椎弓根螺钉置入内固定与单纯椎管减压治疗退行性腰椎滑脱的比较

背景：随着脊柱内固定和脊柱融合技术的发展,脊柱融合已成为腰椎退行性滑脱症毫无争议的“金标准”。同时,邻近节段退行性变的问题引起人们越来越多的关注。 目的：观察椎弓根螺钉内固定置入植骨融合治疗退行性腰椎滑脱的临床疗效、手术节段稳定性及其对相邻节段的影响,并与单纯椎管加压进行对比。 方法：选择天津医科大学总医院骨科收治的退行性腰椎滑脱患者38例,排除失访3例,余35例中采用椎弓根固定后外侧融合21例,单纯椎管减压14例。单纯椎管加压组用咬骨钳咬除黄韧带和椎板解除神经根后方的压迫,用骨凿凿除向前滑脱的椎体后缘与下位相邻椎体后缘形成的相对性突起;椎弓根螺钉固定植骨融合组按Wein-stein 法定位椎弓根钉进针,拧入椎弓根螺钉,根据受压情况进行椎板减压。按Oswestry功能障碍指数综合评价临床疗效,观察过伸、过屈位时的水平位移及角移位,采用UCLA系统来评价邻近节段退变情况。 结果与结论：35例患者随访时间1年。椎弓根螺钉固定植骨融合组优良率显著高于单纯椎管加压组(P < 0.05)。椎弓根螺钉固定植骨融合对腰椎稳定性影响不大,邻近节段退变置入前和置入后1年无明显变化。单纯椎管加压对腰椎稳定性影响显著,同时治疗前和治疗后1年邻近节段退变无明显变化。提示椎弓根螺钉内固定置入植骨融合治疗退行性腰椎滑脱疗效满意,对腰椎稳定性影响小,并且置入后早期对椎间盘的邻近节段影响不大。     

腰椎间孔入路腰椎体间植骨融合结合椎弓根螺钉置入内固定：能提高退行性病变腰椎的稳定性与植骨融合率吗？

背景：腰椎融合已广泛应用于治疗各种腰椎退行性疾病,然而传统的经后方或后外侧入路融合率较低,并发症较多,影响相邻脊柱节段的稳定性,破坏了脊柱的机械载荷分布。 目的：探讨经腰椎间孔入路行腰椎体间植骨融合结合椎弓根螺钉置入内固定治疗腰椎退行性疾病的临床效果。 方法：68例腰椎退行性疾病患者行腰椎间孔入路腰椎体间植骨融合结合短节段椎弓根螺钉置入内固定,其中峡部裂型腰椎滑脱24例、退变性腰椎滑脱16例、退变性腰椎管狭窄18例和退变性腰椎间盘疾病10例。 结果与结论：所有患者无神经损伤、椎间隙感染和脑脊液漏等并发症,一期愈合。均获得随访,平均随访29个月(10~60个月)。所有病例未发生内置物断裂、松动移位和椎间隙高度丧失等并发症,骨融合率为91%。依据日本JOA疗效评定标准,优35例,良26例,可5例,差2例,总优良率为90%。结果说明基于椎弓根置入内固定的椎间孔入路腰椎体间植骨融合可有效治疗腰椎退行性疾病,近期随访结果满意。 关键词：经腰椎间孔入路;椎间融合;椎弓根固定;腰椎退行性疾病;硬组织植入物     

单侧椎弓根螺钉置入并椎间融合对邻近椎间盘节段退变的影响

背景：坚强内固定和良好融合存在严重缺陷和不足。目前还未见临床应用单侧椎弓根螺钉固定结合椎间cage植骨融合治疗腰椎退变性疾病对邻近节段退变影响的相关报道。 目的：回顾分析单侧椎弓根螺钉固定结合椎间cage植骨融合治疗部分腰椎退变性疾病后对固定融合邻近上下节段退变的影响。 方法：2006-03/2009-12对收治的部分腰椎管狭窄症、腰椎失稳及腰椎间盘脱出症患者22例,进行了单侧椎弓根螺钉固定加椎间cage植骨融合,术中不显露对侧。在固定融合后3,6,12,20个月及取出内固定钉棒后3,6个月,随访X射线片及MRI。针对X射线片运用角平分线法测量固定融合邻近上位椎间隙高度变化,MRI测量椎间盘髓核退变情况。 结果与结论：所有病例获得随访,患者椎管狭窄症状及神经根性症状消失,并且在随访期间内没有新的临床症状出现。固定融合前、固定融合后3,6,12,20个月邻近节段上位椎间隙高度分别为(7.420±0.035 4),(7.426 6±0.036 9),(7.453 3±0.036 9),(7.516 6±0.036 9),(7.430 8±0.036 9) mm,结果表明,腰椎单侧固定融合后邻近节段椎间隙高度无明显变化(P > 0.05)。MRI测量结果显示,固定融合邻近上位椎间盘髓核信号在T2加权像无明显退变。提示单侧椎弓根螺钉固定结合椎间融合治疗部分腰椎退变性疾病能有效预防固定融合邻近上下节段退变。     

腰椎融合加椎弓根固定治疗腰椎滑脱

目的 探讨腰椎融合加椎弓根复位固定术在治疗腰椎滑脱中的手术疗效.方法 采用后路手术,行椎管、侧隐窝及神经根管的彻底减压,切除病变椎间盘,利用椎弓根钉复位,行病变椎体间前方植骨,左右椎间融合器融合及椎弓钉内固定术治疗腰椎滑脱症17例.结果 术后随访16～29个月,全部病例临床症状均有不同程度改善,X线显示所有病例均满意复位,病变椎体在半年后达骨性融合,无再次滑脱,无内植物松动、折断,优良率为94.1%.结论 椎弓根钉复位固定并椎间植骨融合术是治疗腰椎滑脱症的有效方法.     

MAST QUADRANT 可扩张管下单侧椎弓根钉置入与椎体间融合治疗腰椎退变性疾病**★

背景：腰椎后路椎体间融合治疗腰椎退变性疾病，能够恢复椎间隙高度、维持腰椎生理前凸、提供腰椎的即刻稳定性及取得较高的椎间骨性融合率。 目的：验证运用MAST QUADRANT 可扩张管通道微创系统行单侧椎弓根钉置入并椎体间融合治疗腰椎退变性疾病的适应证及有效性。 方法：在3.0 cm的微创切口内放置MAST QUADRANT可扩张管，应用单侧椎弓根钉内固定加椎体间融合治疗腰椎退变性疾病患者32例。 结果与结论：患者置入内固过程中未发生硬膜囊撕裂、神经根和大血管等副损伤。随访3个月以上。置入3个月后JOA评分明显高于置入前(P < 0.01)，目测类比评分显著低于置入前(P < 0.01)。X射线片显示椎间隙骨密度均逐渐增加，未发现椎间融合器移位、假关节、内固定松脱或折断等并发症，亦无炎症、过敏等不良反应。     

JJXA钉棒脊柱内固定置入及椎间颗粒骨植骨治疗动力性腰椎不稳症46例

选择2003-03/2007-03南阳市第九人民医院和南阳市第二人民医院收治的动力性腰椎不稳患者46例，行后正中入路下的椎管减压手术，钛制JJXA椎弓根螺钉置入，并行椎间隙撑开，双侧切除椎间盘保留侧方以及前方的纤维环，刮除终板的软骨层，行椎间颗粒骨植骨，椎弓根螺钉系统加压固定。46例随访时间≥15个月，优良率91.3%。JJXA固定牢靠，无断钉断棒和螺钉松动现象，无复位丢失，无炎症及排异现象发生，植骨融合率为97.8%。提示JJXA钉棒内固定及椎间颗粒骨植骨治疗腰椎不稳，能够达到即刻腰椎稳定性重建以及长期骨性融合的治疗目的。     

椎弓根螺钉置入内固定联合自体颗粒骨移植治疗退行性腰椎病变

背景：植骨材料来源、形态及植骨方式对腰椎融合的影响目前仍有争议。自体颗粒骨打压植骨作为一种新的植骨方式,具一定的优点,但目前在腰椎融合的临床应用报道不多。 目的：探讨后路椎弓根螺钉置入内固定联合自体颗粒骨打压移植治疗退行性腰椎疾患的临床可行性。 方法：纳入接受后路腰椎融合治疗的退行性腰椎疾病患者21例(28个节段),其中腰椎间盘突出合并节段性不稳定7例,腰椎间盘突出合并椎管狭窄6例,退变性腰椎不稳8例。对21例(28个节段)退行性腰椎疾病患者行后路自体颗粒骨打压植骨联合椎弓根螺钉置入内固定治疗。根据植骨前后X射线片评价植骨融合率,采用腰腿痛VAS目测评分法、ODI评分法及标准Macnab疗效评价临床症状改善情况。 结果与结论: 全部患者随访12个月以上,3~5个月后可见骨融合征象,无高度及复位丢失、螺钉断裂等现象,患者腰腿痛等症状均有不同程度缓解。末次随访VAS目测类比评分、ODI评分均较术前明显改善(P < 0.01),脊柱融合率为95%。1例患者术后6 d CT检查示椎管内小骨粒压迫神经;1例术后第5天出院后伤口浅表软组织感染。采用Macnab标准评价临床结果：优10例,良9例,差2例,优良率91%。说明后路自体颗粒骨打压移植联合椎弓根螺钉置入内固定治疗退行性腰椎疾患短期临床效果良好,植骨融合率高,手术并发症少。 关键词: 自体颗粒骨; 打压植骨; 椎体间融合;椎弓根螺钉;内固定;硬组织植入物     

椎间融合器植入并双侧下关节突切除治疗退变性腰椎管狭窄症

背景：对退变性腰椎管狭窄治疗可行全椎板减压内固定置入、单侧或双侧开窗减压、后路全椎板减压等方法。但采取何种方式治疗中是否需行椎间融合器植入内固定目前还没有定论。 目的：评价以cage椎间植骨融合椎弓根内植入固定并腰后路全椎板及双侧下关节突切除减压、自体小关节骨质移植治疗退变性腰椎管狭窄症的效果。 方法：选择经3个月保守治疗无效的退变性腰椎管狭窄症患者41例,男23例,女18例,平均年龄60.3岁,行腰后路全椎板及双侧下关节突切除减压、自体小关节骨质及cage椎间植骨融合植入椎弓根内固定治疗,随访24个月,术前及术后随访时JOA评分评价患者疗效,放射学检查患者植骨融合情况及手术节段椎体稳定性。 结果与结论：随访时JOA评分较术前有明显提高(P < 0.01),临床优良率为90%;40例获得骨性融合,融合率98%,1例患者有腰椎不稳征象。术后均无内固定物松动、断裂等并发症发生,但有2例发生硬脊膜撕裂,1例发生椎弓根位置偏斜,1例假关节形成。结果提示腰后路全椎板及双侧下关节突切除减压、自体小关节骨质及cage椎间植骨融合植入椎弓根内固定治疗退变性腰椎管狭窄症具有良好的临床效果。     

单枚cage单侧椎弓根螺钉置入内固定治疗退行性腰椎不稳51例

背景：既往多采用双侧显露,双侧椎弓根钉置入固定治疗退行性腰椎不稳,手术风险较大,出血较多,手术时间长,费用高。 目的：探讨后路单枚cage单侧椎弓根钉置入内固定治疗退行性腰椎不稳的临床效果。 方法：采用后路椎弓根钉及椎间融合器治疗需行内固定融合的退行性腰椎不稳患者51例,男32例,女19例,年龄41~72岁;单节段47例,双节段4例。手术方法均采用单侧显露症状侧椎板及关节突,单侧置入椎弓根钉,经椎间孔入路手术切除椎间盘及软骨终板,植骨后放入单枚cage。根据日本JOA评分法评估术后疗效。 结果与结论：术中出血90~430 mL;手术时间单节段为100(85~120) min, 双节段为150(120~170) min;术后第二三天即可离床活动。术后有2例患者腰腿痛无好转,复查CT 和MRI 均未见异常,其中1 例经3 个月对症处理后腰腿痛减轻,另1 例无变化。按日本JOA 评分法评定标准,术前JOA 评分11(7~13 )分,术后1 年JOA 评分25(18~27 )分。94%患者的JOA改善率>50%。51 例患者中融合44 例,可能融合7例,融合时间为5.4(4.3~7.1) 个月。本组未发现椎弓根螺钉松动、拔出、断钉及cage 移位。说明单侧椎弓根钉及cage内固定手术方法简单,出血少,手术时间短,对脊柱结构破坏少,是治疗退行性腰椎不稳可供选择的较好方法。     

椎弓根钉置入内固定与两种不同椎间植骨融合治疗退行性下腰椎不稳：同一机构4年27例资料回顾

背景：良好的骨性融合对于椎弓根钉置入内固定治疗脊柱获得长期的稳定性至关重要。腰椎融合的方式很多，从融合的效果来看，目前以椎体间植骨融合最为可靠。 目的：对比椎弓根钉置入内固定治疗退行性下腰椎不稳时采用打压植骨椎间融合与椎间融合器植骨融合的临床效果及放射学结果评价。 方法：27例退行性下腰椎不稳症患者C臂机辅助透视下于定节段的椎弓根分别拧入椎弓根钉。按不同椎间植骨融合方法，将患者分为2组，16例打压植骨椎间融合，11例椎间融合器植骨融合。测量椎间隙高度后选用大小合宜的两个椎间融合器，把椎板及棘突骨块塞入融合器内腔并植入椎间隙。所有患者置入前、后均行X射线平片及CT检查。 结果与结论：所有病例随访16 ~25个月，平均19个月。2组患者原有的腰背疼痛及神经症状明显改善：融合器组优良率为91.3%，自体骨组为89.4%，两组间差异无显著性意义。置入后1年融合器组的融合率为87.5%，自体骨组为90.9%，两组间差异无显著性意义；最终随访时椎间隙高度融合器组高于自体骨组，提示椎弓根钉内固定的组织相容性良好，配合自体骨打压植骨治疗后椎间隙高度虽有一定程度丢失，但融合率和临床优良率与置入椎间植骨融合器差异无显著性意义。     

双侧钉棒及同侧单钉棒置入内固定的生物力学比较

背景：腰椎失稳、腰椎滑脱等腰椎退行性疾病常常需要实施腰椎融合,其目标是稳定脊柱,但究竟采取何种内固定方式仍存在争论。 目的：比较单侧与双侧经椎间孔减压椎体间融合治疗腰椎退行性病变的生物力学差异。 方法：人新鲜尸体腰椎标本6具,L4~5模拟微创经椎间孔减压椎体间融合,根据不同的内固定组合方式分为2组,即双侧钉棒组及同侧单钉棒组。在生物力学试验机上测量各种固定方式不同工况下的运动范围(ROM值),并进行比较。 结果与结论：以完整的腰椎运动单元为参照,两固定组的ROM值均低于对照组(P < 0.05)。其中双侧钉棒组在各工况下ROM值均显著低于同侧单钉棒组(P < 0.05)。提示在生物力学实验中,单侧椎弓根螺钉固定椎间融合生物力学性能优良,刚度适中,腰椎可获得可靠的稳定性。但与双侧钉棒固定比较,单钉棒方式仍然存在差距。     

Unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw instrumentation for single-level minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF) has become an increasingly popular method of lumbar arthrodesis. However, there are few published studies comparing the clinical outcomes between unilateral and bilateral instrumented MIS TLIF. Sixty-five patients with degenerative lumbar spine disease were enrolled in this study. Thirty-one patients were randomized to the unilateral group and 34 to the bilateral group. Recorded demographic data included sex, age, preoperative diagnosis, and degenerated segment. Operative time, blood loss, hospital stay length, complication rates, and fusion rates were also evaluated. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain score data were obtained. All patients were asked to follow-up at 3 and 6 months after surgery, and once every 6 months thereafter. The mean follow-up was 26.6 months (range 18–36 months). The two groups were similar in sex, age, preoperative diagnosis, and operated level. The unilateral group had significantly shorter operative time, lower blood loss, and shorter hospital time than the bilateral group. The average postoperative ODI and VAS scores improved significantly in each group. No significant differences were found between the two groups in relation to ODI and VAS. All patients showed evidence of fusion at 12 months postoperatively. The total fusion rate, screw failure, and general complication rate were not significantly different. Results showed that single-level MIS TLIF with unilateral pedicle screw fixation would be sufficient in the management of preoperatively stable patients with lumbar degenerative disease. It seems that MIS TLIF with unilateral pedicle screw instrumentation is a better choice for single-level degenerative lumbar spine disease.     

Anterior versus combined anterior and posterior fixation/fusion in the treatment of distraction-flexion injury in the lower cervical spine.

