...
首页> 外文期刊>Asian spine journal. >Short-Term Results of Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Pedicle Screw with Cortical Bone Trajectory Compared with Conventional Trajectory
【24h】

Short-Term Results of Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Pedicle Screw with Cortical Bone Trajectory Compared with Conventional Trajectory

机译:椎弓根螺钉皮质骨弹道与常规弹道相比经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术的近期结果

获取原文
           

摘要

Study Design Case-control study. Purpose To evaluate clinical and radiological results of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) performed with cortical bone trajectory (CBT) pedicle screw insertion with those of TLIF using 'conventional' or percutaneous pedicle screw insertion. Overview of Literature CBT is a new trajectory for pedicle screw insertion in the lumbar spine; clinical and radiological results of TLIF using pedicle screws inserted with CBT are unclear. Methods In total, 26 patients (11 males, 15 females) were enrolled in this retrospective study and divided into three groups: TLIF with pedicle screw insertion by conventional minimally invasive methods via the Wiltse approach (M-TLIF, n=10), TLIF with percutaneous pedicle screw insertion (P-TLIF, n=6), and TLIF with pedicle screw insertion with CBT (CBT-TLIF, n=10). Surgical results and preand postoperative radiological findings were evaluated and compared. Results Intraoperative blood loss was significantly less with CBT-TLIF ( p =0.03) than with M-TLIF. Postoperative lordotic angles did not differ significantly among the three groups. Complete fusions were obtained in 10 of 12 levels (83%) with M-TLIF, in seven levels (100%) with P-TLIF, and in 10 of 11 levels (91%) with CBT-TLIF. On postoperative computed tomography, correct positioning was seen in 84.1% of M-TLIF screws, 88.5% of P-TLIF screws, and 90% of CBT-TLIF screws. Conclusions CBT-TLIF resulted in less blood loss and a shorter operative duration than M-TLIF or P-TLIF. Postoperative rates of bone union, maintenance of lordotic angles, and accuracy of pedicle screw positions were similar among the three groups.
机译:研究设计案例对照研究。目的评估经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术(TLIF)与皮质骨轨迹(CBT)椎弓根螺钉置入术与TLIF椎间融合术(“常规”或经皮椎弓根螺钉置入术)的临床和放射学结果。文献综述CBT是椎弓根螺钉插入腰椎的新轨迹。使用带CBT的椎弓根螺钉治疗TLIF的临床和放射学结果尚不清楚。方法回顾性研究共纳入26例患者(男11例,女15例),分为三组:采用传统的微创方法通过Wiltse方法(M-TLIF,n = 10)行带蒂椎弓根螺钉置入术的TLIF,TLIF经皮椎弓根螺钉置入术(P-TLIF,n = 6)和经椎弓根螺钉置入术的TLIF与CBT(CBT-TLIF,n = 10)。评估并比较手术结果和术前和术后影像学表现。结果CBT-TLIF组术中失血量明显少于M-TLIF组(p = 0.03)。两组的术后脊柱前凸角度无明显差异。与M-TLIF分别以12个水平中的10个(83%),与P-TLIF分别为7个水平(100%)和11个CBT-TLIF中的10个(91%)获得完全融合。术后计算机体层摄影术中,在84.1%的M-TLIF螺钉,88.5%的P-TLIF螺钉和90%的CBT-TLIF螺钉中观察到正确的定位。结论CBT-TLIF与M-TLIF或P-TLIF相比,可减少出血量并缩短手术时间。三组的骨结合术后率,脊柱前凸角度的维持以及椎弓根螺钉位置的准确性相似。

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