目的:系统分析PETD与PEID治疗单节段LDH的相关的术中情况及术后疗效。方法:对Pub-Med、Med of science、中国期刊全文数据库(CNKI)、维普数据库、万方数据库进行关于PELD相关文献进行检索,语种为英文或中文。由两位作者独立对各研究进行评估,并将各数据导入Revman 5.3软件进行Meta分析,来评估两种入路技术在各种结局指标的统计学意义。结果:最终共计15篇研究被纳入,共计1422例患者被纳入分析。PETD与PEID比较:后者手术时间更短(MD = 6.11, 95% CI: −1.86~14.07),而差异不存在统计学意义(P > 0.05);PEID术中X光线透视次数更少(MD = 9.05, 95% CI: 7.17~10.92, P 0.05);两组的术后1天腰痛VAS变化值(MD = −0.04, 95% CI: −0.34~0.27),ODI变化值(MD = −0.64, 95% CI: −0.22~0.95)、术后1月腰痛VAS变化值(MD = −0.04, 95% CI: −0.34~0.27)和ODI变化值(MD = 0.21, 95% CI: −1.08~1.49)、术后3月腰痛VAS变化值(MD = −0.05, 95% CI: −0.24~0.14)和ODI变化值(MD = −0.88, 95% CI: −1.95~0.19)、术后6月腰痛VAS变化值(MD = 0.04, 95% CI: −0.20~0.29)和ODI变化值(MD = 0.61, 95% CI: −1.31~2.53)、术后12月腰痛VAS变化值(MD = 0.05, 95% CI: −0.09~0.19)和ODI变化值(MD = −0.20, 95% CI: −0.95~0.56),均无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。结论:PETD和PEID治疗单节段LDH均具有良好的临床疗效,但PEID术中X光线透视次数更少,且手术时间可能更短。PETD更具微创性,能够更少破坏脊柱骨性结构,短期内更好地缓解腰腿痛。Objective: To systematically analyze the intraoperative and postoperative effects of two approaches of percutaneous spinal endoscopy in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation. Methods: Clinical studies related to PELD were searched in English or Chinese by Pub-Med, Med of Science, China Journal Full-text Database (CNKI), VIP database and Wanfang database. Two authors independently assessed the quality of each study, and a meta-analysis of each data was performed using Revman 5.3 software t
