الفهرس 
Introduction
THE VERTEBRAL CANALOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 77 |  |  |
| | | from | 77 | | |
Abstract
SummaryIn this study, we compared endoscopic lumbar discectomy to conventional open lumbar discectomy, regarding clinical outcomes, especially pain relief, where low back pain and radicular pain relief were comparable in both groups.Regarding age and sex; both groups showed no differences statistically. Preoperative clinical presentation including VAS of low back pain and radicular pain, and disc site and side were the same in both groups.Regarding wound size, Intraoperative bleeding and postoperative hospital stay were less in endoscopic group significantly. Operarive time was less in open group than endoscopic group significantly. As for patient satisfaction and disability improvement; both techniques gave nearly equal results. Intraoperative complications have no significant difference, if the surgeon is expert enough. Conclusion& RecommendationBoth techniques give good results for patients. There was no significant difference regarding clinical improvement either in low back pain or radicular pain. Each technique has some advantages over the other; Endoscopic discectomy advantages include smaller wound, less intraoperative bleeding, and shortened hospital stay due to less wound pain. On the other hand, the advantages of conventional open discectomy gives wider wound with good visualization and better range of movement for instruments that makes it easier to detect and deal with any events.Endoscopic discectomy takes more time from surgeons to gain experience as it has longer learning curve so surgeons should give more time in practicing PELD to gain further experience and overcome its long learning curve. Care must be taken to wisely make the right decision for every patient and choose the best surgical technique, which must be most appropriate for the patient and well experienced by the surgeon.