单边双通道内镜(UBE)技术治疗腰椎管狭窄症临床研究
DOI:
作者:
作者单位:

芜湖市第二人民医院

作者简介:

通讯作者:

中图分类号:

R681.5

基金项目:

安徽省芜湖市科技局重点研发项目 编号2020ms3-14


Clinical study of unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis
Author:
Affiliation:

1.Wuhu Second People'2.'3.s Hospital

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 通过采用单边双通道内镜(UBE)与TLIF治疗腰椎管狭窄症,以验证UBE技术治疗腰椎管狭窄症的临床疗效。 方法 将2020年4月~2022年3月份收治诊断腰椎管狭窄症的60例患者随机分为两组, 每组30例,一组采用UBE治疗,另一组采用TLIF 治疗。观察两组术前、术后各随访时段的腰腿痛VAS、ODI评分及末次随访Macnab功能评定。统计术后住院日、术前术后血红蛋白差值,术后并发症。 结果 60例均不少于3个月随访, 两组术前、术后腿痛VAS评分统计无明显差异,腰痛VAS评分UBE组术后1周、1个月、3个月低于TLIF组,差异有统计学意义(P﹤0.05),术前及术后6个月、12个月差异无统计学意义;ODI评分UBE组术后1个月、3个月低于TLIF组,差异有统计学意义(P﹤0.05),术前及术后6个月、12个月两组差异无统计学意义。末次随访Macnab功能评定,UBE组优良率93.7%,TLIF组为86.7%,差异无统计学意义。术后住院时间UBE组平均为(6.17±2.44)天,TLIF组为(10.73±4.00)天,术前、术后血红蛋白差值UBE组 (11.33±7.82)g/L与TLIF组(25.00±8.28)g/L 相比差异有统计学意义(P﹤0.05)。UBE组1例马尾神经损伤,再手术1例,TLIF组2例出现神经根撕裂伤伴脑脊液漏,2例切口愈合不良,两组均无椎管内血肿及感染出现。结论 UBE技术治疗腰椎管狭窄症可个体化选择手术方式,单侧入路双侧减压可减少对脊柱稳定性的破坏以及对椎旁肌的损伤,降低椎间融合率,同时创伤小,术后腰痛轻,疗效满意,且学习曲线平缓,易于掌握,值得推广。

    Abstract:

    Abstract: objective to verify the clinical efficacy of UBE in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis by using unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) and TLIF . Methods 60 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis diagnosed in our department from April 2020 to March 2022 were randomly divided into two groups, with 30 patients in each group. One group was treated with UBE surgery , The orther was treated with TLIF surgery . VAS score and ODI score of low back and leg pain and Macnab function evaluation in the last follow-up were observed before and after operation. The hospitalization time, preoperative and postoperative hemoglobin difference, and various postoperative complications. Results 60 cases were followed up for at least 3 months. There was no significant difference in VAS score of leg pain before and after operation between the two groups. The VAS score of low back pain in the UBE group was lower than that in the TLIF group at 1 week, 1 month and 3 months after operation, and the difference was statistically significant (P﹤0.05); The ODI score of the UBE group was lower than that of the TLIF group at 1 and 3 months after operation, and the difference was statistically significant (P﹤0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups before operation, 6 and 12 months after operation.At the last follow-up, the excellent and good rate of Macnab function was 93.7% in the UBE group and 86.7% in the TLIF group, and the difference was not statistically significant. The average postoperative hospitalization time in the UBE group was (6.17 ± 2.44) days and that in the TLIF group was (10.73 ± 4.00) days. The difference in hemoglobin between the UBE group (11.33 ± 7.82) g/l and the TLIF group (25.00 ± 8.28) g/l was statistically significant (P < 0.05).There was 1 cauda equina nerve injury in the UBE group, 1 reoperation, 2 nerve root laceration with cerebrospinal fluid leakage in the TLIF group, and 2 poor wound healing. There was no intraspinal hematoma and infection in both groups. Conclusion UBE technique can be used to treat lumbar spinal stenosis with individualized surgical methods. Unilateral approach and bilateral decompression can reduce the damage to spinal stability and paravertebral muscle, reduce the rate of intervertebral fusion, and have small trauma, light postoperative low back pain, satisfactory curative effect, gentle learning curve, easy to master, which is worthy of promotion.

    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:2022-07-11
  • 最后修改日期:2022-10-18
  • 录用日期:2023-01-18
  • 在线发布日期:
  • 出版日期: