PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Kapetanakis, Stylianos
AU  - Gkantsinikoudis, Nikolaos
AU  - Charitoudis, Georgios
TI  - Full-Endoscopic Ventral Facetectomy vs Open Laminectomy for Lumbar Lateral Recess Stenosis: A Comparative Study and Brief Literature Review
AID  - 10.14444/8218
DP  - 2022 Apr 01
TA  - International Journal of Spine Surgery
PG  - 361--372
VI  - 16
IP  - 2
4099  - https://www.ijssurgery.com/content/16/2/361.short
4100  - https://www.ijssurgery.com/content/16/2/361.full
SO  - Int J Spine Surg2022 Apr 01; 16
AB  - Background Lateral recess stenosis (LRS) represents a major etiology of pain and disability in recent years. The aim of the present study was to compare the clinical outcomes of full-endoscopic ventral facetectomy (FEVF) vs conventional open laminectomy (OL) for surgical treatment of lumbar LRS.Methods Ninety individuals with diagnosed LRS according to clinical and radiological criteria were included in this study. Patients were appropriately classified into 2 distinct groups according to received treatment. Group A was constituted from 48 patients subjected to FEVF. Contrariwise, the 42 patients of Group B underwent OL. All patients were consecutively evaluated with particular clinical scores preoperatively and at 6 weeks, 3, months, 6 months, 12 months, and 2 years postoperatively. Clinical assessment was conducted with the visual analog scale for leg pain (VAS-LP) and back pain (VAS-BP) and with the Short-Form 36 (SF-36) medical questionnaire.Results Values of all studied indices in both groups featured a major clinical improvement in 6 weeks with subsequent quantitatively minor albeit still statistically significant amelioration until the end of follow-up at 2 years. Comparative evaluation of recorded parameters between the 2 groups disclosed that VAS-BP, bodily pain, and role emotional indices of SF-36 were quantitatively and statistically differentiated in favor of Group A in 6 weeks, featuring an amelioration that persisted until the end of follow-up. Registered values of the other parameters were not found to demonstrate a quantitatively and clinically noteworthy differentiation between the 2 groups.Conclusions FEVF represents a feasible, safe, and beneficial alternative for surgical therapy of patients with LRS, featuring comparable outcomes with conventional OL.Clinical Relevance Lumbar LRS represents a frequent entity with remarkable clinical sequelae. FEVF represents a novel, groundbreaking and minimally invasive technique that should be considered as a safe and efficacious alternative over conventional open surgery in specific patients with LRS.Level of Evidence 3.