首页> 外文期刊>Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery. >Which procedure is better for lumbar interbody fusion: Anterior lumbar interbody fusion or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion?
【24h】

Which procedure is better for lumbar interbody fusion: Anterior lumbar interbody fusion or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion?

机译:哪种方法更适合腰椎椎间融合:前路腰椎间融合或经椎间孔腰椎间融合?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Introduction Both anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) surgeries are performed to obtain a solid fusion to treat lumbar spondylosis. This systematic review investigated whether surgical complications, nonfusion rate, radiographic outcome, and clinical outcome of ALIF were significantly different from those of TLIF. Method A computerized search of the electronic databases MEDLINE was conducted. Only therapeutic studies with a prospective or retrospective comparative design were considered for inclusion in the present investigation. Two reviewers independently extracted relevant data from each included study. Statistical comparisons were made when appropriate. Results Nine studies were determined to be appropriate for the systematic review, and all studies were retrospective comparative studies. Blood loss and operative time in ALIF was greater than in TLIF. There was no significant difference in the complication rate between ALIF and TLIF. The restoration of disc height, segmental lordosis, and whole lumbar lordosis in ALIF was superior to TLIF. However, clinical outcomes in ALIF were similar with TLIF, and there was no significant difference in nonfusion rate between the two techniques. Costs of ALIF were greater than those of TLIF. Conclusion Clinical outcomes and nonfusion rate in ALIF were similar to TLIF. However, the restoration of disc height, segmental lordosis, and whole lumbar lordosis in ALIF were superior to those in TLIF, while blood loss, operative time, and costs in ALIF were greater than in TLIF.
机译:简介进行前路腰椎椎间融合术(ALIF)和经椎间孔腰椎椎体间融合术(TLIF)均获得了用于治疗腰椎病的牢固融合。该系统评价调查了ALIF的手术并发症,非融合率,影像学结果和临床结果是否与TLIF显着不同。方法对电子数据库MEDLINE进行计算机搜索。本研究仅考虑具有前瞻性或回顾性比较设计的治疗研究。两名评价者从每个纳入的研究中独立提取相关数据。适当时进行统计比较。结果确定有9项研究适合进行系统评价,所有研究均为回顾性比较研究。 ALIF的失血量和手术时间大于TLIF。 ALIF和TLIF的并发症发生率无显着差异。 ALIF的椎间盘高度,节段性脊柱前凸和整个腰椎前凸的恢复优于TLIF。但是,ALIF的临床结局与TLIF相似,两种技术之间的无融合率无显着差异。 ALIF的成本高于TLIF。结论ALIF的临床结局和非融合率与TLIF相似。但是,ALIF的椎间盘高度,节段性脊柱前凸和整个腰椎前凸的恢复均优于TLIF,而ALIF的失血量,手术时间和成本均高于TLIF。

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