Minimally Invasive versus Open Cervical Foraminotomy: A Systematic Review

被引:50
作者
Clark, Jeffrey G. [1 ]
Abdullah, Kalil G. [1 ]
Steinmetz, Michael P. [2 ]
Benzel, Edward C. [1 ]
Mroz, Thomas E. [3 ]
机构
[1] Cleveland Clin Lerner Coll Med, Cleveland, OH 44195 USA
[2] MetroHlth Med Ctr, Cleveland, OH 44109 USA
[3] Cleveland Clin, Neurol Inst, 9500 Euclid Ave,S-40, Cleveland, OH 44195 USA
关键词
cervical spine; laminoforaminotomy; minimally invasive spine surgery; percutaneous spine surgery; spine surgery outcomes;
D O I
10.1055/s-0031-1296050
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Posterior cervical laminoforaminotomy is an effective treatment for cervical radiculop-athy due to disc herniations or spondylosis. Over the last decade, minimally invasive (i.e., percutaneous) procedures have become increasingly popular due to a smaller incision size and presumed benefits in postoperative outcomes. We performed a systematic review of the literature and identified studies of open or percutaneous laminoforaminotomy that reported one or more perioperative outcomes. Of 162 publications found by our initial screening, 19 were included in the final analysis. Summative results indicate that patients undergoing percutaneous cervical laminoforaminotomy have lower blood loss by 120.7 mL (open: 173.5 mL, percutaneous: 52.8 mL, n = 670), a shorter surgical time by 50.0 minutes (open: 108.3 minutes, percutaneous: 58.3 minutes, n = 882), less inpatient analgesic use by 25.1 Eq (open: 27.6 Eq, percutaneous: 2.5 Eq, n = 356), and a shorter hospital stay by 2.2 days (open: 3.2 days, percutaneous: 1.0 days, n = 1472), compared with patients undergoing open procedures. However, the heterogeneous nature of published data calls into question the reliability of these summative results. Further structured trials should be conducted to better characterize the risks and benefits of percutaneous laminoforaminotomy.
引用
收藏
页码:8 / 13
页数:6
相关论文
共 25 条
[1]
Microendoscopic posterior cervical laminoforaminotomy for unilateral radiculopathy: results of a new technique in 100 cases [J].
Adamson, TE .
JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY, 2001, 95 (01) :51-57
[2]
Tubular Diskectomy vs Conventional Microdiskectomy for the Treatment of Lumbar Disk Herniation: 2-Year Results of a Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial [J].
Arts, Mark P. ;
Brand, Ronald ;
van den Akker, M. Elske ;
Koes, Bart W. ;
Bartels, Ronald H. M. A. ;
Tan, W. F. ;
Peul, Wilco C. .
NEUROSURGERY, 2011, 69 (01) :135-144
[3]
Keyhole approach for posterior cervical discectomy:: Experience on 84 patients [J].
Caglar, Y. S. ;
Bozkurt, M. ;
Kahilogullari, G. ;
Tuna, H. ;
Bakir, A. ;
Torun, F. ;
Ugur, H. C. .
MINIMALLY INVASIVE NEUROSURGERY, 2007, 50 (01) :7-11
[4]
Minimally invasive/endoscopic vs "open" posterior cervical laminoforaminotomy: do the risks outweigh the benefits? [J].
Epstein, Nancy E. .
SURGICAL NEUROLOGY, 2009, 71 (03) :330-331
[5]
Minimally invasive cervical microendoscopic foraminotomy: An initial clinical experience [J].
Fessler, RG ;
Khoo, LT .
NEUROSURGERY, 2002, 51 (05) :S37-S45
[6]
FRYKHOLM R, 1951, ACTA CHIR SCAND, V102, P10
[7]
Grieve JP, 2000, BRIT J NEUROSURG, V14, P40
[8]
Transpedicular approaches to cervical uncovertebral osteophytes causing radiculopathy [J].
Grundy, PL ;
Germon, TJ ;
Gill, SS .
JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY, 2000, 93 (01) :21-27
[9]
Minimally invasive tubular access for posterior cervical foraminotomy with three-dimensional microscopic visualization and localization with anterior/posterior imaging [J].
Hilton, Donald L., Jr. .
SPINE JOURNAL, 2007, 7 (02) :154-158
[10]
Minimally invasive 2-level posterior cervical foraminotomy - Preliminary clinical results [J].
Holly, Langston T. ;
Moftakhar, Parham ;
Khoo, Larry T. ;
Wang, Jeffrey C. ;
Shamie, Nick .
JOURNAL OF SPINAL DISORDERS & TECHNIQUES, 2007, 20 (01) :20-24