Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy: An Outcome Comparison With the Full-endoscopic Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy.
retrospective_cohort · Level III
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 37559217.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1097/BSD.0000000000001507.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
Retrospective control study. To compare the curative effects of unilateral biportal endoscopic posterior cervical foraminotomy (UBE-PCF) with full-endoscopic posterior cervical foraminotomy (FPCF). There are few studies directly comparing outcomes between UBE-PCF and FPCF. The objective of this study was to compare outcomes between UBE-PCF and FPCF. A retrospective control study was conducted for 69 patients of cervical radiculopathy from July 2019 to December 2021. Clinical outcomes scores, including neck disability index, visual analog scale (VAS)-arm, and VAS-neck were evaluated. Serum creatine kinase levels and the size of the operating hole were measured. Postoperative neck disability index, VAS-neck, and VAS-arm scores showed statistically significant improvement over preoperative scores ( P <0.01). The operating time was significantly shorter in the UBE-PCF group ( P <0.001). No significant differences were found in serum creatine kinase levels between the 2 groups ( P >0.05). The mean area of the operating hole was 1.47+0.05 cm 2 in the FPCF group and 1.79+0.11 cm 2 in the UBE-PCF group. The difference was statistically significant ( P <0.001). Both UBE-PCF and FPCF are safe and effective procedures for cervical radiculopathy. Predictable and sufficient decompression could be achieved by UBE-PCF in a shorter operation time. Treatment Benefits Level III.
Medical subject headings
- Foraminotomy
- Radiculopathy
Anatomy
- cervical spine