首页> 外文期刊>Spine >Comparative Analysis of Pedicle Screw Versus Hook Instrumentation in Posterior Spinal Fusion of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis.
【24h】

Comparative Analysis of Pedicle Screw Versus Hook Instrumentation in Posterior Spinal Fusion of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis.

机译:青少年特发性脊柱侧弯后路椎弓根螺钉与钩形器械的对比分析。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

STUDY DESIGN.: A retrospective matched cohort study. OBJECTIVE.: To comprehensively compare the 2-year postoperative results of posterior correction and fusion with segmental pedicle screw instrumentation versus those with hook constructs in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) treated at a single institution. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA.: Despite the reports of satisfactory correction and maintenance of scoliotic curves by pedicle screw instrumentation compared to hook constructs, few reports on the comprehensive comparison of segmental pedicle screw instrumentation versus hook instrumentation exist MATERIALS AND METHODS.: A total of 52 patients with AIS at a single institution who underwent a posterior spinal fusion with segmental pedicle screw (26) or hook (26) instrumentation were sorted and matched according to four criteria: similar age at surgery (14.8 years in pedicle screw group and 14.2 years in hook group), identical Lenke curve types, same number of fused vertebrae (11.7 in each group), andidentical operative methods (18 posterior spinal fusions with thoracoplasty, 4 posterior spinal fusions with iliac crest bone graft, and 4 anterior and posterior spinal fusions in each group). Patients were evaluated before surgery, immediate after surgery, and at the 2-year follow-up according to radiographic changes in curve correction, pulmonary function tests, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, implant costs, and SRS-24 scores. RESULTS.: After surgery, the average major curve correction was 76% in the screw group and 50% in the hook group (P < 0.001). At the 2-year follow-up, loss of the major curve correction was less in the screw group (5.4%) compared with the hook group (8.0%) (P = 0.35). Postoperative global coronal and sagittal balance was similar in both groups. An average of 0.8 levels from the distal end vertebra was saved using pedicle screws compared with hook constructs (P = 0.002). Postoperative 2-year proximal junctional change in the sagittal plane (angle between uppermost instrumented vertebra and two verte bral bodies above the uppermost-instrumented vertebra) was 9 degrees in the screw group and 6 degrees in the hook group (P = 0.19). Postoperative 2-year distal junctional change in the sagittal plane was similar in both groups. Operative time averaged 341 minutes in the screw group and 338 minutes in the hook group (P = 0.86), and intraoperative blood loss was similar in both groups (879 mL in screw group vs. 896 mL in hook group) (P = 0.12). Average implant cost in the hook group (11.8 fixation points; 5,816 U.S. dollars) was significantly lower than that of the screw group (17.1 fixation points; 11,508 U.S. dollars) (P < 0.001). Two years following surgery, the screw group demonstrated improved percent predicted pulmonary function values compared with that of the hook group (FVC, 80%--> 79% in screw group vs. 82%--> 74% in hook group, P = 0.0056; FEV-1, 73%--> 76% in screw group vs. 80%--> 79% in hook group, P = 0.017). Postoperative 2-year SRS-24 scores were similar inboth groups (screw group [97] vs. hook group [101]) (P = 0.15). There were no neurologic or visceral complications related to hook or pedicle screw instrumentation. CONCLUSION.: Pedicle screw instrumentation, although more expensive, offers a significantly better major and minor curve correction without neurologic problems and improved pulmonary function values in the operative treatment of AIS and enables a slightly shorter fusion length than segmental hook instrumentation.
机译:研究设计:一项回顾性配对队列研究。目的:全面比较在单个机构中治疗的青少年特发性脊柱侧凸(AIS)的后路矫正和节段椎弓根螺钉融合术与钩形结构融合术的2年术后结果。背景数据摘要:尽管有报道称与带钩结构相比,椎弓根螺钉器械对脊柱侧弯曲线的矫正和维持令人满意,但关于分段椎弓根螺钉器械与钩形器械的综合比较的报道很少。材料与方法:总共52种根据以下四个标准对在单个机构中接受节段性椎弓根螺钉(26)或钩形(26)器械后路脊柱融合术的AIS患者进行分类和匹配:手术年龄相似(椎弓根螺钉组为14.8岁,而椎弓根螺钉组为14.2岁)。钩组),相同的Lenke曲线类型,相同数量的融合椎骨(每组11.7个)和相同的手术方法(18例后路脊柱融合加胸廓成形术,4例后路脊柱融合加骨植骨以及4例前,后脊柱融合每组)。根据曲线校正,肺功能检查,手术时间,术中失血量,植入物成本和SRS-24评分的影像学变化,在手术前,手术后以及术后2年随访中对患者进行评估。结果:手术后,螺钉组的平均主曲线矫正率为76%,钩组的平均主曲线矫正率为50%(P <0.001)。在2年的随访中,与钩组(8.0%)相比,螺钉组(5.4%)的主要曲线矫正损失更少(P = 0.35)。两组的术后总冠状和矢状平衡相似。与钩状结构相比,使用椎弓根螺钉平均可节省远端椎骨0.8级(P = 0.002)。术后2年矢状面近端交界处的变化(最上器械椎骨与最上器械椎骨上方的两个椎体之间的角度)在螺钉组为9度,在钩组为6度(P = 0.19)。两组的术后2年末矢状面远端交界处变化相似。螺丝组平均手术时间为341分钟,钩组平均为338分钟(P = 0.86),两组术中出血量相似(螺丝组为879 mL,钩组为896 mL)(P = 0.12) 。钩组的平均植入物成本(11.8个固定点; 5,816美元)显着低于螺钉组的平均植入物成本(17.1个固定点; 11,508美元)(P <0.001)。手术后两年,螺钉组的肺功能预测值比钩组提高了(FVC,螺钉组为80%-> 79%,钩组为82%-> 74%,P = 0.0056; FEV-1,螺丝组73%-> 76%,而钩组80%-> 79%,P = 0.017)。术后2年SRS-24评分在两组中均相似(螺丝组[97] vs钩组[101])(P = 0.15)。没有与钩或椎弓根螺钉器械相关的神经系统或内脏并发症。结论:椎弓根螺钉器械虽然较昂贵,但在AIS的手术治疗中可提供明显更好的主,次曲线矫正而无神经系统问题和改善的肺功能值,并且融合器的长度比分段钩器械短。

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