开窗减压手术治疗腰椎管狭窄症的临床研究

目的探索一种无需重建稳定性的减压手术治疗腰椎管狭窄症。方法共152例腰椎管狭窄症患者,随机序贯分为2组,A组行改良开窗减压手术,B组行传统全椎板减压手术,评价术前与术后的腰痛、下肢放射痛、行走耐受性和神经系统功能恢复。结果A组病例总的疗效优为89％,良为11％;B组病例总的疗效优为63％,良为30％,差为7％。结论改良开窗手术对于退变性腰椎管狭窄症,即使合并轻度的先天性腰椎管狭窄,其减压的效果也是足够充分有效的,且术后长期效果满意,并发症少,医疗费用低,可以作为治疗无术前腰椎失稳的退变性腰椎管狭窄症（可合并轻度先天性腰椎管狭窄）的标准手术,在临床上推广。     

个体化手术治疗退变性腰椎管狭窄症

目的回顾性分析选择性减压和减压融合治疗退变性腰椎管狭窄症的临床疗效。方法对我科2008年10月-2010年10月81例行手术治疗的退变性腰椎管狭窄症的临床资料进行总结：其中男37例,女44例,年龄39~72岁,平均（59.4±6.3）岁;单节段狭窄48例,双节段狭窄25例,三个及其以上节段狭窄8例;7例伴L4椎体I°滑脱,5例伴腰椎退变性侧弯,26例存在节段性不稳。根据无或有不稳行减压（A组）或减压融合（B组）。A组43例,行经后路常规椎板开窗减压或后路椎间盘椎管探查减压;B组38例,行后路减压椎体间或横突间植骨融合及椎弓根钉棒内固定术。采用JOA评分、ODI量表评价临床疗效,比较两组的疗效。结果平均随访1.8年,总体临床优良率82.1%,A组82.1%,B组82.2%。结论在仔细分析病情的基础上,选择个体化手术方案治疗退变性腰椎管狭窄症可取得满意的临床疗效,提高生活质量。     

高龄腰椎管狭窄症患者手术治疗的安全性及有效性

目的:分析高龄腰椎管狭窄症患者接受手术治疗的临床疗效及并发症,评价其安全性和有效性。方法:自2015年12月~2017年6月,共有49例75岁以上的腰椎管狭窄症患者在我院接受腰椎后路减压融合内固定术,其中获得半年以上随访且资料完整的患者44例,单节段融合11例,双节段融合21例,3节段融合7例,3节段以上融合5例。34例(77.3%)患者合并高血压,13例(29.5%)合并糖尿病,9例(20.5%)合并冠心病(3例曾行心脏支架植入术,1例曾行心脏搭桥术),6例(13.6%)有脑梗死病史但无明显后遗症,2例(4.5%)合并慢性阻塞性肺疾病,2例(4.5%)慢性肾功能不全。将患者分为短节段融合组(3节段,n=32)和长节段融合组(≥3节段,n=12)。统计两组患者的一般资料、术中出血量、手术时间、疼痛视觉模拟量表(visual analoge score,VAS)评分、Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)以及手术并发症。将患者对手术疗效的主观满意度分为满意、基本满意、不满意、非常不满意。结果:44例患者均顺利完成手术,手术时间为234.2±74.56min(100~411min),术中出血量为475.5±343.4ml(100~1400ml)。术后发生脑脊液漏2例,切口愈合不良5例。随访13.8±2.1个月(6~25个月),末次随访时,VAS评分由术前的7.53±1.19分改善至2.38±1.58分(P0.001),ODI由术前的(70.32±6.90)%改善至(46.38±9.89)%(P0.001);8例出现螺钉松动,2例cage后移,2例cage下沉,再手术2例。30例对疗效满意,6例基本满意,5例不满意,3例非常不满意,满意率为81.8%。两组患者年龄和BMI无显著性差异,长节段融合组女性患者占比较高,手术时间较长,出血量较多;两组患者的VAS评分改善率和ODI改善率无显著性差异;与长节段融合组相比,短节段融合组再手术比例、螺钉松动比例以及cage后移比例较低。结论:高龄腰椎管狭窄症患者并存病较多,围手术期内固定相关并发症较多,且与融合节段有关。围手术期积极控制内科疾病,术中仔细操作,手术的安全性可以得到保障,术后临床症状和功能评分均可以获得显著性改善。     

Patient-based outcomes for the operative treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis

