首页> 外文期刊>Spine >A comparison of two retroperitoneal surgical approaches for total disc arthroplasty of the lumbar spine.
【24h】

A comparison of two retroperitoneal surgical approaches for total disc arthroplasty of the lumbar spine.

机译:腰椎全椎间盘置换术的两种腹膜后手术方法的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective outcome data analysis. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate if there is a significant difference between the midline rectus (MR) and the paramedian lateral rectus (PLR) approaches with regard to implant position for lumbar disc arthroplasty. To establish that a less than optimal implant position may influence clinical outcome. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Little is known about the impact of varying surgical approaches on lumbar artificial disc implant position and clinical outcome. METHODS: Fifty-seven patients were obtained from one center participating Food and Drug Administration study for the evaluation of the lumbar Prodisc-L. Two different surgical access techniques were compared; the MR and left PLR. Two independent evaluators calculated the postoperative radiographical displacement from the midline in the coronal and sagittal planes for each of the surgical techniques. Pre- and postoperative clinical outcomes were evaluated to determine which surgical access technique was associated with better outcomes and if there was a clinical correlation with technical accuracy. RESULTS: The PLR approach was associated with greater malalignment of the prosthesis in both the coronal and sagittal planes compared with the MR approach. However, the difference was significant only in the sagittal plane (P = 0.021). There was no significant difference in clinical outcome for either approach (P = 0.34). Patients with >or=5 mm prosthetic displacement from the midvertebral point had significantly worse Owestry disability index scores than patients with <3 mm malalignment in both the coronal and sagittal planes regardless of the surgical approach employed. CONCLUSION: The finding of a statistically significant more anteriorly displaced position in the sagittal plane of the total disc arthroplasty using the PLR approach may indicate a need to change to the MR approach. This study also demonstrates that patients with >or=5 mm prosthetic deviation from midline in either the coronal or sagittal planes had diminished clinical outcomes regardless of the approach used.
机译:研究设计:回顾性结局数据分析。目的:评估腰椎间盘置换术的植入位置在中线直肌(MR)与旁中直肌(PLR)进路之间是否存在显着差异。要确定不太理想的植入物位置可能会影响临床结果。背景数据摘要:关于改变手术方法对腰椎间盘植入物位置和临床结果的影响知之甚少。方法:从一项参与食品和药物管理局研究的中心获得的57例患者用于评估腰椎Prodisc-L。比较了两种不同的手术入路技术。 MR和左PLR。两名独立的评估人员针对每种手术技术,计算了从冠状平面和矢状平面中线的术后X线摄影位移。评估术前和术后的临床结局,以确定哪种外科手术技术与更好的结局相关,以及是否与技术准确性存在临床相关性。结果:与MR方法相比,PLR方法与在冠状平面和矢状面的假体排列不均相关。但是,该差异仅在矢状平面上才显着(P = 0.021)。两种方法的临床结局均无显着差异(P = 0.34)。不管采用哪种手术方法,从中椎点起假体移位≥5 mm的患者在冠状面和矢状面均<3 mm畸形的患者的Owestry残疾指数得分明显较差。结论:使用PLR方法在全椎间盘置换术的矢状面上发现具有统计学意义的更向前移位的位置可能表明需要改变MR方法。这项研究还表明,无论采用哪种方法,无论是在冠状平面还是在矢状面中,假体与中线的偏差均大于或等于5毫米的患者,其临床结局均降低了。

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