经皮内窥镜下经椎间孔入路腰椎椎间融合术治疗腰椎椎管狭窄症

目的 对比分析经皮内窥镜下经椎间孔入路腰椎椎间融合术（TLIF）与单纯椎板切除术治疗腰椎椎管狭窄症（LSS）的临床疗效。方法 2018年5月-2020年5月收治LSS患者180例,采用随机数字表法分为2组,其中90例采用经皮内窥镜下TLIF治疗（内窥镜组）,其余90例采用椎板切除术治疗（对照组）。记录2组切口长度、手术时间、住院时间及切口感染、脑脊液漏、硬膜囊损伤等并发症发生情况,采用疼痛视觉模拟量表（VAS）评分评估腰腿痛程度,采用生活质量评价量表（SF-36）评分评估患者生活质量,采用改良MacNab标准评定疗效并计算疗效优良率。结果 所有手术顺利完成,所有患者随访（11.26±1.35）个月。与对照组相比,内窥镜组切口更小,手术时间、住院时间更短,差异均有统计学意义（P<0.05）。2组术后12个月腰腿痛VAS评分均较术前明显改善,差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）,组间差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。2组术后12个月SF-36各维度评分较术前均显著提升,差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）,组间差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。2组临床疗效优良率差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。2组并发症发生率差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。结论 经皮内窥镜下TLIF和椎板切除术治疗LSS均可获得良好疗效,可有效减轻患者腰腿痛程度,改善患者生活质量,但经皮内窥镜下TLIF具有创伤更小、术后恢复更快等优点,临床中可依据患者情况和意愿灵活选择。     

经皮内窥镜下经椎间孔入路腰椎椎间融合术治疗退行性腰椎椎管狭窄症

目的 探讨经皮内窥镜下经椎间孔入路腰椎椎间融合术(TLIF)治疗退行性腰椎椎管狭窄症(DLSS)的疗效.方法 2018年10月—2019年10月,南阳市中心医院收治DLSS患者40例,采用随机数字表法分为A组(20例,采用经皮内窥镜下TLIF治疗)、B组(20例,采用传统开放TLIF治疗).记录2组切口长度、手术时间、...     

责任节段融合术治疗高龄多节段腰椎管狭窄症

[目的]探讨责任节段腰椎融合术治疗高龄多节段腰椎管狭窄症的应用价值。[方法]回顾性分析2014年1月～2017年12月收治的160例高龄多节段退行性腰椎管狭窄症患者。其中,82例减压术后仅行责任节段融合,78例减压术后行常规长节段融合术。比较两组围手术期、随访和影像资料。[结果]两组患者均顺利完成手术。责任节段融合组手术时间、出血量、住院时间均少于多节段融合组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。多节段融合组并发症发生率略高于责任节段融合组,差异无统计学差异(P>0.05)。两组患者术后平均随访(24.59±3.25)个月,随术后时间推移,两组患者的VAS评分、ODI指数均显著下降,而JOA评分明显增加,不同时间点间差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);相同时间点,两组间VAS、 ODI和JOA评分的差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。至末次随访时,两组患者疼痛、行走、弯腰活动、劳动能力较术前均得到明显改善,生活质量明显提高。影像检查显示随访过程中均未发生螺钉松动、断裂等现象,笼架未出现明显移位及下沉,所有患者均获得骨性融合。[结论]责任节段融合术治疗高龄多节段腰椎管狭窄症能有效地缩短手术时间,减少出血量,缩短住院时间,且能达到预期临床疗效,改善患者生活质量。     

老年性腰椎椎管狭窄症后路植骨融合术术后效果分析

腰椎椎管狭窄症(lumbar spinal stenosis,LSS)是临床常见的脊柱外科疾病之一,老年人多见。其临床特点为神经源性跛行或根性痛,它是腰椎椎管、神经根管或椎间孔狭窄所致马尾或/和神经根的压迫综合征。治疗LSS的腰椎后路植骨融合术可分为腰椎后外侧植骨融合术(posterolateral lumbar     

