ABSTRACT Objective: Technological advances in recent decades have led to a complexity of choice of the most effective method for treating cervical disc herniations. The idea of removing disc herniations using endoscope techniques is not new, and is successfully used in the treatment of lumbar disc herniations. But in the case of the cervical spine, full endoscopic procedures only started to be performed at the beginning of 2014, by Yang JS and coauthors, and their effectiveness was and still is a matter of controversy. The proposed method of endoscopic portal disc herniation removal was used for the past two years, and its results were compared with the anterior microsurgical approach using a single-level cage implantation. Methods: Twenty-five patients were included in this study, with a comparator group of 25 patients operated by ordinary anterior cervical discectomy with a single-disc fusion. All patients were operated on by the same group of surgeons. Results: During the analysis of VAS data, it was confirmed that the degree of local and radicular pain in the two groups was not significantly different (p > 0.05). According to the Neck Disability Index (NDI) there was a significant difference between the two groups in relation to the endoscopic patient group. Data using the Odom criteria showed significantly better results for the endoscopic group. During the research it was observed that the patients in the endoscopically operated group were discharged from hospital more quickly, after 3 [2; 5] days compared to 5 [4; 6] days in the microsurgery group. Conclusion: The method performed is a safe and reliable alternative to convenient surgical techniques. Level of Evidenced II; Therapeutic study, investigating the results of treatment.

ABSTRACT Objective: Technological advances in recent decades have led to a complexity of choice of the most effective method for treating cervical disc herniations. The idea of removing disc herniations using endoscope techniques is not new, and is successfully used in the treatment of lumbar disc herniations. But in the case of the cervical spine, full endoscopic procedures only started to be performed at the beginning of 2014, by Yang JS and coauthors, and their effectiveness was and still is a matter of controversy. The proposed method of endoscopic portal disc herniation removal was used for the past two years, and its results were compared with the anterior microsurgical approach using a single-level cage implantation. Methods: Twenty-five patients were included in this study, with a comparator group of 25 patients operated by ordinary anterior cervical discectomy with a single-disc fusion. All patients were operated on by the same group of surgeons. Results: During the analysis of VAS data, it was confirmed that the degree of local and radicular pain in the two groups was not significantly different (p > 0.05). According to the Neck Disability Index (NDI) there was a significant difference between the two groups in relation to the endoscopic patient group. Data using the Odom criteria showed significantly better results for the endoscopic group. During the research it was observed that the patients in the endoscopically operated group were discharged from hospital more quickly, after 3 [2; 5] days compared to 5 [4; 6] days in the microsurgery group. Conclusion: The method performed is a safe and reliable alternative to convenient surgical techniques. Level of Evidenced II; Therapeutic study, investigating the results of treatment.

ABSTRACT Objective: Degenerative diseases of the spine are the most common disorder seen in the practice of the neurosurgeon. According to many surgeons, microdiscectomy is the “gold standard” of surgical treatment. Analyzing the current literature, it is seen that the use of endoscopic techniques in spinal surgery is increasing. However, due to the lack of detailed information on the advantages and disadvantages of these methods, there is a need for continuing research in this area. Work to clarify the features of these methods, their specificity and algorithmization will increase the effectiveness of surgical treatment. Methods: This study included patients with herniated lumbar intervertebral discs, the presence of pain in the leg, and failed of conservative therapy. In the period 2014 to 2017, 172 endoscopic lumbar discectomies were performed, using microendoscopic discectomy and percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy. The effectiveness of each technique was evaluated through comparative analysis. Results: In both groups, the methods used obtained high efficacy rates. Comparative analysis showed the advantages of the percutaneous technique in terms of shortening the return to normal activity time, hospitalization time, and disability, and reducing back pain in the early postoperative period. On the other hand, the microendoscopic discectomy enabled greater radicality to be achieved in cases with herniated disc ossification and complex anatomy of the vertebral segment. Conclusions: Analysis of the data obtained led to the formulation of an algorithm for selecting the optimum endoscopic method for achieving positive results of surgical treatment. Level of Evidence II; Therapeutic studies, investigating the results of treatment.

ABSTRACT Objective: Degenerative diseases of the spine are the most common disorder seen in the practice of the neurosurgeon. According to many surgeons, microdiscectomy is the “gold standard” of surgical treatment. Analyzing the current literature, it is seen that the use of endoscopic techniques in spinal surgery is increasing. However, due to the lack of detailed information on the advantages and disadvantages of these methods, there is a need for continuing research in this area. Work to clarify the features of these methods, their specificity and algorithmization will increase the effectiveness of surgical treatment. Methods: This study included patients with herniated lumbar intervertebral discs, the presence of pain in the leg, and failed of conservative therapy. In the period 2014 to 2017, 172 endoscopic lumbar discectomies were performed, using microendoscopic discectomy and percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy. The effectiveness of each technique was evaluated through comparative analysis. Results: In both groups, the methods used obtained high efficacy rates. Comparative analysis showed the advantages of the percutaneous technique in terms of shortening the return to normal activity time, hospitalization time, and disability, and reducing back pain in the early postoperative period. On the other hand, the microendoscopic discectomy enabled greater radicality to be achieved in cases with herniated disc ossification and complex anatomy of the vertebral segment. Conclusions: Analysis of the data obtained led to the formulation of an algorithm for selecting the optimum endoscopic method for achieving positive results of surgical treatment. Level of Evidence II; Therapeutic studies, investigating the results of treatment.