Objective To comparison of clinical efficacy between mini-invasive transforminal lumbar interbody fusion(mis-TLIF) assisted by Quadrant system and open posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF)treatment for lumber spondylolisthesis,to find a better treatment for lumbar spondylolisthesis.Methods A total of 65 cases who were under lumber spondylolisthesis were retrospectively selected from our hospital,26 cases in mini-invasive transforminal lumbar interbody fusion assisted by Quadrant system (mis-TLIF group).39 cases in open posterior lumbar interbody fusion(PLIF group).Record the incision length,intraoperative blood loss,opertive time,bed time,hospital time,pre-and post-operative visual analogue scale(VAS) and Oswestry disability index(ODI) score were recorded respectively.After surgery,the imaging(X-Ray) evalute the vertebral fusion status.Results There were no significant difference between mis-TLIF group and PLIF group in BMI [(22.77 ± 4.38) kg/m2 and (21.28 ± 5.24) kg/m2],preoperative VAS score [(6.46 ± 1.67) and (6.59 ± 1.56)],preoperative ODI score [(58.70 ± 7.19) ％ and (60.10 ± 9.56) ％] (all P ＞ 0.05).There were significant difference between two groups in incision length [(6.10 ± 0.95) cm and (11.12 ± 2.02) cm],intraoperative blood loss [(247.31 ± 36.72) ml and (340.51 ± 64.32) ml],opertive time[(179.96 ± 17.54) min and(151.85 ± 16.06) min],bed time[(3.62 ± 1.44) d and (4.98 ± 1.74) d],hospital time [(9.38 ± 2.60) d and (11.95 ± 3.61) d] (all P ＜ 0.05).Postoperatively VAS score was assesssd at 1 month [(3.15 ± 1.08]),3months [(1.58 ± 0.81)],6months [(1.08 ± 0.74)] and ODI score was(30.77 ± 6.45) ％,(25.54 ± 6.33) ％,(20.23 ± 7.05) ％,respectively in mis-TLIF group were lower than those of PLIF group (P ＜ 0.05).There were no significant difference between two groups in the fusion rate in 3 months,6 months after operation.Conclusion Mis-TLIF had a lot of advantages relative to PLIF in the treatment of lumber spondylolisthesis,be like less trauma,less bleeding,less hospital time,quick rehabilitation and good curative effect,provide a new minimally invasive method for lumber spondylolisthesis patient.%目的 比较Quadrant通道下经椎间孔椎体融合术(mis-TLIF)与开放后路椎体融合术(PLIF)治疗腰椎滑脱症的临床效果,为腰椎滑脱症寻找更好的治疗方法.方法 腰椎滑脱症病人65例,分别采用mis-TLIF手术(mis-TLIF组,26例)和PLIF手术(PLIF组,39例),统计两组手术切口长度、术中出血量、手术时间、卧床时间、住院时间、术前术后疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)及Os-westry功能障碍指数(ODI)评分,术后影像学(X线)评估椎体融合情况.结果 mis-TLIF组和PLIF组BMI指数分别为(22.77±4.38) kg/m2和(21.28±5.24) kg/m2,术前VAS分别为(6.46±1.67)分和(6.59±1.56)分,术前ODI评分分别为(58.70±7.19)％和(60.10 ±9.56)％,两组比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).两组手术切口分别为(6.10 ±0.95)cm和(11.12±2.02) cm,术中出血量分别为(247.31 ±36.72)ml和(340.51 ±64.32)ml,手术时间分别为(179.96±17.54)分钟和(151.85±16.06)分钟,卧床时间分别为(3.62±1.44)天和(4.98±1.74)天,住院时间分别为(9.38±2.60)天和(11.95±3.61)天,两组比较,差异均有统计学意义(P＜0.05).mis-TLIF组VAS评分术后1个月、3个月和和6个月分别为(3.15±1.08)分、(1.58±0.81)分和(1.08±0.74)分,ODI评分术后1个月、3个月和和6个月分别为(30.77±6.45)％、(25.54±6.33)％和(20.23±7.05)％,与PLIF组比较,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).两组术后3个月、6个月融合率比较,差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 mis-TLIF治疗腰椎滑脱症手术创伤小、出血少、住院天数短、恢复快和效果好.
展开▼
