COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF OUTCOMES OF OPEN OR ENDOSCOPIC SPINAL CORD DECOMPRESSION: INTEGRATIVE LITERATURE REVIEW
Victor Lima Dantas1, Rafael Quixabeira Bezerra de Araújo1, Taynan Siqueira Massaro1
1Hospital Santa Marcelina de Itaquera, Serviço de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Introduction:
Spinal cord compression is a neurological condition caused by pressure on the spinal cord, with etiologies including degenerative, neoplastic, infectious, traumatic, and malformative causes. It primarily affects the elderly, with symptoms ranging from pain and sensory-motor deficits to paralysis. The diagnosis is based on clinical evaluation and magnetic resonance imaging. Surgical treatment includes traditional open decompression and the endoscopic technique, the latter involving less trauma and quicker recovery.
Objective:
To review and compare the outcomes of spinal cord decompression via open and endoscopic approaches.
Method:
A search in the PUBMED database with the strategy: (decompre*[title] OR lamin*[title] OR discec*[title] OR micro*[title]) AND ((endosc*[title] OR minima*[title] OR percut*[title]) AND (open*[title] OR traditional[title])), with a 10-year time frame.
Results:
22 studies were identified; after reviewing titles and abstracts, 11 were excluded, leaving 11 articles that formed the sample.
Conclusion:
Minimally invasive techniques showed clinical efficacy comparable to open approaches in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation and lumbar spinal stenosis, with advantages in perioperative parameters. Variations in outcomes related to pain, function, complications, and reoperations suggest that the choice of technique should be individualized, considering the clinical presentation, the complexity of the lesion, and surgical expertise. Level of evidence II; review article.
