单侧枢椎椎板螺钉在椎动脉变异的上颈椎不稳中的临床应用

目的：探讨后路寰椎侧块螺钉联合单侧枢椎椎板螺钉＋对侧枢椎椎弓根螺钉固定、自体双皮质骨加压植骨融合术治疗上颈椎不稳伴椎动脉变异的临床疗效。方法：2008年6月至2012年12月,行后路寰椎侧块螺钉联合单侧枢椎椎板螺钉＋对侧枢椎椎弓根螺钉固定、自体双皮质骨加压植骨融合术12例,男8例,女4例,年龄16—77岁,平均47．5岁。术前患者枕颈部活动受限伴或不伴疼痛,VAS评分0-7分,平均3．50±2．71;椎动脉造影或颈椎CTA示单侧椎动脉明显狭窄。观察术中有无神经及血管损伤;术后7d内行X线和CT检查,了解内固定位置;术后随访观察有无内固定松动、断裂失败并发症、复位丢失,以及植骨融合率等。结果：12例单侧枢椎椎板螺钉固定,术中未发生神经和椎动脉损伤。患者颈部VAS评分0．92±0．90,较术前明显减轻（P=0．01）。术后x线示12例患者颈椎序列恢复良好,CT示1例枢椎椎板腹侧皮质侵犯,余位置均良好。12例患者均获得随访,时间6个月～3年;未见内固定松动、断裂和复位丢失等并发症;术后6个月12例均骨性融合。结论：后路寰椎侧块螺钉联合单侧枢椎椎板螺钉＋对侧枢椎椎弓根螺钉固定、自体双皮质骨加压植骨融合术,既避免了传统螺钉固定椎动脉损伤的同时,又克服了部分病例双侧枢椎椎板螺钉时植骨床的不足,在保证良好力学稳定的情况下,可以取得良好的骨性融合率。单侧枢椎椎板螺钉可以作为一种安全有效的补充固定措施应用于椎动脉变异的上颈椎不稳患者中。     

枢椎椎板螺钉在上颈椎后路固定术中的应用

目的探讨枢椎椎板螺钉固定术应用于上颈椎后路融合内固定术中的可行性。方法回顾性分析本院2012年1月—2014年12月在上颈椎后路融合固定术中采用枢椎椎板螺钉固定的19例患者资料,术中根据枢椎椎弓根是否存在缺如、细小等情况,选择置入双侧枢椎椎板螺钉或单侧枢椎椎板螺钉并对侧椎弓根螺钉,联合枕骨板螺钉和/或寰椎侧块螺钉。15例上颈椎畸形患者均有不同程度脊髓功能损害表现,日本骨科学会(JOA)评分为5~15分,平均11.5分。4例外伤性寰枢椎骨折患者有后颈部疼痛及活动障碍,疼痛视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分为2~7分,平均4.5分。术后复查患者影像学资料,观察内固定位置及植骨融合情况。结果所有手术顺利完成,未发生椎动脉、脊髓等损伤。术后复查CT,显示所有枢椎椎板螺钉位置良好,均未突破内侧皮质骨。随访时X线、CT示螺钉位置良好,无松动及断钉。所有患者术后12个月植骨均融合,上颈椎畸形患者神经功能均有不同程度改善,JOA评分为13~17分,平均15.3分。外伤性寰枢椎骨折患者颈部疼痛及活动障碍明显改善,VAS评分为0~2分,平均1.0分。结论枢椎椎板螺钉固定在上颈椎后路固定手术中方法简单安全、效果良好,对于无法行枢椎椎弓根螺钉固定的患者,枢椎椎板螺钉固定是一种安全有效的替代方法。     

