Articles Tập 67 Số CĐ15 25/09/2026

CLINICAL OUTCOMES OF SINGLE-INCISION FULL-ENDOSCOPIC POSTERIOR CERVICAL FORAMINOTOMY FOR ADJACENT TWO-LEVEL CERVICAL RADICULOPATHY AT SAINT PAUL GENERAL HOSPITAL

Luong Minh Quang, Phung Tien Dung, Pham Ngoc Tuan, Doan Quang Minh, Nguyen Vu Hoang
Corresponding author: luongminhquangpttk@gmail.com
DOI: 10.52163/yhc.v67iCD15.6709
49 Views
0 Downloads
Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the preliminary clinical outcomes of single-incision full-endoscopic posterior cervical foraminotomy (FEPCF) for adjacent two-level cervical radiculopathy.

Subjects and Methods: We conducted a retrospective case series of 43 patients with cervical radiculopathy involving two adjacent levels who underwent single-incision full-endoscopic posterior cervical foraminotomy (FEPCF) at Saint Paul General Hospital between July 2024 and July 2025.

Results: Mean age was 58.4 ± 12.0 years. All 43 procedures were completed through a single skin incision. Mean operative time was 56.9 ± 18.1 minutes and postoperative hospital stay was 3.8 ± 1.8 days. VAS decreased from 6.67 ± 1.04 preoperatively to 0.37 ± 0.79 at 6 months (mean decrease 6.30 points; 95% CI 5.89–6.72), and NDI decreased from 14.53 ± 4.38 to 4.12 ± 2.57 (mean decrease 10.42 points; 95% CI 9.51–11.33). Greenhouse–Geisser-corrected repeated-measures ANOVA showed significant changes over time for VAS (F[2.19, 92.03]=478.32; p<0.001) and NDI (F[1.94, 81.44]=383.22; p<0.001). At 6 months, 43/43 patients had Good or Excellent Modified MacNab outcomes. No postoperative complication was recorded in the retrospective dataset (0/43; exact 95% CI 0–8.2%).

Conclusion: In this retrospective case series, single-incision FEPCF for adjacent two-level cervical radiculopathy was technically feasible and was associated with substantial short-term improvement in the recorded VAS and NDI. No complication was recorded through 6 months, but the uncontrolled design, small sample, aggregate complication variable, and short follow-up do not permit conclusions about comparative effectiveness or long-term safety.

Keywords
Cervical radiculopathy; full-endoscopic posterior cervical foraminotomy; minimally invasive spine surgery; adjacent two-level disease; single-incision surgery.
References
[1]
[1] Lee SH, Durand WM, Raad M, Jain A. Posterior full-endoscopic cervical foraminotomy and diskectomy: surgical techniques and review of outcomes. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2025;33(18):e1072-e1080. doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-24-01415. Google Scholar
[2]
[2] Broekema AEH, Simões de Souza NF, Soer R, et al. Noninferiority of posterior cervical foraminotomy vs anterior cervical discectomy with fusion for procedural success and reduction in arm pain among patients with cervical radiculopathy at 1 year: the FACET randomized clinical trial. JAMA Neurol. 2023;80(1):40-48. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2022.4208. Google Scholar
[3]
[3] Simões de Souza NF, Broekema AEH, Reneman MF, et al.; FACET investigators. Posterior cervical foraminotomy compared with anterior cervical discectomy with fusion for cervical radiculopathy: two-year results of the FACET randomized noninferiority study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2024;106(18):1653-1663. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.23.00775. Google Scholar
[4]
[4] Wu PH, Kim HS, Lee YJ, et al. Posterior endoscopic cervical foraminotomy and discectomy: clinical and radiological computed tomography evaluation of the bony effect of decompression with 2-year follow-up. Eur Spine J. 2021;30(2):534-546. doi: 10.1007/s00586-020-06637-8. Google Scholar
[5]
[5] Xi Z, Lu Y, Xie L. Endoscopic posterior cervical foraminotomy via a single stab incision for contiguous two-level cervical radiculopathy. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2020;162:685-689. doi: 10.1007/s00701-019-04198-4. Google Scholar
[6]
[6] Heo DH, Ha JS, Jang JW. Biportal endoscopic posterior cervical foraminotomy for adjacent 2-level foraminal lesions using a single approach (sliding technique). Neurospine. 2023;20(1):92-98. doi: 10.14245/ns.2346144.072. Google Scholar
[7]
[7] Kotheeranurak V, Lokhande PV, Tangdamrongtham T, et al. Complications in full-endoscopic posterior cervical surgery: a review of the literature and preventive strategies. Global Spine J. 2025;15(7):3379-3394. doi: 10.1177/21925682251328615. Google Scholar
[8]
[8] Carreon LY, Glassman SD, Campbell MJ, Anderson PA. Neck Disability Index, short form-36 physical component summary, and pain scales for neck and arm pain: the minimum clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit after cervical spine fusion. Spine J. 2010;10(6):469-474. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2010.02.007. Google Scholar
[9]
[9] Youn MS, Shon MH, Seong YJ, Shin JK, Goh TS, Lee JS. Clinical and radiological outcomes of two-level endoscopic posterior cervical foraminotomy. Eur Spine J. 2017;26(9):2450-2458. doi: 10.1007/s00586-017-5017-7. Google Scholar
[10]
[10] von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP; STROBE Initiative. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Bull World Health Organ. 2007;85(11):867-872. doi: 10.2471/BLT.07.045120. Google Scholar