首页> 外文期刊>BMC Surgery >Efficacy analysis of two surgical treatments for thoracic and lumbar intraspinal tumours
【24h】

Efficacy analysis of two surgical treatments for thoracic and lumbar intraspinal tumours

机译:两种胸腰椎内肿瘤手术治疗的疗效分析

获取原文
           

摘要

Surgery remains the main curative option for the treatment of intraspinal tumour. The purpose of the present study was to analyze the clinical outcomes of laminoplasty with process-lamina complex replantation compared with laminectomy with pedicle screw fixation for intraspinal tumours. In our retrospective analysis, 27 patients received tumour resection surgery by laminoplasty with reconstruction plate fixation and 32 patients received laminectomy with pedicle screw fixation. All patients were followed up for at least 1?year. Data, including surgical time, blood loss, volume of drainage, drainage time, hospital stay, complications, and neurological status were compared. In addition, imaging evaluation was also included. Patients in the laminoplasty group had lower blood loss (laminoplasty group: 281.5?±?130.2?mL; laminectomy group: 450.0?±?224.3?mL; p?=?0.001), shorter surgical time (laminoplasty group: 141.7?±?26.2?min, laminectomy group: 175.3?±?50.4?min; p?=?0.003), lower volume of drainage (laminoplasty group: 1578.9?±?821.7?mL, laminectomy group: 2621.2?±?1351.0?mL; p?=?0.001), shorter drainage time (laminoplasty group: 6.6?±?2.5?days, laminectomy group: 9.7?±?1.8?days; p?=?0.000), and a shorter hospital stay (laminoplasty group: 16.9?±?4.9?days, laminectomy group: 21.0?±?4.4?days; p?=?0.002) compared with patients in the laminectomy group. There were significant differences of oswestry dysfunction index (ODI) between the two groups at 12?months postoperatively (p?=?0.034). The incidence of secondary spinal stenosis in the laminoplasty group was significantly reduced (p?=?0.029). Laminoplasty in intraspinal tumour resection has a lower blood loss and volume of drainage, shorter surgical time and hospital stay as advantages over the standard laminectomy technique. Moreover, laminoplasty can effectively avoid iatrogenic spinal canal stenosis and thus enhancing functional recovery of spinal cord.
机译:手术仍然是治疗脊柱内肿瘤的主要治疗选择。本研究的目的是分析与椎板切除联合椎弓根螺钉固定椎板切除术治疗椎管内肿瘤相比,椎板复合物再植椎板成形术的临床效果。在我们的回顾性分析中,有27例患者接受了经椎板成形术再造钢板固定的肿瘤切除术,还有32例接受了椎弓根螺钉固定的椎板切除术。所有患者均接受了至少1年的随访。比较了包括手术时间,失血量,引流量,引流时间,住院时间,并发症和神经系统状况在内的数据。另外,还包括成像评估。椎板成形术组患者的失血量较低(椎板成形术组:281.5±±130.2mL / mL;椎板切除术组:450.0±±224.3μmL;p≥= 0.001),手术时间较短(椎板成形术组:141.7±±0.3mL)。 26.2min,椎板切除术组:175.3±±50.4μmin;p≥0.003),引流量较低(椎板成形术组:1578.9±±821.7mL,椎板切除术组:2621.2±±1351.0mL; p ≥0.001),较短的引流时间(隆突成形组:6.6±±2.5天),椎板切除术组:9.7±±1.8±天;p≥0.000)和较短的住院时间(隆凸组:16.9)。椎板切除术组的±±4.9天,为21.0±±4.4天; p = 0.002)。两组在术后12个月时的骨功能障碍指数(ODI)均存在显着差异(p?=?0.034)。椎板成形术组继发性椎管狭窄的发生率显着降低(p = 0.029)。与标准椎板切除术相比,椎管内肿瘤切除术的椎板成形术具有失血少,引流少,手术时间短和住院时间短等优点。此外,椎板成形术可有效避免医源性椎管狭窄,从而增强脊髓的功能恢复。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号