This study compared the results of combined anterior and posterior fixation/fusion with those of anterior fixation/fusion alone through a retrospective review of 50 patients with a distraction flexion injury of the cervical spine. Group A (n=28) had unilateral facet joint subluxation or dislocation (Allen stage I or II) and anterior fixation/fusion alone. Group B (n=10) had bilateral dislocation (Allen stage III) and anterior fixation/fusion alone. Group C (n=5) had unilateral subluxation or dislocation and combined anterior and posterior fixation/fusion. Group D (n=7) had bilateral dislocation or total dislocation (Allen stage III or IV) and combined anterior and posterior fixation/fusion. The following parameters were analyzed: the change in the vertebral height and Cobb's angle, neurologic recovery, fusion time, fusion rate, surgery time, and the rate of complications. The mean fusion time was 3.75+/-2.10, 6.00+/-2.82, 3.60+/-1.34, and 3.85+/-2.26 months in groups A, B, C, and D, respectively. Group B had a significantly longer mean fusion time than groups A and D (Mann-Whitney U-test, P=0,012, P=0.014). There was a significant difference in the operation time between groups A and B and groups C and D. There were no significant differences in the changes in vertebral height and Cobb's angle, fusion rate, and neurologic recovery. The complications encountered were three cases of distal screw loosening in group A (n=2) and B (n=1), and three cases of delayed union in group A (n=2) and B (n=1). There were no complications in groups C and D. In those with a bilateral dislocation, the fusion time was increased when only anterior fixation/fusion had been performed but the clinical results, such as neurologic recovery and complications, were similar in the four groups. Overall, anterior fixation/fusion alone in a bilateral dislocation is recommended as an alternative method.     

椎弓根螺钉和椎板钩选择性融合治疗胸椎青少年特发性脊柱侧弯的差异

背景：既往的文献多报道用椎板钩或联合椎弓根螺钉治疗特发性脊柱侧弯或讨论融合节段的选择。 目的：比较椎弓根螺钉和椎板钩治疗青少年特发性脊柱侧弯临床疗效的差异，并行影像学评价。 方法：选择66例连续观察的青少年特发性脊柱侧弯(胸段主弯、腰段代偿弯)患者，均行后路内固定融合，末端融合到T12或L1椎体。其中32例行椎板钩内固定，34例行椎弓根螺钉内固定，内固定后最少随访2年。 结果与结论：椎弓根螺钉组患者内固定后胸段Cobb角矫正程度及腰段Cobb角自发矫正程度明显大于椎板钩组(P < 0.001)。椎板钩组内固定后13例患者冠状面朝左侧失代偿大于20 mm(参照C7铅垂线)，而椎弓根内固定组仅4例，差异有显著性意义(P < 0.005)。两组患者均无并发症发生。提示后路选择性融合治疗特发性脊柱侧弯(胸段主弯、腰段代偿弯)，与椎板钩相比，椎弓根螺钉有更好的矫正效果且内固定后冠状面失代偿发生率低。     

Fijación lumbar posterior empleando el sistema de imagen quirúrgica O-arm: experiencia inicial

ObjectThe use of transpedicular screw fixation has been widely accepted for the treatment of degenerative and traumatic pathology of the lumbar spine. Complications of spinal instrumentation can be serious. Screw misplacement can result in unintended durotomy, nerve root and/or cauda equina injury. In comparison to fluoroscopy-assisted screw placement, computer-assisted image guidance has been shown to achieve overall higher rates of accuracy. The O-arm is able to obtain computed tomography (CT)-type images with multiplanar reconstruction. In this study we evaluated a cohort of patients who underwent posterior lumbar fusion with pedicle screws utilizing the O-arm imaging system.MethodsA retrospective review of 40 consecutive patients who underwent posterior lumbar fusion surgery with O-arm utilization, was performed. The study population included 14 males and 26 females. Age range was 39-85 years with an average of 63.8 years. Twenty one patients had degenerative lumbar stenosis (52.5%) and 19 had spondylolisthesis (47.5%). Intraoperative CT-images were obtained. The mean time for surgery and screw placement was assessed.ResultsA total of 252 pedicle screws were sited using O-arm navigation system, with a mean of 6.3 screws per patient (range 4-10). On the basis of intraoperative CT, 3 screws were redirected, representing a 98.81% accuracy rate.The mean duration of surgery was 157.2 (90-240) minutes and the mean time for screw placement was 7.13 (3.08-15) minutes per screw.Three patients (7.5%) developed superficial wound infections which were treated conservatively. No patients required a return to the operating room because of screw malposition.ConclusionThe use of intraoperative O-arm imaging system with computer-assisted navigation significantly increases the surgical accuracy and safety of pedicle screw placement in lumbar fusion surgery.