{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.05218855218855219, 'fraction_numerical': 0.040824915824915826, 'mean_word_length': 5.288359788359788, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Therapeutic effect and safety of microendoscopic discectomy versus conventional open discectomy for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation: a Meta analysis].

OBJECTIVE
To conduct a meta analysis of studies comparing theapeutic effect and safety of microendoscopic discectomy to conventional open discectomy in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation in China.


METHODS
A systematic literature retrieval was conducted in the Chinese Bio medicine Database, CNKI database, Chongqin VIP database and Wangfang database. The statistical analysis was performed using a RevMan 4.2 software. The comparison included excellent rate, operation times, blood loss, periods of bed rest and resuming daily activities, hospital stay or hospital stay after surgery, and complications of microendoscopic discectomy versus conventional open discectomy.


RESULTS
The search yielded 20 reports, which included 2 957 cases treated by microendoscopic discectomy and 2 130 cases treated by conventional open discectomy. There were 12, 11, 7, 5, 4 and 4 reports which had comparison of operation times, blood loss, period of bed rest, periods of resuming daily activities, hospital stay and hospital stay after surgery respectively. Complications were mentioned in 10 reports. Compared to patients treated by open discectomy, patients treated by microendoscopic discectomy had a higher excellent rates [OR=1.29, 95%CI (1.03, 1.62)], less blood loss[OR=-63.67, 95%CI (-86.78, -40.55)], less period of bed rest[OR=-15.33, 95%CI (-17.76, -12.90)], less period of resumption of daily activities [OR=-24.41, 95%CI (-36.86, -11.96)], less hospital stay [OR=-5.00, 95%CI (-6.94, -3.06)] or hospital stay after surgery [OR=-7.47, 95%CI (-9.17, -5.77) respectively. However, incidence of complications and operation times were proved no significant different between microendoscopic discectomy and open discectomy.


CONCLUSIONS
Microendoscopic discectomy and conventional open discectomy in treatment of lumbar disc herniation are both safe, effective; incidence of complications are nearly. Patients with lumbar disc herniation treated by microendoscopic discectomy have fewer blood loss, shorter periods of bed rest and hospital stay, and resume daily activities faster. Techniques are selected according to indications, microendoscopic discectomy should be carried out when conjunct indications occur.