Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy Versus Posterior Open Lumbar Microdiscectomy for the Treatment of Symptomatic Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Objective: The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the clinical efficacy between percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) versus posterior open lumbar microdiscectomy (OLMD) for the treatment of symptomatic lumbar disc herniation.

Methods: We performed a comprehensive retrieval of related studies in 4 electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library). Randomized or nonrandomized controlled trials reported from January 1990 to December 2017 that compared PELD versus OLMD for the treatment of symptomatic lumbar disc herniation were acquired. The quality of randomized controlled trials was evaluated by the criteria of the Cochrane Back Review Group, and the quality of cohort studies was assessed according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The primary outcome measurements included preoperative and postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) score of sciatica; the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) before and after surgery; the Excellent and Good outcome rate based on Macnab criteria. The secondary outcome measurements included the incidence of complication, residual disk, recurrence, and reoperation; operation time; hospital stay; and time to return to work. Two authors independently extracted data and assessed each study for quality.

Results: Nine studies with 1585 patients were included in our meta-analysis. Two were randomized controlled trials and the remaining 7 were retrospective cohort studies. The forest plots showed that no statistically significant difference was observed between the 2 groups in terms of preoperative and postoperative VAS score of sciatica, ODI before and after surgery, the Excellent and Good outcome rate, the complication rate, and the incidence of recurrence and reoperation. However, the PELD group had a higher incidence of residual disk or incomplete decompression than did the OLMD group. In addition, no significant difference was detected in the operation time between the 2 groups, but the PELD group was associated with shorter hospital stay and time of return to work.

Conclusions: Based on the present meta-analysis, no significant difference existed in VAS and ODI scores between the 2 surgical procedures, and they were also similar in terms of operation time, complication rate, and incidence of recurrence and reoperation, but PELD showed shorter hospital stay and time of return to work. Thus, under the premise of careful manipulation and complete decompression, we consider that PELD is a relatively more minimally invasive technique, which could be an alternative to OLMD.