Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Introduction : Micro discectomy is the surgical procedure of choice for treating lumbar disc herniations. A laminectomy can cause instability, significant epidural fibrosis, continued radiated pain, and surgical site infection, although there is still concern about the dangers of muscle damage, such as to the multifidus, and excessive articular facet resection. Unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy has been suggested as a less invasive therapeutic approach.Objective: To compare the clinical effects in terms of pain, impairment, and complications associated with percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy with standard micro discectomy for the treatment of disc herniations. Materials and methods: A study of 60 people with disc herniations who were treated with either microdiscectomy or unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomy. The Oswestry Disability Index and visual analogue score for back and leg pain was evaluated after three, six, and twelve months. Results: In comparison to Group E, Group M's mean operating time was substantially lower (p<0.05). In addition, it took group M more time on average to get back to work. (p<0.05), and the VAS score at 3 showed a statistically significant change (p<0.05). At three months, group M's Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability score was considerably greater than group E's. (p<0.001). Conclusion: In terms of a three-month return to work and wound infections, endoscopic surgery has a little advantage over microscopic surgery. Both techniques are efficient and safe for lumbar discectomy. However, after 6 months of follow-up, the results seem to be comparable. Keywords: Intervertebral Disc Prolapse, Discectomy, Endoscopy, Intervertebral Disc, Micro Discectomy, Visual Analog Scale, Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Score
Kirankumar et al. (Mon,) studied this question.