...
首页> 外文期刊>European Spine Journal >Clinical and radiological outcome of anterior–posterior fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for symptomatic disc degeneration: a retrospective comparative study of 133 patients
【24h】

Clinical and radiological outcome of anterior–posterior fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for symptomatic disc degeneration: a retrospective comparative study of 133 patients

机译:前后路椎间融合术与经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术治疗有症状椎间盘退变的临床和影像学结果:133例患者的回顾性比较研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Abundant data are available for direct anterior/posterior spine fusion (APF) and some for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), but only few studies from one institution compares the two techniques. One-hundred and thirty-three patients were retrospectively analyzed, 68 having APF and 65 having TLIF. All patients had symptomatic disc degeneration of the lumbar spine. Only those with one or two-level surgeries were included. Clinical chart and radiologic reviews were done, fusion solidity assessed, and functional outcomes determined by pre- and postoperative SF-36 and postoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and a satisfaction questionnaire. The minimum follow-up was 24 months. The mean operating room time and hospital length of stay were less in the TLIF group. The blood loss was slightly less in the TLIF group (409 vs. 480 cc.). Intra-operative complications were higher in the APF group, mostly due to vein lacerations in the anterior retroperitoneal approach. Postoperative complications were higher in the TLIF group due to graft material extruding against the nerve root or wound drainage. The pseudarthrosis rate was statistically equal (APF 17.6% and TLIF 23.1%) and was higher than most published reports. Significant improvements were noted in both groups for the SF-36 questionnaires. The mean ODI scores at follow-up were 33.5 for the APF and 39.5 for the TLIF group. The patient satisfaction rate was equal for the two groups.
机译:直接的前/后脊柱融合术(APF)和经椎间孔的腰椎椎体间融合术(TLIF)有大量数据,但是只有一所机构进行的研究比较了这两种技术。回顾性分析了133例患者,其中68例患有APF,65例患有TLIF。所有患者均出现腰椎症状性椎间盘退变。仅包括具有一级或二级手术的患者。通过术前和术后SF-36和术后Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)以及满意度调查表完成临床图和放射学检查,评估融合牢固性,并确定功能结局。最小随访时间为24个月。 TLIF组的平均手术时间和住院时间要短。 TLIF组的失血量略少(409比480 cc。)。 APF组的术中并发症较高,主要是由于前腹膜后入路的静脉撕裂。 TLIF组的术后并发症较高,这是由于移植物向神经根挤压或伤口引流所致。假关节率在统计学上相等(APF 17.6%和TLIF 23.1%),高于大多数已发表的报告。两组中的SF-36问卷调查都有显着改善。随访时,APF的平均ODI评分为33.5,而TLIF组为39.5。两组的患者满意度相同​​。

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