经多裂肌间隙入路(Wiltse入路)在治疗单节段退行性腰椎管狭窄症患者的疗效研究
DOI:
作者:
作者单位:

1.武警海景总队医院;2.浙江省人民医院/杭州医学院附属人民医院

作者简介:

通讯作者:

中图分类号:

基金项目:


Clinical Research of TLIF by Wiltse Approach for the Treatment of Degenerative Lumbar Stenosis
Author:
Affiliation:

1.Jiaxing Hospital of Zhejiang General Corpsof Armed Police Forces;2.Zhejiang Provincial People’s Hospital/People’s Hospital of Hangzhou Medical College

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:

    目的:通过与传统后正中入路TLIF术进行比较,探讨经多裂肌间隙入路(Wiltse入路)在治疗单节段退行性腰椎管狭窄症的临床效果。方法:回顾分析2016年1月1日至2018年2月1日在本院手术治疗的单节段退行性腰椎管狭窄症病人60例,分别采用后经多裂肌间隙入路TLIF(30例)与后正中入路TLIF(30例)进行治疗,观察两组的手术时间、术中出血量、术后下地时间、术后及术前疼痛比较、JOA腰痛评分、腰背部多裂肌萎缩率是否存在明显差异。结果:经多裂肌间隙入路(Wiltse入路)组的手术时间、术中出血量、术后下地时间均显著低于传统后正中入路组(P<0.05)。两组患者均获随访,随访时间13—36个月,平均(26.22±8.97),两组术前VAS、JOA评分差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),术后两组患者均随时间推移VAS评分显著降低,术后1个月、术后6个月及末次随访Wiltse入路组VAS评分均明显低于传统组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。术后1、6、末次随访,两组JOA评分均较术前显著增加,Wiltse入路组明显高于传统组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组患者术后手术节段、邻近节段的多裂肌均有一定程度的萎缩。但Wiltse入路组多裂肌萎缩率明显低于传统组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:采用经多裂肌间隙入路(Wiltse入路)治疗单节段退行性腰椎管狭窄症可减少手术时间,降低对椎旁肌肉的损伤,减少术后腰背部疼痛的发生,具有出血少、创伤小、康复快等优点,值得在临床上进一步推广。

    Abstract:

    To provide the clinical evidence by comparing the efficacy of Paraspinal Approach TLIF and Midline Approach TLIF for the treatment of single segment degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis.Method:From January 1, 2016 to February 1, 2018, 60 patients with single segment degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis who were operated in our hospital were analyzed retrospectively. The patients were treated with TLIF via posterior interhemispheric approach ((group A,30 cases) and TLIF via posterior median approach (traditional group,30 cases) . The operation time, Intraoperative bleeding volume, ambulation time,visual analog scale(VAS), Japanese Orthopedic Association(JOA) score and the multifidus muscle cross-section area in MRI were evaluated. Results:Comparing the operation time, intraoperative bleeding volume and ambulation time, group A was less than traditional group(P<0.05).The follow-up period ranged from 13-36 months, with an average of (26.22±8.97) months. There was no difference in VAS and JOA scores between the two groups before surgery (P> 0.05).The VAS score of the two groups decreased significantly with time, and the VAS score of the Wiltse group was significantly lower than that of the traditional group (P < 0.05). At 1, 6 months and last investigation after operation, JOA scores of the two groups were significantly increased compared with that before operation. Wiltse approach group was significantly higher than that of the traditional group (P < 0.05). The surgical segment and the multifidus of adjacent segments of the two groups of patients had a certain degree of atrophy. But the group A multifidus muscle atrophy rate is significantly lower than the traditional group. Conclusion:Compared with the traditional posterior Midline Approach, the use of the Paraspinal Approach (Wiltse approach) to treat single degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis can reduce the operation time, damage to the paravertebral musclesand the back pain. What's more, the Paraspinal Approach also has the advantages of less bleeding, less trauma, and faster recovery, which deserves further promotion in the clinic.

    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:2020-04-01
  • 最后修改日期:2020-10-11
  • 录用日期:2020-10-13
  • 在线发布日期:
  • 出版日期: