Computed tomography-guided percutaneous facet screw fixation in the lumbar spine. Technical note

The authors describe a new minimally invasive technique for posterior supplementation using percutaneous translaminar facet screw (TFS) fixation with computed tomography (CT) guidance. Oblique axial images were used to determine facet screw fixation sites. After the induction of local anesthesia and conscious sedation, a guide pin was inserted and guided with a laser mounted on the CT gantry. Cannulated TFSs were placed via a percutaneous approach. From December 2002 to August 2003, 18 patients underwent CT-guided TFS. In 17 of these patients this procedure was supplementary to anterior lumbar interbody fusion, which had been performed several days earlier; in the remaining patient, CT-guided TFS fixation was undertaken as the primary therapy. Twelve patients had painful degenerative disc disease or unstable degenerative spondylolisthesis, three had infections, and three had deformities. All screws were inserted accurately and there were no complications. This new minimally invasive surgical technique may offer an alternative to pedicle screw fixation as a method of posterior supplementation.     

Efficacy of translaminar facet screw fixation in circumferential interbody fusions as compared to pedicle screw fixation

OBJECTIVES: Posterior lumbar fixation with translaminar facet screws is a minimally invasive technique with good success rates. Long-term follow-ups show reduced reoperation rates, a decrease in pain scores, and few complications compared with pedicle screw fixation devices. The purpose of this study was to compare the reoperation rate of translaminar facet screw fixation with that of pedicle screw fixation in 360 degrees anterior and posterior fusions for incapacitating low back pain due to lumbar disc degeneration unresponsive to at least 6 months of aggressive nonoperative treatment. METHODS: One hundred five patients underwent a combined circumferential lumbar fusion with posterior fixation for discogenic pain by one surgeon between August 1993 and February 2003. Seventeen patients were excluded from the study owing to their preoperative etiology for fusion or a prior instrumented posterior fusion. A retrospective chart review was done on all 88 remaining patients. Patients were followed in the office, by phone, or by mail to obtain functional outcome measures. Any subsequent operations by this surgeon or another were recorded. The comparison focused on the rate of reoperation on the region of posterior lumbar fixation. RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients have had at least a 2-year follow-up. Twenty-four patients had a posterior fusion with pedicle screws, and 43 had translaminar facet screw fixation. Nine patients of the pedicle screw population (37.5%) had a reoperation to remove their instrumentation. Two patients of the translaminar facet screw population (4.7%) had reoperations on their lumbar spine. There was a significant association between posterior instrumentation type and reoperation (P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: The success of translaminar facet screws in circumferential fusions is justified.     

Minimally invasive 360° instrumented lumbar fusion

A retrospective preliminary study was undertaken of combined minimally invasive instrumented lumbar fusion utilizing the BERG (balloon-assisted endoscopic retroperitoneal gasless) approach ¶anteriorly, and a posterior small-incision approach with translaminar screw fixation and posterolateral ¶fusion. The study aimed to quantify the clinical and radiological results using this combined technique. The traditional minimally invasive approach to the anterior lumbar spine involves gas insufflation and provides reliable access only to L5-S1 and in some cases L4-5. A gas-mediated approach yields many technical drawbacks to performing spinal surgery. A minimally invasive posterior approach involving suprafascial pedicle screw instrumentation has been developed, but without widespread use. Translaminar facet fixation may be a viable alternative to transpedicular fixation in a 360° instrumented fusion model. Past studies have shown open 360° instrumented lumbar fusion yields high arthrodesis rates. The study examined the cases of 46 patients who underwent successful 360° instrumented lumbar fusion using a combined minimally invasive approach. Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) at one or two levels was performed through the BERG approach; a gasless retroperitoneal approach to the lumbar spine allowing the use ¶of standard anterior instrumentation. Posteriorly, all patients underwent successful decompression, translaminar fixation, and posterolateral fusion at one or two levels through ¶one small (2.5–5.0 cm) incision. Results showed mean hospital stay of 2.02 days; mean combined blood loss was 255 cc; and mean pain relief was 56%, with 75.5% of patients reporting good, excellent, or total pain relief. Forty-two of 46 patients (93.2%) achieved a solid fusion ¶24 months after surgery. A total of 47% of all patients working prior to surgery returned to work following surgery. The study showed that minimally invasive 360° instrumented lumbar fusion, when performed utilizing these approaches, yields a high rate of solid arthrodesis (93.3%), good pain relief, short hospital stays, low blood losses, accelerated rehabilitation, and a quick return to the workforce. The BERG approach offers technical advantages over the traditional gas-mediated laparoscopic approach to the anterior lumbar spine.     

