital stays, total expenses, complications, visual analogue scale (VAS, 0–10), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI, 0–100%) were assessed and compared among three groups.ResultsThere were no significant differences in VAS or ODI scores at 12 months after surgery among three groups. In comparison with the MD group, the FEFLD and UBE group yield better VAS scores for back pain on the first day following surgery (P < 0.05). The FEFLD group was superior to the UBE group or MD group with less time in bed and shorter hospital stay (P < 0.05). The operation time and total expenses in the UBE group were significantly longer and higher than those in the FEFLD group or MD group (P < 0.05).ConclusionsFEFLD and UBE discectomy yield comparable results to conventional MD concerning pain relief and functional outcomes. In addition, FEFLD and UBE discectomy enable less back pain in the immediate postoperative period. FEFLD offers advantages in rapid recovery. Conventional MD is still an efficient and cost-effective surgical procedure.
Publisher
Springer Nature B.V
Subject
