Material and Methods: The study is a retrospective series of 15 patients operated by PTELD. Bladder dysfunction was classified as incomplete CES (CESI) and complete CES retention (CESR). Bladder / motor recovery rate and its timing, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Visual Analogue Score (VAS), patient satisfaction index, and sexual dysfunction were used to measure the outcome objectively. Additionally, in CESR patients, post-void residual (PVR) urine was measured by sonography. Complications and technical problems were noted.
Results: There were ten patients of CESI and five patients of CESR. The average follow-up was 20.33(12.05) months. Bladder symptoms recovery was 100%, and motor recovery was 80%. VAS for back pain recovered to 0.53(0.52) from 8(2.39). VAS for leg pain recovered to 0.13(0.35) from 9.20(1.32). ODI improved to 6.07(2.85) from 77.52(13.20). The time to the recovery of bladder function was 1.47(1.55) days. All CESR patient's abnormal PVR urine was normalised at five weeks post-operative. No complications were reported. However, five technical executional problems occurred.
Conclusion: PTELD can be considered for CES treatment due to its substantial and quick recovery advantages. However, more evidence support is needed to make it a practice recommendation.
Material and Methods: A total of 55 patients who had undergone conventional surgery (Group A) are compared with 45 patients of UBS (Group B) in TSS. The primary outcome measure of Modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association score (m JOA) with neurological complications and dural injury were assessed. Secondary outcome measures of total blood loss (TBL), time duration of surgery (ORT) and length of hospital stay (LHS) were analysed.
Results: The pre-operative mJOA score 5.00(4.00-6.00) in the group A and 5.00(4.00-6.00) in the group B improved to 7.00(7.00-8.00) in the group A and 9.00(9.00-10.00) in the group B, respectively (P<0.001) at final average follow-up of 117.55 months for group A and 75.69 months in group B. More significant grade of myelopathy improvement and mJOA recovery rate (RR) were noted in group B. The TBL, ORT and LHS were more favourable in group B as compared to group A (p<0.0001). The group A had 9 (16.36%) neurological deficits compared to 2 (4.44%) in group B (p<0.001). Dural tears occurred in both groups (A=11, B=9). It was more frequent and not repairable in group A but without significant statistical difference.
Conclusion: UBS can reduce neurological deficits and improve outcomes in TSS. Secondarily, reduced blood loss, lesser surgical time and reduced LHS are significant added advantages of this new technology.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of patients operated by transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in POS was done. Confirmed clinico-radiological diagnosed POS cases, not responding within three to four weeks were included. Normalisation of CRP and radiological stable reconstruction was assessed for objective clearance of POS and bony union.
RESULTS: Ninety-five patients were included in the study with minimum follow-up period of two years. The mean age was 51.63±13.63 years. There were organisms cultured in 55 patients (57.89%). The ODI improvement of the patients was noted to improve from 88.71±5.3 to 20.80±9.7 (8 weeks) and was incremental at 2 years follow-up (10.12±6.41) and maintained further at final follow-up at 9±4.3. Bony union achieved in all with stable reconstruction. The resumption of activities of daily living (ADL) was quick (15.90±8.20 days) and job (3.67±1.31 months) was achieved in all the patients. In poor outcomes, two patients didn't respond, and one patient died due to uncontrolled infection.
CONCLUSION: Early diagnosis and intervention is the key to effective management of POS. Utilisation of aggressive TLIF yields faster ADL resumption.