Minimally invasive 360° instrumented lumbar fusion

A retrospective preliminary study was undertaken of combined minimally invasive instrumented lumbar fusion utilizing the BERG (balloon-assisted endoscopic retroperitoneal gasless) approach ¶anteriorly, and a posterior small-incision approach with translaminar screw fixation and posterolateral ¶fusion. The study aimed to quantify the clinical and radiological results using this combined technique. The traditional minimally invasive approach to the anterior lumbar spine involves gas insufflation and provides reliable access only to L5-S1 and in some cases L4-5. A gas-mediated approach yields many technical drawbacks to performing spinal surgery. A minimally invasive posterior approach involving suprafascial pedicle screw instrumentation has been developed, but without widespread use. Translaminar facet fixation may be a viable alternative to transpedicular fixation in a 360° instrumented fusion model. Past studies have shown open 360° instrumented lumbar fusion yields high arthrodesis rates. The study examined the cases of 46 patients who underwent successful 360° instrumented lumbar fusion using a combined minimally invasive approach. Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) at one or two levels was performed through the BERG approach; a gasless retroperitoneal approach to the lumbar spine allowing the use ¶of standard anterior instrumentation. Posteriorly, all patients underwent successful decompression, translaminar fixation, and posterolateral fusion at one or two levels through ¶one small (2.5-5.0 cm) incision. Results showed mean hospital stay of 2.02 days; mean combined blood loss was 255 cc; and mean pain relief was 56%, with 75.5% of patients reporting good, excellent, or total pain relief. Forty-two of 46 patients (93.2%) achieved a solid fusion ¶24 months after surgery. A total of 47% of all patients working prior to surgery returned to work following surgery. The study showed that minimally invasive 360° instrumented lumbar fusion, when performed utilizing these approaches, yields a high rate of solid arthrodesis (93.3%), good pain relief, short hospital stays, low blood losses, accelerated rehabilitation, and a quick return to the workforce. The BERG approach offers technical advantages over the traditional gas-mediated laparoscopic approach to the anterior lumbar spine.     

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.     

Unilateral transforaminal posterior lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF): indications, technique, and 2-year results

A prospective analysis of consecutive cases of lumbar fusion using the unilateral transforaminal posterior lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) technique with pedicle screw fixation. The objective of the study was to assess the clinical and radiographic outcome of TLIF and describe the technique and indications in the treatment of degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Forty patients treated with TLIF for degenerative diseases of the lumbar spine were followed up for a minimum of 2.5 years (mean: 36 months; range: 30-42 months). Twenty-three patients had degenerative disc disease alone, 13 had associated isthmic or degenerative spondylolisthesis, and 4 had recurrent disc herniations at the L4-L5 level. Thirty-six (90%) had solid fusions radiographically at latest follow-up. Seventy-nine percent had excellent or good clinical outcomes. Our patients demonstrated high fusion rates and patient satisfaction.     

Unilateral transforaminal posterior lumbar interbody fusion.