Study design: A retrospective surgical case series was conducted using a condition-specific, patient-based outcomes assessment. Objective: The goal of this study was to describe the outcome predictors of decompressive surgery for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS). Summary of background data: Surgical decompression is the recommended treatment for patients with moderate to severe DLSS. Previous studies have reported that factors such as the number of operated levels and patient health status are predictors of surgical outcomes. Methods: This study analyzed the success rates of 58 DLSS patients treated with decompressive surgery. Outcomes were measured with the Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ) completed pre-operatively and at least 12 months post-operatively (range 12–54 months). The ZCQ includes three distinct domains that involve symptom severity, physical function, and patient satisfaction. Variables such as age, sex, pre-operative symptom severity, and arthrodesis were analyzed as predictors of success. Results: The study group included 21 males and 37 females, and the mean age of all patients was 66 years (range 41–80 years). Overall, 63.8% of the patients had significant clinical improvement in Symptom Severity, 55.2% had significant clinical improvement in Physical Function, and 58.6% of the patients were at least somewhat satisfied; 63.8% (37/58) of the patients were considered to be clinically successful. Patients with more severe pre-operative symptoms and more physical function restrictions had better success results than those patients with milder symptoms and less restrictive physical function. Also, patients who were followed for less than 24 months had better success than those followed for more than 24 months. There was no significant difference in the clinical success rates of (1) patients who were fused and those not fused, (2) males and females, (3) patients aged less than 65 years and those greater than 65 years, and (4) patients who were treated at one or two levels and those treated at three or four levels. Conclusion: The results of this retrospective study indicate that operative decompression of the lumbar spine offers significant improvement for patients with DLSS. Although not all comparisons were statistically significant, there was a trend for DLLS patients aged less than 65 years with more severe pre-operative symptoms and physical function disturbances treated at one or two levels with a laminectomy and fusion to have the best outcomes.     

单纯减压与减压融合术治疗老年退行性腰椎管狭窄症的Meta分析

目的对单纯减压术与减压融合术治疗老年退行性腰椎管狭窄症进行Meta分析。方法计算机检索Pub Med、Embase、Cochrane图书馆、万方数据库和中国期刊全文数据库中2016年2月以前的相关文献。根据纳入与排除标准,由2名研究者分别独立筛选文献,按照Cochrane偏倚风险评估工具严格进行质量评估,并利用Rev Man 5.2软件对相关结局指标(总体疗效、手术时间、术中出血量、并发症发生率、二次手术率)进行Meta分析。结果纳入9篇符合纳入标准的随机对照试验,共964例,单纯减压组580例,减压融合组384例。Meta分析结果显示,与减压融合组比较,单纯减压组手术时间和术中出血量明显更少,差异有统计学意义(P0.05);而2组在术后总体疗效、并发症发生率和二次手术率方面差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论单纯减压和减压融合术治疗老年退行性腰椎管狭窄症的疗效相当,但单纯减压术具有手术创伤小、出血量少、手术时间短、术后康复快的优点。     

老年退行性腰椎管狭窄症患者全椎板切除术后远期X线变化

目的：观察老年退行性腰椎管狭窄症患者全椎板切除减压术后远期腰椎X线影像变化情况。方法：1991年1月～2001年12月,我院行单纯全椎板切除术治疗老年退行性腰椎管狭窄症患者132例,其中X线资料完整者63例,男32例,女31例,年龄65～83岁,平均72.3岁。分析术前和术后X线资料,观察末次随访时手术节段及其相邻上、下节段的椎体间相对距离、相对位移、椎体间活动角度及椎体间冠状面活动度和水平面旋转度的改变。结果：术后随访5～15年,平均7.3年,125个全椎板切除减压节段末次随访时与术前比较,椎体间相对距离明显降低（P=0.001）,椎体间相对位移略有增大（P=0.1）,椎体间活动角度明显增大（P=0.01）,椎体间冠状面活动角度略有增大（P=0.1）,椎体间水平面相对旋转度明显增大（P=0.01）。112个减压相邻上、下节段手术前后比较,上述指标变化均不明显（P〉0.05）。结论：退行性腰椎管狭窄症患者行全椎板切除减压术后减压节段X线影像退变迹象明显,减压相邻上、下节段退变迹象较轻。     

Results of surgical treatment for lumbar canal stenosis due to degenerative spondylolisthesis: enlargement of the lumbar spinal canal

The purpose of this retrospective study was to analyze clinical results and radiographic findings in patients who underwent surgical enlargement of the lumbar spinal canal combined with resection of the posterosuperior margin underneath the slipping vertebral body for the treatment of lumbar canal stenosis due to degenerative spondylolisthesis. A series of 64 patients who were observed for 3 years or more after operation were examined. The mean age at the time of operation was 64.2 years. The follow-up period was 3–17 years. The Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score increased from 14.9 points before operation to 25.4 points at the time of the study on average. The general improvement rate was 75.6%. The height and range of motion of the enlarged intervertebral disc were mildly to moderately decreased, and it was found there was a small effect on the adjacent intervertebral disc. On computed tomography, the total level of the enlarged region of the posterosuperior margin increased from 184.4mm² to 339.1mm² on average, but the area of the resected region was 163.3mm² and accounted for 48% of the postoperative area of the spinal canal in the posterosuperior margin. This enlargement of the spinal canal was maintained along the dural canal, and physiological morphology was established. By surgically enlarging the lumbar spinal canal combined with resecting the posterosuperior margin underneath the slipping vertebral body, concomitant repositioning or spinal fixation was unnecessary.     

