Percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy vs. percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy for L5/S1 lumbar disc herniation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials - Summary - MDSpire
Advertisement
Percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy vs. percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy for L5/S1 lumbar disc herniation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
To compare the perioperative efficiency, clinical outcomes, and safety of percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy (PEID) and percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy (PETD) for single-level L5/S1 lumbar disc herniation (LDH).
Approach:
Eligibility Criteria: Included randomized controlled trials comparing PEID and PETD for single-level L5/S1 LDH.
Key Findings:
PEID was associated with shorter operative time compared to PETD (MD = -17.07 min).
Fluoroscopy frequency favored PEID (MD = -8.94 counts).
No significant difference in hospital stay (MD = 0.38 days).
VAS leg pain and ODI outcomes were comparable across follow-up time points.
Complications/adverse events did not differ significantly between the two approaches.
Interpretation:
PEID may offer advantages in operative time and fluoroscopy frequency, but the clinical outcomes and safety profiles are broadly comparable to PETD.
Limitations:
High between-study heterogeneity in several outcomes.
Geographic concentration of studies.
Methodological limitations in the included studies.
Conclusion:
Findings should be interpreted cautiously, and procedure selection should remain individualized.
High-revision-rate surgeons saw a late revision signal after adopting robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty, despite no overall reduction in revision rates or failure modes.