A prospective analysis of consecutive patients who had lumbar fusion using the unilateral transforaminal posterior lumbar interbody fusion with pedicle screw fixation is presented to assess the clinical and radiographic outcomes of the transforaminal posterior lumbar interbody fusion procedure and describe the technique and indication in the treatment of degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Forty patients treated with transforaminal posterior lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative diseases of the lumbar spine (with anterior column deficiency) were followed up for a minimum of 3 years (mean, 3.4 years; range, 3-3.9 years). Radiographic assessment included plain and flexion and extension radiographs. Clinical outcome was based on pain relief, ability to do activities of daily living, and return to work. Thirty-six patients (90%) had solid fusions and at latest followup, segmental lordosis has increased in all patients. Eighty-five percent of patients had excellent or good clinical outcome(s). The unilateral transforaminal posterior lumbar interbody fusion provides bilateral anterior column support through a unilateral approach. The patients had high fusion rates and patient satisfaction as reported with similar complications found in other methods commonly used for spinal decompression and stabilization.     

小切口TLIF结合单侧钉棒及对侧关节突螺钉治疗腰椎退变性疾病

目的探讨小切口经椎间孔椎间融合术（transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion,TLIF）辅助单侧钉棒及对侧经椎板关节突螺钉治疗腰椎退变性疾病手术方法及疗效。方法 2010年1月至2012年6月对我院收治的50例腰椎退行性变（腰椎失稳、单侧症状腰椎管狭窄症及腰椎间盘突出症）患者,均采用单侧TLIF椎间植骨融合、辅助同侧钉棒及对侧经椎板关节突螺钉治疗。采用单侧长4~6cm的旁正中椎旁切口,钝性分离最长肌和多裂肌间隙并显露关节突,直视下症状侧腰椎管减压,椎间盘摘除,置入椎弓根螺钉并Cage植入、对侧经椎板关节突螺钉等操作。结果患者手术时间为100~160min,平均125min,出血量160~330mL,平均250mL。术后平均引流量40mL,无血肿及术后感染、无硬脊膜撕裂、神经根损伤等严重并发症发生。所有病例获得8~24个月（平均19个月）随访,未发现继发性脊柱侧弯,无椎弓根钉、螺钉松动、断裂等情况。患者术后症状均得到明显缓解,并且在随访期间内没有新的临床症状出现。在固定融合后3~18个月取出内固定钉棒后3~6个月,采用日本骨科学会评分（JOA）评价疗效,优35例（70%）,良13例（26%）,可2例（4%）,效果优良。结论小切口单侧TLIF椎间植骨融合、辅助单侧钉棒及对侧经椎板关节突螺钉治疗腰椎退变性疾病能有效固定融合并预防邻近上下节段退变,具有对入路软组织创伤小、术中出血量少、患者术后手术部位疼痛轻、术后恢复快、并发症少、疗效确切的优点,值得临床推广应用。     

Which posterior instrumentation is better for two-level anterior lumbar interbody fusion: translaminar facet screw or pedicle screw?

Purpose

To determine whether translaminar facet screws can provide stability equivalent to pedicle screws and whether the two posterior instrumentations have the same influence on the adjacent segments in two-level anterior lumbar interbody fusion.

Methods

In a biomechanical study conducted, we used 12 fresh human lumbar spines and tested an intact spine with a stand-alone two-level anterior lumbar interbody fusion and anterior fusion augmented with pedicle screws or translaminar facet screws, under 400 N compressive preloads and 7.5 N m moments in flexion, extension, axial rotation and lateral bending, and measured the stiffness of the operated level, range of motion and intradiscal pressure at the adjacent levels.

Results

We found a significant increase in the stiffness of the segments operated, range of motion and intradiscal pressure at the adjacent superior segment in the stand-alone two-level anterior lumbar interbody fusion during flexion, axial rotation and lateral bending, but a decrease in extension, when compared with the intact spine. The stiffness of operated segments, range of motion and intradiscal pressure in the adjacent segment are significantly higher in the two-level anterior lumbar interbody fusion augmented with posterior instrumentation than in the stand-alone two-level anterior lumbar interbody fusion. There was no significant difference between the two augmented constructs except that, at the adjacent superior segment, the intradiscal pressure was more in the construction augmented with a pedicle screw than with a translaminar facet screw in flexion.