枢椎椎板螺钉联合寰椎椎弓根螺钉固定治疗寰枢椎脱位

目的 评价枢椎椎板螺钉联合寰椎椎弓根螺钉固定融合治疗寰枢椎脱位的临床可行性.方法 对5例枢椎椎弓根细小的寰枢椎脱位患者,在气管插管全身麻醉下施行了枢椎椎板螺钉联合寰椎椎弓根螺钉固定术.枢椎椎板螺钉的进钉点位于棘突两侧椎板交界处,交叉置人对侧椎板内;寰椎椎弓根螺钉的进钉点位于枢椎侧块中线上,距寰椎后弓上缘最少3 mm,内斜10°,上斜5°.螺钉直径3.5 mm,枢椎椎板螺钉长26～32 mm,寰椎椎弓根螺钉长28～32 mm,结合自体髂骨植骨.结果 患者获得随访3～18个月,平均7.5个月.未发生椎动脉、脊髓损伤,术后临床症状得到不同程度的改善,X线、CT复查螺钉位置良好,无松动、断钉,植骨3个月后均达到满意融合.结论 枢椎椎板螺钉联合寰椎椎弓根螺钉固定治疗寰枢椎脱位效果满意,是又一可供选择的寰枢椎后路固定术式.     

枢椎椎板螺钉治疗上颈椎不稳的临床研究

目的探讨枢椎椎板螺钉技术的临床应用和适应证。方法2004年10月至2008年12月,采用后路枢椎椎板螺钉技术治疗上颈椎不稳35例,男19例,女16例;年龄23～73岁,平均45岁。AndersonⅡ型和Ⅲ型齿突骨折19例,寰椎横韧带断裂1例,先天性游离齿突并寰枢椎不稳2例,寰椎骨折合并寰枢椎不稳7例,不典型Hangman骨折并C2-3不稳1例,C2-3创伤性不稳5例。患者均采用颈椎后路Vertex钉棒系统固定。结果35例患者共置入枢椎椎板螺钉68枚,术中无一例发生脊髓和椎动脉损伤。患者均获得随访,随访时间6个月～4年,平均25.5个月。随访时X线片均未见明显颈椎不稳、内固定失败及螺钉松动退出。11例患者螺钉穿出椎板背侧,但无症状出现。结论枢椎后路经椎板螺钉技术固定牢固,操作简单,相对安全,特别适用于C2椎弓根发育异常或骨折不能采用椎弓跟固定的患者。     

寰椎椎弓根螺钉及枢椎椎板螺钉固定植骨融合治疗创伤性上颈椎不稳

目的:探讨寰椎椎弓根螺钉及枢椎椎板螺钉固定、植骨融合治疗创伤性上颈椎不稳的临床疗效。方法:2005年10月至2008年6月,采用后路寰椎椎弓根螺钉及枢椎椎板螺钉或椎弓根螺钉固定技术治疗创伤性上颈椎不稳患者43例,其中枢椎椎板螺钉固定组(A组)21例,枢椎椎弓根螺钉固定组(B组)22例。所有患者均有寰枢椎半脱位或不稳,表现为不同程度的颈枕区疼痛,活动受限。均使用颈椎后路Vertex钉棒系统固定。对比两组的手术时间、术中出血量,有无神经、血管、脊髓损伤和内固定松动、断裂失败并发症,是否出现复位丢失和植骨融合率。结果:A组手术时间1～3h,平均1.5h,出血量100～650ml,平均240ml。B组手术时间1.2～3h,平均2h,出血量120～800ml,平均350ml。A组手术时间和术中出血量明显少于B组(P0.05)。A组有2例、B组有3例术中在剥离时损伤C1-2间静脉丛,均用明胶海绵压迫止血成功。术后CT显示B组1例单侧枢椎椎弓根螺钉部分进入横突孔,但无症状,余枢椎椎弓根螺钉和椎板螺钉均位置良好,未见椎动脉、神经损伤及脑脊液漏并发症。43例术后获12个月～3年随访,平均20.3个月,所有患者均于术后3～4个月获得骨性融合,术后X线片显示颈椎稳定,未见复位丢失,亦未见内固定松动退出或断裂。结论:对创伤性上颈椎不稳患者应用寰椎椎弓根螺钉及枢椎椎板螺钉固定不仅具有椎弓根螺钉同等的固定疗效,而且相对安全、简单,可以作为椎弓根螺钉固定的一种补充方法。     

