首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Neurosurgery. Spine. >Comparison of instrumented posterolateral fusion versus percutaneous pedicle screw fixation combined with anterior lumbar interbody fusion in elderly patients with L5-S1 isthmic spondylolisthesis and foraminal stenosis.
【24h】

Comparison of instrumented posterolateral fusion versus percutaneous pedicle screw fixation combined with anterior lumbar interbody fusion in elderly patients with L5-S1 isthmic spondylolisthesis and foraminal stenosis.

机译:老年L5-S1峡部型腰椎滑脱和椎间孔狭窄的患者采用器械后外侧融合与经皮椎弓根螺钉固定联合前路腰椎椎间融合术的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

OBJECT: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of treating L5-S1 isthmic spondylolisthesis and foraminal stenosis in elderly patients with instrumented posterolateral fusion (PLF) versus percutaneous pedicle screw fixation (PSF) combined with anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF). METHODS: Forty-nine patients older than 65 years of age with L5-S1 isthmic spondylolisthesis and symptomatic foraminal stenosis who underwent ALIF were retrospectively analyzed. An ALIF with instrumented PLF (Group A) was performed in 23 patients, and ALIF with percutaneous PSF (Group B) was performed in 26 patients. Data were collected preoperatively and at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and every subsequent year. A comparative analysis was made between the 2 groups using clinical (visual analog pain scale [VAS] and modified MacNab criteria) and radiological (dynamic plain radiographs and CT scans) measures. RESULTS: The mean follow-up duration was 30.3 months (range 24-47 months). The mean preoperative scores on the VAS for low-back pain in Groups A and B were 5.9 and 5.7, respectively, decreasing to 1.4 and 3.6, respectively, at 6 months after surgery (p = 0.001), whereas VAS scores for low-back pain in Groups A and B at 2 years postoperatively were 1.3 and 2.3, respectively (p = 0.005). The mean preoperative scores on the VAS for leg pain in Groups A and B were 7.5 and 7.8, respectively, decreasing at 6 months after surgery to 1.2 and 1.6, respectively (p = 0.201), whereas VAS scores for leg pain in Groups A and B at 2 years postoperatively were 1.3 and 1.4, respectively (p = 0.803). The rates of patients with excellent or good outcomes in terms of the modified MacNab criteria in Groups A and B were 91.3% and 69.2%, respectively, at 6 months after surgery (p = 0.010). Those rates in Groups A and B at 2 years after the operation were 91.3% and 84.6%, respectively (p = 0.203). The fusion rates in Groups A and B were 91.3% and 57.7%, respectively, at 6 months after surgery (p = 0.008), whereas the fusion rates in Groups A and B were 91.3% and 76.9%, respectively, at 2 years after surgery (p = 0.103). There was no significant difference in terms of the complication rate between Group A (4.3%) and B (3.8%) (p = 0.691). CONCLUSIONS: A relatively longer time until, and lower rate for, fusion in the patients treated with ALIF and percutaneous PSF were noted, which may be correlated with a relatively lower rate of patients with excellent or good outcomes. These results seem to favor ALIF with instrumented PLF rather than ALIF with percutaneous PSF in the treatment of elderly patients with L5-S1 isthmic spondylolisthesis and foraminal stenosis. However, additional long-term follow-up, a larger number of patients, and well-designed studies are necessary for a more rigorous evaluation of the outcome of patients treated using these surgical techniques.
机译:目的:本研究的目的是比较老年患者使用器械后外侧融合术(PLF)与经皮椎弓根螺钉固定术(PSF)联合前路腰椎椎间融合术治疗L5-S1峡部脊柱滑脱和椎间孔狭窄的临床和放射学结果ALIF)。方法:回顾性分析接受ALIF的65例年龄在65岁以上的L5-S1峡部脊柱滑脱和有症状的椎间孔狭窄的患者。在23例患者中进行了带器械PLF的ALIF(A组),在26例患者中进行了经皮PSF的ALIF(B组)。术前以及分别在3个月,6个月,1年和以后的每一年收集数据。使用临床(视觉模拟疼痛量表[VAS]和改良的MacNab标准)和放射学(动态X线平片和CT扫描)测量对两组进行比较分析。结果:平均随访时间为30.3个月(范围24-47个月)。 A组和B组中腰背痛的VAS术前平均评分分别为5.9和5.7,术后6个月分别降低至1.4和3.6(p = 0.001),而腰背VAS评分术后2年,A组和B组的疼痛分别为1.3和2.3(p = 0.005)。 A组和B组的VAS腿痛术前平均评分分别为7.5和7.8,在术后6个月时分别降至1.2和1.6(p = 0.201),而A组和B组的VAS腿痛疼痛评分在术前分别为1.2和1.6。术后2年的B分别为1.3和1.4(p = 0.803)。术后6个月,根据改良的MacNab标准,A组和B组中具有优异或良好结局的患者比率分别为91.3%和69.2%(p = 0.010)。术后2年,A组和B组的这些比率分别为91.3%和84.6%(p = 0.203)。术后6个月,A组和B组的融合率分别为91.3%和57.7%(p = 0.008),而A组和B组在术后2年的融合率分别为91.3%和76.9%。手术(p = 0.103)。 A组(4.3%)和B组(3.8%)的并发症发生率无显着差异(p = 0.691)。结论:在ALIF和经皮PSF治疗的患者中,直至融合的时间相对较长,融合率较低,这可能与相对较低的具有优良或良好结局的患者发生率相关。这些结果似乎更有利于使用ALF结合器械性PLF治疗,而不是ALIF结合经皮PSF治疗老年L5-S1峡部脊柱滑脱和椎间孔狭窄。但是,需要更长期的随访,更多的患者和精心设计的研究,才能对使用这些手术技术治疗的患者的结果进行更严格的评估。

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