有限椎板减压内固定治疗退行性腰椎管狭窄症的疗效分析

目的:探讨有限椎板切除减压内固定治疗退行性腰椎管狭窄症的疗效.方法:2002年9月～2007年3月共收治45例退行性腰椎管狭窄症患者,男16例,女29例,年龄36～80岁,平均61.3岁,病程5个月～20年,平均16个月.依据Hansraj等的经典与复杂型腰椎管狭窄症分型标准及引起症状的"责任"部位,经典的腰椎管狭窄症患者采用有限椎板切除椎管减压术(A组,14例):复杂型腰椎管狭窄症患者行有限椎板切除椎管减压并脊柱融合内固定术(B组,10例)或行全椎板切除减压并脊柱融合内固定术(C组,21例).采用日本骨科学会(JOA)15分法及Eule法对术前和末次随访时的神经功能与自觉症状进行评估,计算改善率,并对结果进行统计学分析.结果:随访9个月～5年,平均3.4年,末次随访时JOA评分改善率A组58.2%±34.0%,B组61.7%±23.6%,C组56.4%±26.8%,优良率A组78%,B组80%,C组76%,三组间无统计学差异.Eule法评估除A组与C组分别有1例术后疼痛加重外,其余病例腰腿痛症状均改善.结论:有限椎板切除减压是治疗退行性腰椎管狭窄症的一种可靠术式,只要把握好手术适应证与减压范围,无论单纯有限减压还是减压并植骨融合内固定均可获得良好的疗效.     

Results of surgery for spinal stenosis adjacent to previous lumbar fusion

The literature provides little data to guide surgical management of spinal stenosis adjacent to previous lumbar fusion. Thirty-three consecutive patients who had surgical decompression for spinal stenosis at the lumbar segments adjacent to a previous lumbar fusion were studied. The mean interval between fusion and the adjacent segment surgery was 94 months. Of the 33 patients, 26 were followed for 3-14 years (mean: 5 years) after adjacent segment surgery and were clinically evaluated and independently completed an outcome questionnaire. Of the 26 patients, 15 rated their outcome as completely satisfactory, 6 were neutral toward the surgery, and 5 considered their surgery a failure. The surgery was generally effective at improving or relieving lower extremity neurogenic claudication. The strongest independent predictive factor of patient dissatisfaction was ongoing postoperative low back pain (r = 0.7, p = 0.001). A higher back pain score at follow-up was associated with continued narcotic use (p = 0.001) and decreased ability to perform activities of daily living (p = 0.05). Six patients required further lumbar surgery during the follow-up period. This study provides the longest published follow-up data of surgical results for symptomatic spinal stenosis adjacent to a previously asymptomatic lumbar fusion.     

Epiduroscopy for lumbar spinal stenosis

Editor—Igarashi and colleagues have presented their seriesof epiduroscopies in a most interesting way,¹ and Richardsonhas written a highly supportive editorial.² They have focusedon the visual findings as well as outcome, and have not madecomparison with other treatments, apart from epidural steroidinjection. Their paper raises a number of questions. Patients with radicular (monosegmental) pain had a greater amountof fatty tissue and vascularity within the epidural space thanthose with more widespread (multisegmental) pain. We are toldthat     

Decompression, fusion, and instrumentation surgery for complex lumbar spinal stenosis

Between 1990 and 1993, 54 consecutive patients were treated with decompression, fusion and instrumentation surgery for complex lumbar spinal stenosis. The mean age of the patients was 60 years. The average followup was 39 months. Clinically, there was one deep wound infection, and three mechanical failures. There were two staged operations. There were three revision surgeries performed for mechanical reasons. Of the 47 patients who completed the questionnaire, 96% of patients were very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with the operation, 98% were satisfied with relief of pain, 94% were satisfied with their ability to walk, 89% were satisfied with their strength, and 94% were satisfied with balance. Survivorship analysis (failure endpoint was revision surgery) revealed that at the end of 4 years, the patient had a 92% chance of not undergoing revision surgery for any reason (mechanical and infectious), and a 94% chance of not undergoing revision surgery for mechanical reasons. Lumbar decompression, fusion, and instrumentation surgery seems to be efficacious in patients with complex lumbar spinal stenosis (associated previous lumbar spine operations with evidence of radiographic instability, radiographic evidence of junctional stenosis after surgery, radiographic evidence of instability, degenerative spondylolisthesis greater than Grade I with instability, if present, and degenerative scoliosis with a curve greater than 20 degrees).     

后路Quadrant通道下MIS-TLIF微创手术治疗老年退变性腰椎管狭窄症的临床疗效

[目的]探讨Mast Quadrant可扩张通道微创系统下微创经椎间孔入路腰椎椎体间融合术(minimally invasive surgery transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion,MIS-TLIF)治疗老年退变性腰椎管狭窄症(lumbar spinal stenosis,LSS)的临床疗效。[方法]回顾性分析2011年1月~2014年12月本院老年性腰椎管狭窄症手术患者共69例,均不同程度合并腰椎不稳,其中合并腰椎间盘突出症36例,合并腰椎退变滑脱20例;年龄60~75岁,平均65.6岁。采用Mast Quadrant可扩张通道下MIS-TLIF方法治疗31例(微创组),采用传统后路开放TLIF手术治疗者38例(开放组)。记录手术时间、术中出血量、术后术区引流量。疗效评定及随访采用JOA评分,VAS评分,ODI评分,对所有患者术前1 d,术后2周,术后3、6个月及术后1年疗效进行评定。[结果]经统计学检验,微创手术组的术中出血量、术后术区引流量及手术用时均明显少于开放手术组。术后随访期内JOA评分、ODI评分及VAS评分与开放手术效果相当。[结论]Mast Quadrant通道下MIS-TLIF微创手术治疗老年性腰椎管狭窄症创伤显著小于传统开放手术,符合微创外科治疗理念。术后患者下腰痛发生率较低,可早期进行腰背肌功能锻炼,有利于术后早期康复。     

