...
首页> 外文期刊>Spine >In Degenerative Spondylolisthesis, Unilateral Laminotomy for Bilateral Decompression Leads to Less Reoperations at 5 Years When Compared to Posterior Decompression With Instrumented Fusion A Propensity-matched Retrospective Analysis
【24h】

In Degenerative Spondylolisthesis, Unilateral Laminotomy for Bilateral Decompression Leads to Less Reoperations at 5 Years When Compared to Posterior Decompression With Instrumented Fusion A Propensity-matched Retrospective Analysis

机译:在退行性辛隆角质间,与双侧减压的单侧薄膜切开术导致与用仪器融合的后减压相比,在5年内导致较低的重新进入融合型偏离匹配的回顾性分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Study Design. Multicenter retrospective cohort study. Objective. The aim of this study was to compare reoperation rates at 5-year follow-up of unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (ULBD) versus posterior decompression with instrumented fusion (Fusion) for patients with low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) in a multicenter database. Summary of Background Data. Controversy exists regarding whether fusion should be used to augment decompression surgery in patients with LSS with DS. For years, the standard has been fusion with standard laminectomy to prevent postoperative instability. However, this strategy is not supported by Level 1 evidence. Instability and reoperations may be reduced or prevented using less invasive decompression techniques. Methods. We identified 164 patients with DS and LSS who underwent ULBD between January 2007 and December 2011 in a multicenter database. These patients were propensity score-matched on age, sex, race, and smoking status with patients who underwent Fusion (n = 437). Each patient required a minimum of 5-year follow-up. The primary outcome was 5-year reoperation. Secondary outcome measures included postoperative complication rates, blood loss during surgery, and length of stay. Logistic regression models were used to estimate the odds ratio of the 5-year reoperation rate between the two surgical groups. Results. The reoperation rate at 5-year follow-up was 10.4% in the ULBD group and 17.2% in the Fusion group. ULBD reoperations were more frequent at the index surgical level; Fusion reoperations were more common at an adjacent level. The two types of operations had similar postoperative complication rates, and both groups tended to have fusion reoperations. Conclusion. For patients with stable DS and LSS, ULBD is a viable, durable option compared to fusion with decreased blood loss and length stay, as well as a lower reoperation rate at 5-year follow-up. Further prospective studies are required to determine the optimal clinical scenario for ULBD in the setting of DS.
机译:学习规划。多中心回顾性队列研究。客观的。本研究的目的是在单侧椎间力减压(ULBD)对单侧薄膜切开术的5年后续率为5年的后续速度与腰椎脊柱狭窄的低级退化脊柱型患者(Fusion)对比,对双侧减压(ULBD)进行比较。 (LSS)在多中心数据库中。背景数据摘要。存在关于融合是否应该用于增强DS患者的解压缩手术的争议。多年来,标准一直融合标准椎板切除术,以防止术后不稳定。但是,第1级证据不支持这种策略。使用较少的侵入性减压技术可以减少或防止不稳定性和重新进展。方法。我们确定了164名DS和LSS患者,在2007年1月至2011年12月在多中心数据库中接受了ULBD。这些患者在随后融合的患者时均为年龄,性别,种族和吸烟地位匹配(n = 437)。每位患者至少需要5年的随访。主要结果是5年的重新组合。次要结果措施包括术后并发症率,手术过程中的血液损失以及逗留时间。 Logistic回归模型用于估计两年外科群体之间的5年重新速率的差距。结果。 5年后续率在5年的后续率为10.4%,融合组中的17.2%。在指数外科水平的ULBD重新进展更频繁;融合重新进入在相邻水平上更常见。两种类型的操作具有相似的术后并发症率,并且两组往往具有融合重新进展。结论。对于具有稳定DS和LSS的患者,与融合的血液损失和长度保持率和5年随访时,ULBD是一种可行的,耐用的选择,与血液损失和长度降低,以及较低的重新进入率。需要进一步的预期研究来确定DS设置中的ULBD的最佳临床情景。

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