首页> 外文期刊>Asian spine journal. >Do Pedicle Screws in Concave Apex of Scoliosis Offer Any Advantages?
【24h】

Do Pedicle Screws in Concave Apex of Scoliosis Offer Any Advantages?

机译:凹入的脊柱侧凸椎弓根螺钉有什么优点吗?

获取原文
           

摘要

Study Design Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. Purpose To assess the relative advantages of implant constructs with and without pedicle screws in the concave apex for correcting scoliosis. Overview of Literature Concave apical pedicles in scoliosis can be narrow and dysplastic. Neural structures also migrate toward concavity, leaving little room for error while inserting pedicle screws into the concave apex. Methods Patients (n=35) undergoing scoliosis surgery from September 2004 to September 2009 with minimum 5-year follow-up period were included. Exclusion criteria were pseudarthrosis, implant failure, infection, anterior release surgery, corrective osteotomies, incomplete data, constructs not involving anchors at the apex of the curve, and kyphoscoliosis. Curves were classified into two groups as follows: group A, with screws alone anchoring the convex apex and the correction performed from the convex side and group B, with screws anchoring the concave apex with or without convex apex purchase and the correction performed from the concave side. Results Twenty-two of 35 patients were selected. In these patients, 29 individual curves were selected and classified into groups A (n=15) and B (n=14). Both groups were comparable in terms of age, sex, and etiology (idiopathic and nonidiopathic). However, group A had larger (68.53°±26.29°) and more rigid (29.04%±18.22% flexibility) curves than group B (50.14°±16.89° with 49.87%±25.01% flexibility) (two-tailed p 0.05). Despite this, the immediate postoperative correction was comparable between the two groups (A, 57.98%±16.28%; B, 62.76%±13.13%; two-tailed p =0.39). Interestingly, group A showed significantly better results in terms of the gain of instrumented correction over and above preoperative flexibility (A, 28.94%±8.51%; B, 12.89%±23.06%; two-tailed p =0.03). There was no statistically significant difference in the correction percentage of sagittal profile between the two groups and in the loss of correction at follow-up or Scoliosis Research Society-22 scores. Conclusions Present study could not demonstrate any advantages associated with use of apical concave pedicle screws.
机译:研究设计对预期收集的数据进行回顾性分析。目的评估在矫正脊柱侧弯时在凹尖顶上有无椎弓根螺钉的植入物结构的相对优势。文献概述脊柱侧凸的凹尖蒂可能狭窄而发育不良。神经结构也向凹方向移动,将椎弓根螺钉插入凹尖时几乎没有误差的余地。方法纳入2004年9月至2009年9月接受脊柱侧弯手术的患者(n = 35),随访时间最少为5年。排除标准为假关节,假体植入失败,感染,前释放手术,矫正截骨术,数据不完整,曲线顶点不涉及锚的构造以及后凸畸形。曲线分为两组:A组,仅螺钉固定凸尖,然后从凸侧进行矫正; B组,螺钉固定凹尖,购买或不购买凸尖,并通过凹形进行校正侧。结果选择了35例患者中的22例。在这些患者中,选择了29条单独的曲线并将其分为A组(n = 15)和B组(n = 14)。两组在年龄,性别和病因(特发性和非特发性)方面均具有可比性。然而,与B组(50.14°±16.89°,柔韧性为49.87%±25.01%)相比,A组具有更大的曲率(68.53°±26.29°)和更刚性(29.04%±18.22%的柔韧性)曲线(两尾p <0.05) 。尽管如此,两组的术后即刻矫正相当(A,57.98%±16.28%; B,62.76%±13.13%;两尾p = 0.39)。有趣的是,就术前灵活性以外的矫正效果而言,A组显示出明显更好的结果(A,28.94%±8.51%; B,12.89%±23.06%;两尾p = 0.03)。两组之间矢状面的校正百分比以及随访或脊柱侧弯研究学会22分的校正丧失均无统计学上的显着差异。结论本研究无法证明与使用根尖凹蒂椎弓根螺钉相关的任何优势。

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