【摘要】 目的 本研究旨在比较经过Delta大通道（delta large-channel endoscopy,DLE）与椎间孔镜椎板间隙入路（transforaminal endoscopic interlaminar approach,TEIA）两种方法在治疗腰椎侧隐窝狭窄（lumbar lateral recess stenosis,LLRS）中的临床效果。方法 本研究选取广西骨伤医院2020年1月—2023年5月收治的LLRS患者60例，使用随机数字表法将患者分为观察组与对照组。观察组（n=30）接受DLE内镜治疗，对照组（n=30）接受经TEIA治疗。比较两组的手术时长、术中出血量、住院时间、术后并发症、疼痛视觉模拟评分（VAS）和Oswestry功能障碍指数（ODI）评分，并进行统计分析以评估疗效。结果 观察组的手术时间和术中出血量均高于对照组，组间比较差异均有统计学意义（t=8.461、6.475，均P<0.05）；两组住院时间相比较，差异无统计学意义（t=0.564,P>0.05）。两组在术后1个月及随访各时间段的VAS和ODI评分均显著降低，且观察组评分均低于对照组，组间比较差异均有统计学意义（t=2.462、4.491、2.675、4.298、5.741、5.194、3.796、4.835，均P<0.05）。两组术后并发症发生率均为3.33%，差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。结论 DLE与TEIA在治疗LLRS方面均有确切的疗效，但是DLE更适合黄韧带肥厚和骨质增生引起的狭窄，而TEIA则更适合椎间盘突出的患者。更多还原

【Abstract】 Objective This study aims to compare the clinical outcomes between two endoscopic of the delta large-channel endoscopy(DLE) and the transforaminal endoscopic interlaminar approach(TEIA) in the treatment of lumbar lateral recess stenosis(LLRS). Methods A total of 60 patients diagnosed with LLRS admitted to Guangxi Orthopedic Hospital from January 2020 to May 2023 were selected, patients were randomized into observation and control groups using a random number table. The observation group underwent DLE(n=30), while the control group received TEIA(n=30). The surgical time, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay duration, postoperative complications, visual analog scale(VAS)scores for pain, and Oswestry disability index(ODI)scores were recorded and compared between groups, and statistical analyzed to evaluate the efficacy. Results The observation group had significantly longer surgical time and greater intraoperative blood loss compared to the control group, with statistically significant difference between groups(t=8.461、6.475, both P<0.05); there was no statistically significant difference in the length of hospital stay between the two groups(t=0.564, P>0.05).The VAS and ODI scores showed significant improvement at 1-month postoperatively and all subsequent follow-up time points in both groups, which in the observation group were lower in the contrast group, with statistically significant difference between groups(t=2.462、4.491、2.675、4.298、5.741、5.194、3.796、4.835, all P<0.05). The incidence of postoperative complications was 3.33% in each group, with no statistically significant difference between groups(P>0.05). Conclusion Both DLE and TEIA are effective in treating LLRS. However the DLE demonstrates more suitable for stenosis caused by ligamentum flavum hypertrophy and osteophyte formation, while the TEIA is better suited for the cases involving disc herniation.更多还原