Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Background: Transforaminal spinal endoscopy is a minimally invasive technique used to treat several spinal conditions. Thanks to its minimally invasive approach, it offers numerous advantages over traditional open surgery, including reduced blood loss, faster post-operative hospital discharge, quicker recovery, and lower complications. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of transforaminal spinal endoscopy on a large cohort of patients. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of 1000 patients who underwent transforaminal spinal endoscopy between January 2015 and December 2023. All patients were treated by a single surgeon in a single hospital. The patients presented with persistent symptoms of radicular pain, neurological deficits related to herniated discs, and foraminal stenosis. All patients underwent transforaminal spinal endoscopy using a transforaminal approach. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the VAS (Visual Analogue Scale) for pain, the ODI (Oswestry Disability Index) for functional disability, and patient satisfaction. Perioperative complications were recorded and analyzed. Results: Reduction in Pain: The mean VAS score decreased significantly from 8.2 ± 1.3 pre-operatively to 2.1 ± 1.5 at 12 months post-operatively (p < 0.001). Functional Improvement: The mean ODI improved from 56% ± 12% pre-operatively to 18% ± 9% at 12 months post-operatively (p < 0.001) Patient Satisfaction: 92% of patients reported a high level of satisfaction with their treatment results. Complications: Perioperative complications were minimal, with an overall common complication rate of 4%. No major complications or functional impairments were observed. Conclusions: Transforaminal spinal endoscopy is associated with good clinical outcomes and a low complication rate in patients with spinal pathologies. This study supports the adoption of this technique as a first-line treatment for selected patients, offering a less invasive and equally effective option compared to traditional surgery.
Tornatore et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: