首页> 外文期刊>Journal of clinical neuroscience: official journal of the Neurosurgical Society of Australasia >Outcome of posterior lumbar interbody fusion versus posterolateral fusion in lumbar degenerative disease.
【24h】

Outcome of posterior lumbar interbody fusion versus posterolateral fusion in lumbar degenerative disease.

机译:腰椎退行性疾病中后路腰椎椎间融合术与后外侧融合术的结果。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Between March 2003 and September 2007, 170 consecutive patients with lumbar degenerative disease were studied retrospectively. Eighty patients underwent posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF group) with pedicle screw (PS) fixation, and 82 patients underwent posterolateral fusion (PLF group) with PS fixation. Eight patients were lost to follow-up. The minimum follow-up period in each group was 2.0years. The mean follow-up period for the PLIF group was 3.6years, and for the PLF group, the mean follow-up was 3.4years: there was no significant difference between the two groups for length of follow-up. The Pain Index (PI) improved from 66 to 27 in the PLF group (p<0.001) and from 69 to 29 in the PLIF group (p<0.001), but there was no significant difference between the two groups (p>0.05). In the PLF group, the preoperative mean Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score was 34.5, which reduced to 14.2 at the final follow-up. In the PLIF group, the mean preoperative ODI was 36.4, which reduced to 16.2 at the final follow-up. There was no significant statistical difference between the two groups for ODI (p>0.05). Eighty-eight percent (n=72) of patients in the PLF group and 91% (n=73) in the PLIF group had radiologically confirmed union, with no significant difference in fusion percentage between the two groups (p>0.05). Twenty-two of 162 patients (14%) underwent a second operation: 18 (22%) in the PLF group and four (5%) patients in the PLIF group (p<0.001). The clinical and functional outcomes in both groups were similar, and no significant difference was found in the parameters tested. Both surgical procedures were effective, but patients in the PLF group showed more complications related to hardware biomechanics than patients in the PLIF group (p<0.001).
机译:在2003年3月至2007年9月期间,对170例连续的腰椎退行性疾病患者进行了回顾性研究。 80例行椎弓根螺钉(PS)固定后路腰椎椎间融合术(PLIF组),而82例行PS固定术的后外侧椎体融合术(PLF组)。 8名患者失去随访。每组的最小随访时间为2。0年。 PLIF组的平均随访时间为3.6年,而PLF组的平均随访时间为3.4年:两组的随访时间没有显着差异。 PLF组的疼痛指数(PI)从66改善到27(p <0.001),PLIF组从69改善到29(p <0.001),但是两组之间没有显着差异(p> 0.05) 。在PLF组中,术前平均Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)评分为34.5,在最终随访时降至14.2。在PLIF组中,术前平均ODI为36.4,在最后一次随访时降至16.2。两组的ODI差异无统计学意义(p> 0.05)。 PLF组中有88%(n = 72)的患者,PLIF组中有91%(n = 73)的患者经放射学证实为融合,两组之间的融合百分比无显着差异(p> 0.05)。 162名患者中的22名(14%)接受了第二次手术:PLF组中的18名(22%)和PLIF组中的四名(5%)患者(p <0.001)。两组的临床和功能结局相似,并且测试参数无显着差异。两种手术方法均有效,但是PLF组的患者与硬件生物力学相关的并发症要多于PLIF组(p <0.001)。

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