Endoscopic decompression combined with interspinous process implant fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis

Objective： To propose a new technique to treat lumbar spinal stenosis with median approach endoscopic decompression combined with interspinous process implant fusion and evaluate the initial clinical outcome.
Methods： This study involved 30 patients who had neurogenic commitment claudication over 2 years and were resistant to conservative therapy. All cases were treated using the median approach endoscopic decompression combined with interspinous process implant fusion in 2006. Clinical signs and radicular pain were noted and evaluated preoperatively and at the 1st month and 3rd month postoperatively. Japanese Orthopedic Association （JOA） score was used to evaluate leg and back pain. X-ray films at flexion and extension were applied to evaluate the range of motion at involved segments. Results： There was a significant increase in JOA score postoperatively, but no significant difference preoperatively or postoperatively between the two groups.The range of motion at involved segments was significantly higher in the control group.
Conclusions： The median approach endoscopic decompression is an ideal method for bilateral radiculopathy resulting from lumbar spinal canal stenosis. The combination with interspinous process implant fusion can stabilize the spine. The initial clinical outcome is exllent. Preservation of adjacent level disease can be assessed only in long-term follow-up.     

小切口椎板间插装融合技术治疗腰椎管狭窄症的近期疗效

目的探讨经小切口局部椎板减压,椎板间插装融合(interlaminar lumbar instrumented fusion,ILIF)技术治疗腰椎管狭窄症的近期疗效。方法 2009年11月-2011年1月,采用经小切口椎板减压、ILIF治疗16例腰椎管狭窄症患者。男7例,女9例;年龄49～67岁,平均52.8岁。病程2年～9年4个月,平均4年7个月。16例均为退变性狭窄,4例合并双侧侧隐窝狭窄,3例合并腰椎间盘突出。病变节段:L3、42例,L4、54例,L5、S14例,L3、4和L4、5双节段2例,L4、5和L5、S1双节段4例。手术前后采用疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)、Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)进行临床疗效评定;CT扫描并测量椎管横截面面积。结果手术时间35～80 min,平均47 min;术中出血量120～350 mL,平均145 mL;住院时间4～15 d,平均7.8 d。除1例发生脑脊液漏,其余切口均Ⅰ期愈合。16例均获随访,随访时间12～22个月,平均14.8个月。术后CT扫描固定节段,示14例棘突间融合,2例可能融合;融合时间3～10个月,平均4.6个月。术后VAS评分、ODI及椎管横截面面积均较术前显著改善,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论 ILIF可兼顾椎板减压和重建后柱稳定性,同时保护脊髓,具有创伤小及操作简便的优点。     

微创经椎间孔腰椎体间融合术治疗腰椎管狭窄合并腰椎不稳症

目的 探讨微创经椎间孔腰椎间融合术(MIS-TLIF)治疗腰椎管狭窄合并腰椎不稳的临床疗效.方法 对2010年3月至2011年1月42例微创通道下行单侧入路双侧减压加MIS-TLIF手术治疗的腰椎管狭窄合并腰椎不稳患者进行回顾性分析;其中男性18例,女性24例,年龄48～79岁,平均61.7岁.病变节段为L3～4 4例,L4～5 26例,L5～S1 12例;其中间歇性跛行伴单侧下肢症状24例,伴双侧下肢症状18例.记录手术时间、术中出血量、术后住院时间、手术并发症的情况.患者术前、术后采用视觉模拟评分(VAS)分别对腰痛及下肢痛进行评分;采用Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)评估腰椎功能情况及Bridwell方法评价腰椎融合情况;术后末次随访时采用MacNab标准评价疗效.结果 手术时间120～170 min,平均150.4 min;术中出血50～400 ml,平均147.1 ml,无输血病例;术后住院天数5～18d,平均8.8d;术中l例出现硬膜囊撕裂,l例骨质疏松患者行椎间融合时融合器打入上位椎体中,术后3例发生切口愈合不良.随访6 ～14个月,平均11个月.术前腰痛VAS评分为7.3±1.0,术后3个月及末次随访时分别为2.9±0.8和2.0±0.8,与术前比较有显著改善(t =25.319和29.334,P＜0.01);术前下肢痛VAS评分为7.9±0.7,术后3个月及末次随访时分别为2.0±0.5和1.0±0.7,与术前比较差异有显著改善(t=49.584和41.885,P＜0.01);OD1评分术前为75％±6％,术后3个月随访时为16％±6％,末次随访时为l2％±5％,与术前比较差异有统计学意义(t=43.675和56.323,P＜0.01).末次随访时,根据Bridwell椎间融合评价标准,Ⅰ级和Ⅱ级为40例(95.3％),无螺钉断裂及松动发生;采用MacNab标准评价临床效果,其中优16例,良22例,可4例.结论 MIS-TLIF手术是治疗单节段腰椎管狭窄合并腰椎不稳的一种理想手术方法,但要根据术者的临床经验、手术技巧和医院的具体条件谨慎开展.     