Conclusions

Translaminar facet screws can provide stability equivalent to pedicle screws, but their influence on the adjacent segments is relatively lower; therefore, we suggest that translaminar facet screws be the choice in the optimal posterior instrumentation in a two-level anterior lumbar interbody fusion.     

微创经椎间孔椎间融合术联合单、双侧内固定治疗单间隙腰椎退变性疾病

 目的 探讨微创经椎间孔椎间融合术（minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion,MIS-TLIF）联合单侧或双侧内固定治疗单节段腰椎退行性疾病的临床及影像学疗效。方法 回顾性分析 2009年 10月至 2011年 12月期间,采用 METRx-MD（Microscopic Endoscopic Tubular Retractor System）进行 MIS-TLIF治疗单节段腰椎退行性疾病并获得长期随访的 65例患者的相关资料。根据内固定方式分为两组,单侧固定组（31例）采用 MIS-TLIF联合单侧内固定技术,双侧组（34例）采用 MIS-TLIF联合双侧经皮内固定技术。采用 Oswestry功能障碍指数（Oswestry disability index,ODI）评价腰椎功能情况,采用疼痛视觉模拟评分（visual analogue scale,VAS）分别对腰痛及下肢痛进行评估;在 X线片上测量手术前后的腰椎前凸角度、手术节段前凸角度、腰椎侧凸角度、手术节段侧凸角度,计算腰椎前凸指数及椎间高度指数。结果 所有患者均顺利完成手术,术后随访 18~36个月,平均 26.6个月。所有患者术后 12个月均获得骨性融合。两组患者术后 VAS及 ODI评分均较术前有明显改善,两组间术前及随访期间 VAS及 ODI评分的差异无统计学意义。影像学测量结果显示两组间腰椎前凸角度、手术节段前凸角度、腰椎侧凸角度、手术节段侧凸角度、腰椎前凸指数及椎间高度指数的差异均无统计学意义,腰椎前凸角度与腰椎前凸指数呈线性相关。结论 对于治疗单间隙腰椎退变性疾病,MIS-TLIF联合单侧或双侧经皮内固定技术具有相似的临床及影像学疗效。     

中央型腰椎间盘突出症合并隐性腰椎不稳的治疗

目的:评价椎弓根螺钉系统与椎间融合器在治疗中央型腰椎间盘突出症合并隐性腰椎不稳定的手术疗效.方法:对21例中央型腰椎间盘突出症合并隐性腰椎不稳定患者采用椎弓根螺钉系统与椎间融合器(cage)治疗.结果:21例患者手术后临床疗效评价,优14例,良6例,融合区均骨性愈合,未见假关节形成和根性疼痛复发,椎间高度及复位程度无丢失.结论:椎弓根螺钉系统与椎间融合器是中央型腰椎间盘突出症合并隐性腰椎不稳定的有效治疗方案.     

不同手术方式治疗腰椎滑脱症的比较

目的：比较采用不同内固定及植骨融合方式治疗腰椎滑脱症的手术疗效及适应证。方法：应用后路椎弓根螺钉复位内固定后．分别采用后外侧植骨融合术、后路椎体间植骨融合术及前路椎体间植骨融合术治疗不同类型及合并症的腰椎滑脱症患者67例，比较不同术式的手术时间与出血量、手术疗效与并发症、滑脱椎体复位率与复位丢失率以及椎间隙高度。结果：后路椎弓根钉固定加椎体间植骨融合术手术时间最长、出血量最多。手术总体优良率为88．71％，三种术式间无差异。所有椎体间植骨组植骨融合良好，椎间隙高度维持良好，滑脱椎体复位无丢失；12例后外侧植骨者平均复位丢失率为11．24％，2例椎弓根螺钉松动，2枚椎弓根螺钉断裂。结论：退变性腰椎滑脱者宜选用后路椎弓根钉固定加后外侧植骨融合术；峡部裂性腰椎滑脱者宜选用后路椎弓根钉固定加椎体间植骨融合术；腰椎滑脱翻修者宜选用后路椎弓根钉固定加前路椎体间植骨融合术     

