Objective To review the application and research progress of unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) technique in the treatment of lumbar related diseases. Methods The domestic and foreign literature on the application of UBE technique in the treatment of lumbar related diseases was extensively consulted, and the development history, clinical application, operation points and precautions, related complications and adverse reactions, advantages and disadvantages of the technique were reviewed. Results As a minimally invasive technique developed in recent years, UBE technique is effective in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis caused by different causes, with satisfactory decompression effect, less damage, and good lumbar stability. UBE technique has significant advantages over open surgery and microscopy-assisted surgery in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation. In the treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis, the postoperative trauma of UBE technique is less than that of conventional surgery, and the fusion rate is satisfactory. There are also complications such as spinal cord injury, spinal epidural hematoma, incomplete decompression or recurrence, nerve root irritation symptoms, and postoperative infection in the treatment of lumbar related diseases with UBE technique. Detailed preoperative planning is essential for patients with lumbar related diseases who are suitable for UBE surgery. Conclusion UBE technique is easy to operate, has a gentle learning curve, can use conventional instruments, and has definite effectiveness. It is suitable for a variety of lumbar related diseases, but there are some defects and deficiencies.
Objective To compare the effectiveness of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) and unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) discectomy in the treatment of far lateral lumbar disc herniation (FLLDH). Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of 60 patients with FLLDH, who were admitted between September 2021 and September 2024 and met the selection criteria, including 30 cases treated with PTED and 30 cases with UBE discectomy. There was no significant difference in baseline data between the two groups (P>0.05), such as gender, age, body mass index, responsible segment, preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for low back/leg pain, and modified Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). The operation time, incision length, intraoperative blood loss, and length of hospital stay in two groups were recorded. The VAS score was used to evaluate the severity of low back and leg pain, and the ODI was employed to assess the spinal functional status. X-ray films combined with CT three-dimensional reconstruction and MRI were performed to confirm the nerve decompression effect and soft tissue repair status. Results All patients successfully underwent operation. In the PTED group, 1 patient experienced intolerable lower extremity pain during the procedure, which was managed with potent analgesics allowing the operation to proceed uneventfully. In the UBE group, 1 patient developed peritoneal effusion postoperatively and required peritoneal puncture drainage. All incisions healed by first intention. The UBE group demonstrated significantly longer operation time and incision length, and more intraoperative blood loss compared to the PTED group (P<0.05). All patients were followed up for 12 months. After operation, both groups showed significant reductions in VAS scores for low back and leg pain as well as ODI compared to preoperative measurements, with continuous improvement over time. There were significant differences between different time points (P<0.05) in both groups. The VAS score for low back pain in the UBE group was significantly higher than that in the PTED group at 3 days after operation (P<0.05); there was no significantly between the two groups in other outcome indicators (P>0.05). Radiological re-examinations showed that both groups had limited resection of articular processes, adequate spinal canal decompression, good nerve root release, and satisfactory lumbar stability. No patients experienced incomplete decompression or required reoperation during follow-up. Conclusion Both PTED and UBE are effective minimally invasive approaches for FLLDH with confirmed short-term effectiveness. PTED offers advantages in reduced trauma and faster recovery, whereas UBE provides superior endoscopic visualization with lower nerve root injury risk.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of the nose ring drain (NRD) in treatment of severe diabetic foot infection.MethodsThe clinical data of 35 patients with severe diabetic foot infection who were treated with NRD between June 2017 and June 2019 were analyzed retrospectively. There were 24 males and 11 females with an average age of 54.5 years (range, 28-82 years). All of them were type 2 diabetic patients. The diabetes duration was 3-20 years, with an average of 9.4 years. The diabetic foot duration was 4 months to 2 years, with an average of 1.16 years. There were 16 cases of left foot and 19 cases of right foot. According to Wagner’s grading, there were 11 cases of grade 2, 20 cases of grade 3, and 4 cases of grade 4, all of which were moderate and severe infection of diabetic foot wound. Postoperative wounds were treated with “nibble-like” debridement until the patient’s epidermis regenerated and healed. During the treatment process, the indexes of bacterial culture type of wound secretions, duration of antibiotic therapy, wound healing method, healing time, amputation rate, and other indicators were analyzed and summarized.ResultsAll 35 patients were followed up 3-6 months, with an average of 4.5 months. Postoperative bacterial culture of wounds showed that 5 cases of Staphylococcus aureus, 4 cases of Pseudomonas aeruginosa, 5 cases of Escherichia coli, 3 cases of Enterobacter cloacae, 3 cases of coagulase-negative Staphylococcus, and 15 cases of other types were detected. The duration of antibiotic therapy ranged from 3 to 15 days, with an average of 9.1 days. The wound was autolytically healed without skin grafting, and the healing time was 62-82 days, with an average of 72.3 days. During the follow-up, 3 cases (8.6%) had amputation due to the patient’s poor blood glucose control, which led to a large spread of infection. In addition, among the other patients with wound healing, there was no recurrence of wound infection or new ulcer on the original surface.ConclusionThe NRD is a simple operation for treatment of severe diabetic foot infection, which can effectively control wound infections and promote wound healing and regeneration without skin grafting.
