首页> 外文期刊>Coluna/Columna >FUS?O PóSTERO-LATERAL, POSTERIOR E MI-TRANSFORAMINAL: ESTUDO COMPARATIVO 212 CASOSFUSIóN POSTEROLATERAL, POSTERIOR Y MI-TRANSFORAMINAL: ESTUDIO DE 212 CASOS
【24h】

FUS?O PóSTERO-LATERAL, POSTERIOR E MI-TRANSFORAMINAL: ESTUDO COMPARATIVO 212 CASOSFUSIóN POSTEROLATERAL, POSTERIOR Y MI-TRANSFORAMINAL: ESTUDIO DE 212 CASOS

机译:脊柱后侧,后侧和腹腔后融合术:212例椎旁,脊柱后侧和腹腔后融合术:212例研究

获取原文
           

摘要

Objective: Degenerative disc disease is a common problem that could require surgical treatment. The aim of this study was to compare clinical outcomes, complications and benefits associated with intersomatic fusions by the MI-TLIF, PLIF and PLF techniques. Methods: A total of 212 patients were retrospectively reviewed. All patients underwent the same pre- and postoperative clinical evaluations using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and SF-36. Follow-ups were performed for at least one year. Inpatient days, complications, blood loss and operative times were equally quantified. Results: Estimated blood loss for MI-TLIF was statistically lower compared to the amount of blood recovered by Cell Saver device on PLIF and PLF groups. Mean surgical time for MI-TLIF were not significantly different compared to PLIF and PLF groups. Inpatient days were significantly lower in the MI-TLIF group, with an average decrease of one day. Four complications were recorded in the PLIF group, 2 in the PLF group, and one in the MI-TLIF group. Analysis of the clinical parameters revealed post-operative improvements at all time points, with the most statistically significant differences occurring at the first six months. Better results were achieved with the MI-TLIF technique. Conclusions: Compared to more invasive techniques, MI-TLIF showed fewer complications, less blood loss and shorter hospitalization times. Longer operative times in this group can be explained by the greater technical complexity and incipient learning curves. Interbody fusion by PLIF, PLF and MI-TLIF provided good clinical outcomes, but faster recovery was obtained with less invasive techniques. Level of evidence: III; Type of study: Retrospective comparative case study.
机译:目的:退行性椎间盘疾病是一个普遍的问题,可能需要手术治疗。这项研究的目的是比较MI-TLIF,PLIF和PLF技术与体间融合相关的临床结果,并发症和获益。方法:回顾性分析212例患者。使用Oswestry残疾指数(ODI),视觉模拟量表(VAS)和SF-36对所有患者进行相同的术前和术后临床评估。随访至少一年。住院天数,并发症,失血量和手术时间均被量化。结果:与PLIF和PLF组的Cell Saver装置回收的血液量相比,MI-TLIF的估计失血量统计学上较低。与PLIF和PLF组相比,MI-TLIF的平均手术时间无显着差异。 MI-TLIF组的住院天数明显减少,平均减少了一天。 PLIF组记录了4种并发症,PLF组记录了2种并发症,MI-TLIF组记录了1种并发症。临床参数分析显示,所有时间点的手术后均有改善,最显着的统计学差异出现在头六个月。使用MI-TLIF技术可获得更好的结果。结论:与更具侵入性的技术相比,MI-TLIF显示出更少的并发症,更少的失血量和更短的住院时间。该组中更长的手术时间可以通过更大的技术复杂性和初期学习曲线来解释。 PLIF,PLF和MI-TLIF进行的椎间融合治疗提供了良好的临床效果,但采用侵入性较小的技术可实现更快的恢复。证据级别:III;研究类型:回顾性比较案例研究。

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