微创入路单侧椎弓根钉联合关节突螺钉内固定治疗下腰椎退行性疾病

目的探讨多裂肌间隙入路可扩张管微创系统（Quadrant系统）辅助下单侧椎弓根钉联合对侧椎板关节突螺钉内固定cage椎间植骨融合术治疗下腰椎退行性疾病的疗效。方法2010年1月～2011年12月对40例单节段下腰椎退行性疾病采用多裂肌间隙人路,经椎间孔融合器植骨单侧椎弓根螺钉固定,并在椎间盘镜通道辅助直视下行对侧椎板关节突螺钉内固定。根据视觉疼痛模拟评分（visual analogue scores,VAS）及Nakai标准评定临床疗效。结果切口长3．0～4．0cm,平均3．3cm。手术时间70～120min,平均85min。术中出血量90～400ml,平均150ml。术后切口无感染、皮肤坏死。40例随访12～24个月,平均18．2月。术后1年随访时患者腰痛VAS评分从术前（6．8±2．6）分降至（2．7±1．3）分,腿痛VAS评分从术前（8．1±2．4）分降至（2．9±1．4）分。疗效评定采用Nakai标准：优25例,良12例,可3例,优良率92．5％（37／40）。所有患者无螺钉松动、断裂及cage移位等并发症。结论Quadrant系统下多裂肌间隙人路单侧椎弓根钉联合对侧椎板关节突螺钉内固定具有操作简单、出血少、稳定可靠、并发症少、疗效确切等优点．是部分下腰椎病变固定融合的理想方法。     

Stand-alone anterior lumbar discectomy and fusion with plate: initial experience

BACKGROUND: The stability of the lumbar spine after ALIF with lateral plate fixation and/or posterior fixation has previously been investigated; however, stand-alone ALDF with plate has not. Previous clinical studies have demonstrated poor fusion rates with stand-alone anterior interbody fusion in the absence of posterior instrumentation. We review our initial experience with stand-alone ALDF with segmental plate fixation for degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine and compare these results with our experience with traditional ALIF and supplemental posterior instrumentation. METHODS: Forty-nine patients treated at the University of California, San Francisco between 2002 and 2005 were included in this analysis. The study was retrospective in nature. All patients presented with discogram-positive back pain and had failed conservative treatment. Twenty-four patients underwent ALDF with plate, and 25 underwent ALIF with posterior instrumentation. Patients underwent flexion/extension imaging at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year postoperatively. All patients completed ODI and VAS questionnaires at 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year postoperatively. RESULTS: Average follow-up was 11.6 and 21.7 months in the ALDF with plate and ALIF with instrumentation groups, respectively. All patients demonstrated radiographic evidence of fusion at last follow-up. None developed instability at the fusion level, and none developed hardware failure (plate back-out, screw lucency, etc). Average subsidence at 6 months postoperatively was 2.2 and 2.5 mm, respectively. The VAS and ODI scores are presented in Tables 3 and 4. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary results of stand-alone ALDF with plate suggest it may be safe and effective for the surgical treatment of patients with degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine. Long-term follow-up is clearly needed. Subsidence is diminished with ALDF and plating compared with ALIF with posterior instrumentation. It is unclear at this time which subset of patients may ultimately require posterior hardware supplementation, but those with circumferential stenosis or severe facet disease are not ideal candidates for ALDF with plate. For some patients in whom lumbar arthroplasty is not indicated, or as a salvage procedure, ALDF with plate may be a satisfactory alternative and may eliminate the need for a supplemental posterior procedure.     