枢椎经椎板螺钉联合寰椎侧块螺钉内固定术的临床应用

目的 探讨后路经枢椎椎板螺钉联合寰椎侧块螺钉固定技术治疗上颈椎不稳的临床疗效和并发症.方法 2003年10月至2006年12月,采用此技术治疗寰枢椎不稳17例,男12例,女5例;年龄34～73岁,平均42.5岁.Anderson Ⅱ型和Ⅲ型齿突骨折14例,寰椎横韧带断裂1例,先天性游离齿突并寰枢椎不稳2例.均有寰枢椎半脱位或不稳,表现为不同程度的颈枕区疼痛,活动受限.枢椎经椎板螺钉固定技术以棘突和椎板的交界处椎板头尾方向的中点为进钉点,为避免钉道的相互干扰,第1枚螺钉的进钉点通常选择枢椎椎板的偏头侧,另1枚螺钉的进钉点偏尾侧,用高速磨钻在进钉点磨去少许皮质骨开窗后,用手钻向枢椎对侧椎板钻孔,螺钉方向在直视下与椎板平面并行,并稍向枢椎椎板背侧倾斜,以确保螺钉不穿破椎板腹侧皮质侵犯椎管,宁可穿破枢椎椎板背侧皮质骨.内固定系统均使用颈椎后路Vertex钉棒系统同定.结果 术中无一例发生脊髓和椎动脉损伤.有2例患者在剥离寰椎后弓下缘时,损伤静脉丛,用明胶海绵压迫止血成功.术后CT示枢椎椎板螺钉位置良好,未见侵犯枢椎椎管和脊髓.随访术后X线片未见明显颈椎不稳、内固定失败及螺钉松动退出.结论 枢椎后路经椎板螺钉技术固定牢固,操作简单,相对安全,值得进一步推广.     

后路寰枢椎椎弓根螺钉结合单侧枢椎棘突椎板钉固定治疗寰枢椎不稳的临床疗效

 目的探讨后路寰枢椎椎弓根螺钉结合单侧枢椎棘突椎板钉加同种异体骨植骨融合术治疗寰枢椎不稳的临床疗效。方法回顾性分析2010年3月至2014年4月,采用枢椎棘突椎板钉结合寰枢椎椎弓根固定植骨融合术治疗10例寰枢椎不稳定患者资料,男6例,女4例;年龄16~62岁,平均39岁;单侧椎动脉高跨畸形伴寰枢椎不稳定7例,枢椎单侧关节突破坏累及椎弓根致寰枢椎不稳定3例。患者均表现为颈部活动受限及疼痛,VAS评分1~8分,平均（3.70±2.11）分,其中3例伴肌力下降及感觉异常。术前常规行影像学检查,术后7 d及1、3、6、12个月行X线和CT检查,了解内固定位置及植骨融合情况;比较手术前后VAS评分。结果10例患者均获得随访,随访时间9~18个月,平均13个月。术中无一例发生颈脊髓和椎动脉损伤,除1例颈部肌肉肥厚者需另开软组织通道置入螺钉外,其余均一次性置钉成功。1例术后第3天切口出现渗液,考虑为同种异体骨排异反应,对症换药后5天停止渗液,余切口均一期愈合。术后VAS评分（1.01±0.89）分,较术前明显减轻。术后X线片示颈椎序列恢复良好,CT示1例患者寰椎椎弓根钉道内侧皮质破损,椎管未侵犯,余螺钉位置正常;术后6个月X线片及CT检查均见骨性融合。结论寰枢椎椎弓根螺钉结合单侧枢椎棘突椎板钉植骨融合术治疗寰枢椎不稳,近期疗效肯定。     

