撑开型融合器与椎弓根钉固定治疗腰椎不稳症比较性研究
收稿日期: 2013-12-01
网络出版日期: 2014-04-21
Comparative study of expandable interbody cage and pedicle screw fixationin treating lumbar instability disease
Received date: 2013-12-01
Online published: 2014-04-21
目的 探讨后路撑开型融合器与椎弓根钉固定联合椎间融合治疗腰椎不稳症的临床疗效及优缺点。 方法 回顾性分析2007年1月至2010年1月期间93例腰椎不稳症行后路撑开型融合器及椎弓根固定术患者临床资料，其中43例行撑开型融合器治疗(A组)，50例行椎弓根内固定联合椎间融合器治疗(B组)。观察并比较两组手术数据及随访数据。 结果 所有患者均随访3年以上，随访发现使用撑开型融合器治疗腰椎不稳症与椎弓根钉固定组相比, 两组手术时间、出血量比较有统计学差异(P<0.01)，两组患者术后并发症及术后14 d及术后1~3年随访JOA评分、椎间融合率、椎间隙高度比较差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。 结论 两种手术方法均可有效治疗腰椎不稳症，术前对病例进行慎重选择，术中可能保留较多的腰椎后路稳定结构,撑开型融合器可以达到良好的治疗效果。
刘恩志 , 尹庆水 , 郭东明 . 撑开型融合器与椎弓根钉固定治疗腰椎不稳症比较性研究[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2014 , 32(2) : 217 -220 . DOI: 10.13418/j.issn.1001-165x.2014
Objective To investigate the surgical outcome of expandable interbody cage and pedicle screw fixation with intervertebral body fusion for lumbar instable disease by comparative study. Methods ninety-three patients with degenerative lumbar instability were reviewed retrospectively from Jan．2007 to Jan. 2010. Forty-three patients underwent an expandable interbody cage (group A), while fifty cases underwent a pedicle screw fixation with intervertebral body fusion (group B). operation and follow-up data of the two groups and were evaluated and compared. Results All patients were followed up for 3 years. Reduced operative time, blood loss , postoperative complications of patients could be found in Group A can and JOA score at postoperative 14d and followed up for 1-3 years of patients in the two groups , intervertebral fusion rate, intervertebral height showed no significant difference(P>0.05). Conclusion Two surgical methods are both optional in lumbar spine instabable disease. When patients were carefully chosen prior to operation and the posterior lumbar structure was retained in operation, expandable interbody fusion can achieve good therapeutic effect.
[1] 田长庆, 顾洪生, 肖建德, 等. 退行性腰椎不稳的临床影像解剖特征及治疗
[J].中国临床解剖学杂志, 2004, 22(5):560-562.
[2] Azimi P, Mohammadi HR, Montazeri A. An outcome measure of functionality and pain in patients with lumbar disc herniation: a validation study of the Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score
[J]. J Orthop Sci, 2012, 17(4):341-345.
[3] 滕海军,孙海燕,王谦军.腰椎椎间融合器融合的影像学评定进展
[J].中国脊柱脊髓杂志, 2008, 6(18):473-475.
[4] Kim JW, Park HC, Yoon SH, et al. A multi-center clinical study of posterior lumbar interbody fusion with the expandable stand-alone cage(tyche cage) for degenerative lumbar spinal disorders
[J]. J Korean Neurosurg Soc, 2007,42(4):251-257.
[5] Blumenthal SL, Ohnmeiss DD. Intervertebral cages for degenerative spinal diseases
[J].Spine J，2003，3(4):301-309.
[6] 王文军, 姚女兆, 王鹿山, 等. 可膨胀性生椎间融合器在腰椎退行性疾患治疗中的应用
[J].中华骨科杂志, 2007, l2(27):889-892.
[7] 余斌, 靳安民, 杨建成. 后部结构逐级切除对腰椎三维稳定性的影响
[J].中国临床解剖学杂志, 2003, 21(5):505-506.
[8] Park JH, Bae CW, Jeon SR. Clinical and radiological radiological outcomes of unilateral facetectomy and interbody fusion using expandable cages for lumbosacral forminal stenosis
[J]. J Korean Neurosurg Soc，2010, 48(6):496-500.
[9] 李春海, 叶伟, 李鉴轶, 等. 后路椎问融合器对不同节段腰椎稳定性的影响
[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2008, 26(6):677-679.
[10]Galbusera F, Schmidt H, Wilke HJ. Lumbar interbody fusion: a parametric investigation of a novel cage design with and without posterior instrumentation
[J]. Eur Spine J, 2012, 21(3):455-462.
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
京ICP备08002354号-3