The role of supplemental translaminar screws in anterior lumbar interbody fixation: a biomechanical study

The immediate stabilization provided by anterior interbody cage fixation is often questioned. Therefore, the role of supplementary posterior fixation, particularly minimally invasive techniques such as translaminar screws, is relevant. The purpose of this biomechanical study was to determine the immediate three-dimensional flexibility of the lumbar spine, using six human cadaveric functional spinal units, in four different conditions: (1) intact, (2) fixed with translaminar screws (TLS), (3) instrumented with anterior interbody cage insertion with the BAK system and (4) instrumented with BAK cage with additional TLS fixation. Flexibility was determined in each testing condition by measuring the vertebral motions under applied pure moments (i.e. flexion-extension, bilateral axial rotation, bilateral lateral bending) in an unconstrained manner. Anterior fixation with the BAK alone provided significant stability in flexion and lateral bending. Additional posterior TLS significantly reduced the motion in extension and axial rotation. TLS fixation alone resulted in smaller rotations than BAK fixation in all loading directions. Based on these results, it seems that interbody cage fixation with the BAK system stabilizes the spine in some, but not all, loading directions. The problematic loading directions of extension and axial rotation can be substantially stabilized by using translaminar screw fixation. However, one should emphasize that the degree of stability needed to achieve solid fusion is not known. Received: 14 August 1997 Revised: 28 May 1998 Accepted: 9 June 1998     

单侧椎弓根螺钉联合对侧经皮椎板关节突螺钉固定治疗下腰椎病变的临床观察

 目的 探讨单侧椎弓根螺钉联合对侧经皮椎板关节突螺钉固定治疗下腰椎病变的可行性和疗效。方法 男 8例.女 22例;年龄 39~68岁.平均 53.7岁。腰椎间盘退变 11例.腰椎间盘突出症术后原位复发 4例.巨大型腰椎间盘突出 5例.腰椎间盘突出伴椎管狭窄 4例.腰椎退行性滑脱(I度) 6例。 L_3.4 2例、L_4.5 20例、L₅S₁ 8例。采用单侧显露、减压、同侧椎弓根螺钉固定.同时在自行设计的瞄准器引导下经皮对侧进行椎板关节突螺钉固定并椎间融合器植骨方法治疗。观察手术时间、术中出血量和术后引流量。通过影像学评价椎板关节突螺钉位置。采用日本骨科学会(Japanese Orthopaedic Association. JOA)下腰痛评分系统(29分法)评价疗效。结果 手术时间 75~110 min.平均 89 min;术中出血量为 180~500 ml.平均 285 ml.均未输血。椎板关节突螺钉位置I型 24例. II 型 6例。术后 2例病例出现终板切割.融合器部分陷入终板及椎体内。随访时间 12~36个月.平均 22.5个月。除 1例不能明确外.其余均获得骨性融合.融合率为 96.7%。随访过程中椎弓根螺钉与椎板关节突螺钉未出现松动、移位、断裂.椎间融合器亦无移位现象。 JOA评分由术前的 10~16分(平均 13.0分)提高到 22~27分(平均 25.2分).改善率为 61.7%~90.5%.平均 72.5%。结论 单侧椎弓根螺钉联合对侧经皮椎板关节突螺钉固定具有操作简单、创伤小、稳定性好、融合率高和并发症少等优点.是部分下腰椎病变固定融合的较好选择。     

下腰椎不同固定方式的生物力学对比研究

目的 观察下腰椎不同固定方式对腰椎稳定性的影响.方法 新鲜成人尸体下腰椎标本6具,测定L4/5节段屈伸、左右侧屈、左右旋转6个方向ROM和刚度值的变化,按5组顺序依次测试:A组(正常下腰椎标本组);B组(单侧椎板关节突螺钉固定+椎间单枚Cage);C组(单侧椎弓根螺钉固定+椎间单枚Cage);D组(单侧椎弓根螺钉联合对侧椎板关节突螺钉固定+椎间单枚Cage);E组(双侧椎弓根螺钉固定+椎间单枚Cage).结果 与A组比较,B组各运动状态ROM有减少,而刚度明显增加,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05);与B组比较,C组各运动方向ROM与刚度,差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05);与C组比较,D组各运动状态ROM有减少,而刚度增加,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05);与E组比较,D组各运动方向ROM与刚度,差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05);与E组比较,C组各运动状态ROM有增加,而刚度减少,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).结论 单侧椎板关节突螺钉固定并椎间融合器植骨方法提供了一定的稳定性,而单侧椎弓根螺钉联合对侧椎板关节突螺钉固定并椎间融合器植骨具有与双侧椎弓根螺钉固定相同的稳定性,临床上可根据病例的具体情况,如身高体质量指数、病变类型及病变节段稳定程度选择性地应用上述两种固定融合方法.     