寰枢椎椎弓根钉固定融合治疗寰枢椎失稳

目的探讨经后路寰枢椎椎弓根钉固定融合技术治疗寰枢椎失稳的手术方法、疗效。方法采用后路寰枢椎椎弓根螺钉系统,固定、融合治疗32例寰枢椎失稳患者,术中在C型臂X线机辅助下行C1、C2置钉,复位固定,取自体髂骨行椎板间植骨。术后颈托固定3个月。结果 32例128枚螺钉成功置入,复位满意,术中未发生椎动脉和脊髓损伤。患者全部获327个月定期随访,螺钉位置良好,钉棒无松动、断裂,术后36个月均获植骨融合。术前JOA评分（8.6±2.8）分;术后3个月JOA评分（14.9±1.8）分,恢复率76%92%,平均83%。结论经后路寰枢椎椎弓根钉固定融合技术具有直视下置钉、短节段固定、固定牢靠、植骨融合率高等特点,有利于稳定寰枢关节及脊髓功能的恢复,是一种较为理想的治疗寰枢椎失稳的内固定术式。     

寰枢椎椎弓根钉板固定融合治疗上颈椎伤病临床体会

[目的]探讨经寰枢椎椎弓根钉板固定融合治疗上颈椎伤病的临床疗效。[方法]回顾2000年3月~2007年9月,徒手对50例上颈椎伤病患者进行后路经寰枢椎椎弓根钉板系统复位内固定,置入200枚寰枢椎椎弓根钉,在寰椎后弓及枢椎椎板间植骨融合,使寰枢椎复合体得到稳定。其中男36例,女14例;年龄20~65岁,平均41.52岁。Ⅱ型齿状突陈旧性骨折23例,齿状突不连12例,横韧带损伤15例。[结果]4例术后出现枕大神经痛,经对症治疗1个月后痊愈;2例螺钉穿破寰椎左侧椎弓根外侧壁,未发现脊髓、椎动脉损伤。48例获得随访,随访时间25~60个月,平均27.56个月,均获得骨性融合,未发现钉板断裂。所有患者X线片示寰椎完全复位,枢椎齿状突骨折处复位良好。CT片示螺钉与椎动脉及脊髓位置关系良好。按JOA评分标准,优34例,良13例,可2例,差1例;优良率94.00%。[结论]寰枢椎椎弓根螺钉结合钉板系统固定治疗上颈椎伤病,能显著增强寰枢椎间生物力学稳定性,植骨融合率高,该术式在寰枢椎融合术中具有较高的推广应用价值。     

双侧寰椎椎板挂钩及经寰枢椎关节间隙螺钉固定术

寰枢椎后路融合术是稳定上颈椎最常用的手术方式之一。目前临床上常用的内固定方法包括钢丝捆扎技术（Gallie技术和Brooks技术）、椎板夹技术、经C1～C2关节螺钉技术（Magrel技术）、C1～C2椎弓根螺钉技术等。研究表明，上述每项单一技术均有其不足和缺陷。2004年2月至2004年12月，我们采用一种新的寰枢椎后路内固定术——双侧寰椎椎板挂钩及经寰枢椎关节间隙螺钉固定术及自体骼骨植骨治疗了16例寰枢椎不稳患者，现将初步临床应用情况报道如下。     

Clinical application of C2 laminar screw technique

C2 laminar screws have become an increasingly used alternative method to C2 pedicle screw fixation. However, the outcome of this technique has not been thoroughly investigated. A total of 35 cases with upper cervical spinal instability undergoing C2 laminar screw fixation were reviewed. All cases had symptoms of atlantoaxial instability, such as craniocervical junction pain, and were fixed with the Vertex cervical internal fixation system. A total of 68 screws were placed and hybrid constructs (a C2 translaminar screw combined with a C2 pars screw) were incorporated in two patients. In this series, there were no intraoperative complications and no cases of neurological worsening or vascular injury from hardware placement. Computed tomographic scans demonstrated a partial dorsal laminar breach in ten patients. None of these resulted in neurological symptoms. None of the patients was found to have a breach of the ventral laminar cortex. All the C2 laminar screws fixations were performed successfully. There was no instability seen on the films with no evidence of hardware failure or screw loosening during the follow-up period in all patients. In conclusion, C2 laminar screw technique is straightforward and easily adopted; it can efficiently and reliably restore upper cervical stability. It is an alternative method to C2 pedicle screw fixation, especially in patients with unilateral occlusion of vertebral artery and pedicle deformity of C2.     

Laminar screw fixation of the axis

OBJECT: Laminar fixation of the axis with crossing bilateral screws has been shown to provide rigid fixation with a theoretically decreased risk of vertebral artery damage compared with C1-2 transarticular screw fixation and C-2 pedicle screw fixation. Some studies, however, have shown restricted rigidity of such screws compared with C-2 pedicle screws, and others note that anatomical variability exists within the posterior elements of the axis that may have an impact on successful placement. To elucidate the clinical impact of such screws, the authors report their experience in placing C-2 laminar screws in adult patients over a 2-year period, with emphasis on clinical outcome and technical placement. METHODS: Sixteen adult patients with cervical instability underwent posterior cervical and cervicothoracic fusion procedures at our institution with constructs involving C-2 laminar screws. Eleven patients were men and 5 were women, and they ranged in age from 28 to 84 years (mean 57 years). The reasons for fusion were degenerative disease (9 patients) and treatment of trauma (7 patients). In 14 patients (87.5%) standard translaminar screws were placed, and in 2 (12.5%) an ipsilateral trajectory was used. All patients underwent preoperative radiological evaluation of the cervical spine, including computed tomography scanning with multiplanar reconstruction to assess the posterior anatomy of C-2. Anatomical restrictions for placement of standard translaminar screws included a deeply furrowed spinous process and/or an underdeveloped midline posterior ring of the axis. In these cases, screws were placed into the corresponding lamina from the ipsilateral side, allowing bilateral screws to be oriented in a more parallel, as opposed to perpendicular, plane. All patients were followed for >2 years to record rates of fusion, instrumentation failure, and other complications. RESULTS: Thirty-two screws were placed without neurological or vascular complications. The mean follow-up duration was 27.3 months. Complications included 2 revisions, one for pseudarthrosis and the other for screw pullout, and 3 postoperative infections. CONCLUSIONS: Placement of laminar screws into the axis from the standard crossing approach or via an ipsilateral trajectory may allow a safe, effective, and durable means of including the axis in posterior cervical and cervicothoracic fusion procedures.     

经椎板关节突螺钉固定治疗下腰椎不稳

目的探讨关节突螺钉固定在下腰椎退行性不稳定患者手术中应用的临床效果。方法对19例退行性腰椎不稳患者采用后路椎板开窗减压，椎间植骨融合，经椎板关节突螺钉固定。结果19例随访6—36个月（平均21个月），椎间植骨融合率6个月时为86％，1年时为93％，临床症状消失，满意率92％。未出现断钉。结论采用后路椎板减压，经椎板关节突螺钉固定加椎间植骨能提高椎间融合率，使小关节稳定，解除临床症状。     

寰枢椎后路经关节螺钉固定术

目的评价参照枢椎椎管内壁行寰枢椎后路经关节螺钉固定（Naged技术）的可行性。方法2002年1月～2005年1月，对31例寰枢椎不稳患者行后路经关节螺钉内固定术，男18例，女13例；平均年龄36．8岁。螺钉置入方法：紧贴枢椎椎管内壁确定距离中线的距离，以枢椎椎板下缘上2帅为进针高度，两线交叉点即为螺钉进针点。螺钉平行矢状面，指向寰枢关节面后缘高度，通过C型臂机侧位像确认螺钉向上倾斜角度。术后结合正、侧位x线片、螺旋CT三维重建及断层扫描图像，评价螺钉置入准确程度。根据螺钉与寰枢椎关节面的位置关系分为A、B、C三区，A区螺钉通过寰椎下关节面；B区螺钉在关节面的前方或后方（前方为B1，后方为B2）；C区为螺钉在关节面的内侧或外侧（内侧为C1，外侧为C2）。结果共置入60枚螺钉。术中无椎动脉、颈脊髓、颈神经根及颅神经损伤。所有患者获得6～18个月（平均9个月）的随访，植骨融合时间为3～12个月，平均5个月，颈脊髓及神经根症状改善明显者3例，部分改善者5例，无改善者1例，无神经症状加重患者。枕颈部疼痛完全缓解者8例，部分缓解者6例，无缓解者2例。60枚螺钉中，A区58枚（96．7％），B1区2枚（3．3％），无B2及C区螺钉。结论参照枢椎椎管壁行寰枢椎后路经关节螺钉固定是安全可靠的。     

Laminar screw fixation in the subaxial cervical spine: A report on three cases

Although laminar screw fixation is often used at the C2 and C7 levels, only few previous case reports have presented the use of laminar screws at the C3-C6 levels. Here, we report a novel fixation method involving the use of practical laminar screws in the subaxial spine. We used laminar screws in the subaxial cervical spine in two cases to prevent vertebral artery injury and in one case to minimize exposure of the lamina. This laminar screw technique was successful in all three cases with adequate spinal rigidity, which was achieved without complications. The use of laminar screws in the subaxial cervical spine is a useful option for posterior fusion of the cervical spine.     

Posterior cervical spine arthrodesis incorporating C2 laminar screw fixation in the treatment of cervical spine injury

Objective: To investigate the clinical application and efficacy of an internal fixation technique incorporating C₂ laminar screws for upper cervical spine injury. Methods: Using a posterior cervical approach, incorporating C₂ laminar screw fixation and bone grafting were performed on 20 patients with cervical spine injury. There were 12 male and 8 female patients, with a mean age of 45.6 years (range, 32–71 years). All patients were evaluated by X‐ray, computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Results: The patients were followed up for 11–35 months (mean, 15 months), and bony union was achieved in all patients. There were no spinal cord or vertebral artery injuries during surgery, and only two instances of vein clump injury, in both of which the bleeding was controlled successfully. Postoperative CT scans showed that all the C₂ laminar screws had been placed properly, and were not encroaching on the spinal canal. No spinal instability, evidence of hardware failure or screw loosening was found during the follow‐up period in any patient. Conclusion: Crossing C₂ laminar screw internal fixation technique is simple, and is not limited by the position of the vertebral artery in the body of C₂. The laminar screw method avoids arterial injuries and also can be used as a salvage method after previous misinsertion. As all relevant structures are directly visualized during C₂ laminar screw placement, this kind of technique may be applicable to a large number of patients.     

Translaminar screws of the axis—an alternative technique for rigid screw fixation in upper cervical spine instability

C2 pedicle screws or transarticular atlantoaxial screws are technically demanding and carry an increased risk of vertebral artery injury. In up to 20% of cases, pedicle and transarticular screw placement is not possible due to a high-riding vertebral artery or very small C2 pedicles in addition to other anatomical variations. Translaminar screws have been reported to rigidly capture posterior elements of C2 and therefore appear to be a suitable alternative. We present our first experiences and clinical results with this new method in two neurosurgical spine centers. Twenty-seven adult patients were treated between 2007 and 2010 in two neurosurgical spine departments with C2 translaminar screw fixation for upper cervical spine instability of various origins (e.g., trauma, tumor, dens pseudarthrosis). Eight patients were men and 19 were women. Mean age was 68.9 years. In most cases, translaminar screws were used because of contraindications for pedicle or transarticular screws as a salvage technique. All patients were clinically assessed and had CT scans postoperatively to verify correct screw placement. Follow-up was performed with reexamination on an ambulatory basis. Mean follow-up was 7.6 months for all patients. In 27 patients, 52 translaminar screws were placed. There were no intraoperative complications. Postoperatively, we identified four screw malpositions using a new accuracy grading scale. One screw had to be revised because of violation of the spinal canal >4 mm. None of the patients had additional neurological deficits postoperatively, and all showed stable cervical conditions at follow-up. Two patients died due to causes not associated with the stabilization technique. The fusion rate for patients with C1/C2 fixation is 92.9%. Translaminar screws can be used at least as an additional technique for cases of upper cervical spine instability when pedicle screw placement is contraindicated or not possible. The current data suggest comparable biomechanical stability and fusion rates of translaminar screws to other well-known posterior fixation procedures. In addition, translaminar screw placement is technically less demanding and reduces the risk of vertebral artery injury.