腰椎后路全椎板减压椎体间融合术治疗腰椎管狭窄临床疗效观察

目的探讨腰椎后路全椎板减压椎体间融合治疗腰椎管狭窄的疗效。方法对16例腰椎管狭窄或合并椎间盘突出的患者采用腰椎后路全椎板减压椎体间融合术治疗,对其临床资料进行回顾性分析,用Eule评定方法对其疗效进行评估。结果 16例患者全部得到随访,随访时间4个月~3年,优良率87.5%。结论腰椎后路全椎板减压椎体间融合治疗腰椎管狭窄的疗效满意,同时应严格掌握适应症,提高治疗效果。     

椎弓根螺钉及360°植骨融合术治疗多节段腰椎管狭窄症

目的探讨充分减压、椎弓根螺钉内固定及360°植骨融合术治疗多节段腰椎管狭窄症的疗效。方法采用椎弓根螺钉内固定术及360°植骨融合术治疗34例多节段腰椎管狭窄症患者。结果随访10~23个月,平均14个月。JOA计算手术改善率为75%~91%(平均87%),X线复查34例全部达到骨性融合。结论椎弓根螺钉内固定为腰椎管狭窄症的彻底减压提供可靠的技术支持,360°植骨融合术确保了术后腰椎节段的稳定,两者结合为治疗多节段腰椎管狭窄症提供一种较好的方法。     

Indirect spinal decompression for lumbar stenosis

Lumbar spinal stenosis continues to be an important cause of low back pain and neurogenic claudication. As the population ages and life expectancy increases, both the incidence and prevalence of spinal stenosis will present a significant challenge to spine surgeons. Both interspinous and interbody fusion techniques have demonstrated the ability to decrease low back pain and provide clinically significant pain relief from neurogenic claudication through indirect means. While direct decompression of the spine has been well documented in the literature and the gold standard, new interest in minimally invasive techniques and indirect decompression has led to new devices and clinical studies with promising results.     

显微减压术治疗腰椎管狭窄症

目的：总结显微减压术治疗腰椎管狭窄症的临床应用结果。方法：自2001年9月至2006年5月,对87例腰椎管狭窄症患者采用显微减压术治疗。其中,男60例,女27例。年龄43～80岁,平均51岁。L3,42例,L4,547例,L5S138例。结果：87例均获随访,时间18～48个月,平均26个月。按Macnab腰腿痛评定标准：优52例,良28例,差7例,优良率92%。结论：对腰椎管狭窄症的手术治疗重点应放在压迫引起症状的部位,而对无症状的部位不做预防性减压操作。这种显微减压操作老年人更容易耐受。     

Expansive laminoplasty for lumbar spinal stenosis

Expansive laminoplasty, a procedure used for cervical myelopathy, was carried out in 4 patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. The method was used in relatively young patients with severe low back and sciatic pain who had intraspinal ossification at multiple segments, with or without developmental spinal stenosis. The advantages of osteoplastic enlargement of the lumbar spinal canal with reinforcement of spinal stability are confirmed by our follow up of 2 to 5 1/2 years. The results were very satisfactory in each case. The indications and operative technique are described.     

Nonoperative treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis

The natural history of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis is documented poorly. Little is known about the efficacy of nonoperative treatments. An aggressive nonoperative treatment consisting of therapeutic exercise, analgesics, and epidural steroid injections is proposed. The clinical evaluation of the patients is reviewed and the relevance to the selection of the nonoperative treatment plans is emphasized. Efficacy of nonoperative treatment may depend greatly on the nature and severity of the patient's symptomatic and radiographic presentation. Several studies on nonoperative treatment of patients with between 1 and 5 years of followup suggest that variably 15% to 43% of patients will have continued improvement after nonoperative treatment.