单侧椎弓根钉结合对侧关节突螺钉内固定与双侧椎弓根钉固定治疗下腰椎退行性疾病的比较

目的比较后路减压椎间融合器植骨后行单侧椎弓根钉结合对侧椎板关节突螺钉固定与双侧椎弓根螺钉固定治疗下腰椎退行性疾病的优缺点。方法2010年1月至2012年1月采用后路减压椎间融合器植骨内固定治疗80例下腰椎退行性疾病患者,均为单节段病变。其中40例在可扩张管微创系统（Quadrant系统）辅助下行椎弓根钉结合对侧椎板关节突螺钉固定（微创组）,40例采用开放后路腰椎体间融合双侧弓根螺钉内固定（常规组）。使用0s—westry功能障碍指数（oswestry disability index,ODI）、疼痛视觉模拟评分（visual analogue score,VAS）评定临床疗效,并比较两组患者手术切口长度、手术时间、术中出血量、术后引流量、住院时间、并发症等指标。结果术后1周微创组腰痛VAS评分优于常规组（P〈0．05）。而其他时间相比两组VAS评分与ODI评分相比,差异均无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。两组患者手术切口长度、手术时间、术中出血量、术后引流量、住院时间比较差异均有统计学意义,微创组少于常规组。随访过程中两组病例均未出现内固定物松动、移位、断裂等。融合率差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论与传统后路开放减压双侧椎弓根螺钉内固定术相比,微创通道下单侧椎弓根钉结合对侧椎板关节突螺钉内固定方法具有操作简单、创伤出血少、稳定可靠、疗效确切等优点,更加符合微创原则。     

棘突椎板作为骨源椎间植入在下腰椎椎间融合中的应用

目的探讨腰椎后路棘突椎板作为骨源椎间植入加椎弓根钉系统固定在下腰椎椎间融合中的可行性和临床效果。方法应用自体棘突椎板作为骨源椎间植入加椎弓根钉系统固定下腰椎98例，其中椎间盘脱出症30例，椎间盘突出症复发11例，腰椎不稳45例，椎管狭窄12例。结果10例失访，88例术后随访12—56个月，腰腿痛症状消失或明显减轻，腰椎间融合好，椎间隙高度无明显减少。结论棘突椎板作为骨源椎间植入加椎弓根钉系统固定在下腰椎的应用具有操作简单、安全、可靠及融合效果好的优点。     

Anterior interbody arthrodesis with percutaneous posterior pedicle fixation for degenerative conditions of the lumbar spine

This is a retrospective case series to evaluate clinical variables, complications and outcome of 50 patients who underwent anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) supplemented with posterior percutaneous pedicle screw fixation for degenerative conditions of the lumbar spine. Twenty-four patients underwent single-level fusion and 26 patients had a two-level fusion for a total of 76 levels fused. The mean lengths of the anterior and posterior (including repositioning) portions of the procedure were 131 and 102 min, respectively. The mean estimated blood loss for the entire procedure was 288 ml. The overall adverse event rate was 12%. The mean VAS score for leg pain, VAS score for back pain and mean ODI all improved postoperatively. This study found that ALIF using allograft bone and rhBMP-2 combined with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation had a high fusion rate and a low incidence of perioperative complications. Patient outcomes showed significant improvements in back and leg pain and physical functioning.