两种术式治疗双侧神经症状腰椎管狭窄症比较
DOI:
作者:
作者单位:

1.山东省立医院西院(山东省耳鼻喉医院);2.解放军960医院泰安院区;3.山东第一医科大学第二附属医院

作者简介:

通讯作者:

中图分类号:

基金项目:


Comparison of two surgical methods for bilateral neurological symptoms of lumbar spinal stenosis
Author:
Affiliation:

1.Shandong Provincial Western Hospital;2.The 960 Hospital of PLA of Taian District;3.The Second Affiliated Hospital of Shandong First Medical University

Fund Project:

  • 摘要
  • |
  • 图/表
  • |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献
  • |
  • 相似文献
  • |
  • 引证文献
  • |
  • 资源附件
  • |
  • 文章评论
    摘要:

    摘要[目的]比较经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术(TLIF)联合对侧椎板间开窗减压术与后路腰椎椎间融合术(PLIF)治疗双侧神经症状腰椎管狭窄症的疗效。[方法]2014年2月至2015年3月在解放军960医院泰安院区住院双侧神经症状腰椎管狭窄症患者,TLIF联合对侧椎板间开窗减压术(TLIF+开窗)32例,PLIF32例,记录一般情况、住院及手术时间、出血量、引流量、并发症发生率及融合情况。术前、术后2周、3个月、6个月及末次随访时进行Oswestry功能障碍指数评分(ODI)、疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS),测量椎间隙高度及局部矢状位Cobb角。[结果]术后随访25~38 个月,平均27.2个月。TLIF+开窗组住院及手术时间、出血量、引流量低于PLIF组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。并发症发生率、ODI及VAS评分、椎间隙高度、局部矢状位Cobb角差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),椎间隙全部融合。[结论]TLIF+开窗术及PLIF均是治疗双侧神经症状腰椎管狭窄症的有效方法。TLIF+开窗组的住院及手术时间、出血量、引流量少于PLIF组,是一种安全有效的手术方式。

    Abstract:

    Abstract:[Objective]To compare the curative effect of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) combined with fenestration decompression on the other side and the posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) for the treatment of lumbar spinal canal stenosis with bilateral nerve symptoms.[Methods]Patients with bilateral neurological symptoms of lumbar spinal stenosis hospitalized in the 960 Hospital of PLA of Taian from February 2014 to March 2015.Among them,32 cases underwent TLIF combined with contralateral fenestration decompression (TLIF+ fenestration group) ,32 cases underwent PLIF operation,record the general condition, length of hospital stay and operation, blood loss, drainage volume, complication rate and fusion rate were recorded.Oswestry Disability Index score (ODI) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS),intervertebral space height and local sagittal Cobb angl were performed preoperatively, 2 weeks, 3 months, 6 months and At last follow-up postoperatively.[Results]Postoperative follow-up ranged from 25 to 38 months, with an average of 27.2 months.The hospitalization and operation time, blood loss and drainage volume of TLIF + fenestration group were lower than those of PLIF group,the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).There were no significant differences in the incidence of complications, ODI and VAS scores, intervertebral space height, and local sagittal Cobb angle(P>0.05).ALL the intervertebral space were fused.[Conclusion]TLIF + fenestration and PLIF are effective methods for the treatment of bilateral neurological symptoms of lumbar spinal stenosis.The hospitalization and operation time, bleeding volume and drainage volume of TLIF + fenestration group were less than those of PLIF group, which was a safe and effective surgical method.

    参考文献
    相似文献
    引证文献
引用本文
分享
文章指标
  • 点击次数:
  • 下载次数:
  • HTML阅读次数:
  • 引用次数:
历史
  • 收稿日期:2020-02-24
  • 最后修改日期:2020-08-13
  • 录用日期:2020-08-28
  • 在线发布日期:
  • 出版日期: