首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Neurosurgery. Spine. >Can low-grade spondylolisthesis be effectively treated by either coflex interlaminar stabilization or laminectomy and posterior spinal fusion Two-year clinical and radiographic results from the randomized, prospective, multicenter US investigational device exemption trial: Clinical article
【24h】

Can low-grade spondylolisthesis be effectively treated by either coflex interlaminar stabilization or laminectomy and posterior spinal fusion Two-year clinical and radiographic results from the randomized, prospective, multicenter US investigational device exemption trial: Clinical article

机译:可通过coflex椎板间稳定术或椎板切除术以及后路脊柱融合术有效治疗低度腰椎滑脱随机,前瞻性,多中心美国研究性器械豁免试验的两年临床和影像学结果:临床文章

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Object. Posterolateral spinal fusion (PSF) has long been the standard of care for degenerative spondylolisthesis, but less invasive, motion-preserving alternatives have been proposed to reduce the complications associated with fusion while still providing neural decompression and stabilization. The object of the current study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of coflex Interlaminar Stabilization compared with PSF to treat low-grade spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis. Methods. This is a prospective, randomized, multicenter FDA investigational device exemption (IDE) trial comparing coflex Interlaminar Stabilization with laminectomy and PSF. A total of 322 patients from 21 sites in the US were enrolled between 2006 and 2008 for the IDE trial. The current study evaluated only the subset of patients from this overall cohort with Grade 1 spondylolisthesis (99 in the coflex group and 51 in the fusion group). Subjects were randomized 2:1 to receive decompression and coflex interlaminar stabilization or decompression and posterolateral spinal fusion with spinal instrumentation. Data collected included perioperative outcomes, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), back and worse leg visual analog scale (VAS) scores, 12-Item Short Form Health Survey, Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ), and radiographic outcomes at a minimum of 2 years. The FDA criteria for overall device success required the following to be met: 15-point reduction in ODI, no reoperations, no major devicerelated complications, and no postoperative epidural injections. Results. At a minimum of 2 years, patient follow-up was 94.9% and 94.1% in the coflex and fusion control groups, respectively. There were no group differences at baseline for any demographic, clinical, or radiographic parameter. The average age was 63 years in the coflex cohort and 65 years in the fusion cohort. Coflex subjects experienced significantly shorter operative times (p < 0.0001), less estimated blood loss (p < 0.0001), and shorter length of stay (p < 0.0001) than fusion controls. Both groups experienced significant improvements from baseline at 2 years in ODI, VAS back, VAS leg, and ZCQ, with no significant group differences, with the exception of significantly greater ZCQ satisfaction with coflex at 2 years. FDA overall success was achieved in 62.8% of coflex subjects (59 of 94) and 62.5% of fusion controls (30 of 48) (p = 1.000). The reoperation rate was higher in the coflex cohort (14 [14.1%] of 99) compared with fusion (3 [5.9%] of 51, p = 0.18), although this difference was not statistically significant. Fusion was associated with significantly greater angulation and translation at the superior and inferior adjacent levels compared with baseline, while coflex showed no significant radiographic changes at the operative or index levels. Conclusions. Low-grade spondylolisthesis was effectively stabilized by coflex and led to similar clinical outcomes, with improved perioperative outcomes, compared with PSF at 2 years. Reoperation rates, however, were higher in the coflex cohort. Patients in the fusion cohort experienced significantly increased superior and inferior level angulation and translation, while those in the coflex cohort experienced no significant adjacent or index level radiographic changes from baseline. Coflex Interlaminar Stabilization is a less invasive, safe, and equally efficacious clinical solution to PSF to treat low-grade spondylolisthesis, and it appears to reduce stresses at the adjacent levels. Clinical trial registration no.: NCT00534235 (ClinicalTrials.gov).
机译:目的。后外侧脊柱融合术(PSF)长期以来一直是退行性脊柱滑脱的护理标准,但已提出了侵入性较小,保留运动的替代方案,以减少与融合相关的并发症,同时仍提供神经减压和稳定作用。本研究的目的是评估coflex层间稳定术与PSF相比治疗低度脊柱狭窄合并椎管狭窄的安全性和有效性。方法。这是一项前瞻性,随机,多中心FDA研究器械豁免(IDE)试验,将coflex层间稳定与椎板切除术和PSF进行了比较。在2006年至2008年之间,美国21个地区的322名患者参加了IDE试验。当前的研究仅评估了这一总体队列中具有1级腰椎滑脱的患者子集(coflex组为99名,融合组为51名)。受试者按2:1的比例随机接受减压和coflex椎板间稳定或减压和后外侧脊柱融合术与脊柱器械。收集的数据包括围手术期结局,Oswestry残疾指数(ODI),后背和小腿视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分,12项简短形式健康调查,苏黎世C行问卷(ZCQ)以及至少2年的影像学结果。 FDA总体器械成功的标准要求满足以下条件:ODI降低15分,不再进行再次手术,没有与器械相关的主要并发症以及术后硬膜外注射。结果。至少2年,coflex和融合对照组的患者随访率分别为94.9%和94.1%。对于任何人口统计学,临床或放射学参数,基线时均无组间差异。 Coflex队列的平均年龄为63岁,融合队列的平均年龄为65岁。与融合对照组相比,Coflex受试者的手术时间(p <0.0001),估计失血量(p <0.0001)和住院时间(p <0.0001)显着缩短。两组在ODI,VAS背部,VAS腿和ZCQ方面均比基线2年时有了显着改善,两组之间无显着差异,但2年时Coflex对ZCQ的满意度显着提高。在62.8%的coflex受试者(94名中的59名)和62.5%的融合对照(48名中的30名)中,FDA总体上获得了成功(p = 1.000)。与融合术(51的3 [5.9%],p = 0.18)相比,coflex队列的再手术率(99的14 [14.1%])更高。与基线相比,融合与上,下相邻水平的明显成角度和更大的翻译相关,而coflex在手术或指标水平上未显示显着的影像学改变。结论。与2年时的PSF相比,coflex可有效稳定低度腰椎滑脱并导致相似的临床结局,并改善围手术期结局。但是,coflex人群的再手术率更高。融合队列患者的上,下水平成角度和翻译明显增加,而融合队列中的患者与基线相比无显着的邻近或指数水平影像学改变。 Coflex层间稳定术是针对PSF的侵入性较小,安全且等效的临床解决方案,可用于治疗低度腰椎滑脱,并且似乎可以减轻邻近水平的压力。临床试验注册号:NCT00534235(ClinicalTrials.gov)。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
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