棘突劈开、单侧进入双侧减压与椎板切除减压治疗退变性腰椎管狭窄症的比较

目的 比较棘突劈开、单侧进入双侧减压与椎板切除、椎管减压治疗腰椎管狭窄症的疗效.方法 前瞻性研究2009年6月至2010年5月手术治疗56例退变性腰椎管狭窄症或椎管狭窄合并间盘突出患者资料.术前随机将患者分为棘突劈开、单侧进入双侧减压组(简称棘突劈开组)及传统腰椎椎板切除、椎管减压组(简称椎板切除组).棘突劈开组共27例,男15例,女12例;年龄49～71岁,平均59.4岁.椎板切除组29例,男18例,女11例;年龄52～69岁,平均61.1岁.术后第3天行血肌酸激酶测定.应用日本矫形外科学会(Japanese Orthopaedic Association,JOA)腰痛评分及疼痛视觉模拟评分(visual analogue scale,VAS)作为手术前后主、客观评分标准.术后6个月CT扫描评价棘突愈合情况.测量术前及末次随访时多裂肌MR面积.结果 棘突劈开组21例、椎板切除组24例获得2年以上有效随访.棘突劈开组术前腰痛及下肢痛VAS、JOA评分、多裂肌MR面积分别为:(5.6±1.7)分、(7.1±0.4)分、(11.6±2.6)分、(5.8±1.8)cm2;椎板切除组分别为(6.2±1.2)分、(7.9±1.3)分、(10.9±1.0)分、(6.1±2.0) cm2.棘突劈开组术后第3天血肌酸激酶测定值明显小于椎板切除组.棘突劈开组术后6个月随访时劈开棘突均完全愈合.末次随访时棘突劈开组下肢痛VAS、JOA评分及改善率分别与椎板切除组比较均无显著性差异.棘突劈开组腰痛VAS评分、多裂肌萎缩比分别为(1.0±0.5)分、6.4％±1.2％;椎板切除组分别为(2.6±0.7)分、l5.7％±3.0％,棘突劈开组均优于椎板切除组.两组动力位X线片均未见继发性腰椎不稳.结论 棘突劈开、单侧进入双侧减压可有效减少手术创伤及术后腰痛发生率,保护双侧多裂肌棘突止点及对侧多裂肌在椎板的附着点.     

后路综合手术治疗腰椎退变性滑脱并椎管狭窄

目的 探讨后路综合手术治疗腰椎退变性滑脱并椎管狭窄(DLSSS)的手术方法和疗效。方法 对47例均采取后路充分减压,植骨融合及经椎弓根复位固定综合性手术治疗。平均随访32个月,进行临床功能和影像学评价。结果 临床功能评价优良率87％(41/47);椎体滑移复位率96％(45/47);退变畸形矫正率91％(43/47);植骨融合率96％(45/47)。内固定松动率4％(2/47),一过性腰腿痛发生率34％(16/47)。结论 应用上述综合手术治疗DLSSS可同时解除神经卡压,矫正畸形和稳定脊柱,从而能够达到多症兼治的治疗目的。     

Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis

The aim of the study was to evaluate the long-term outcome of various surgical procedures for lumbar spinal stenosis. Operations were performed on 117 consecutive patients for lumbar spinal stenosis between 1987 and 1992. Pre- and intraoperative data were recorded in a standardized manner. Three treatment groups were distinguished: group I consisting of 39 patients submitted to undercutting decompression; group II, 51 patients, submitted to laminectomy and foraminal decompression alone; and group III, 27 patients, who underwent foraminal decompression and laminectomy with instrumented fusion. Eight years (5–10 years) after surgery a questionnaire was mailed to the patients containing the outcome scales according to Greenough and Fraser [6] and Turner et al. [22] together with questions about residual pain, necessity of treatment and satisfaction with the operative outcome. A total of 72 questionnaires (61.6%) gave enough information for analysis. After a mean follow-up of 8 years, walking capacity had increased significantly in all groups (P<0.001). Compared to preoperative values, pain had decreased significantly in all groups (P<0.01). In group I 36% had good-to-excellent outcomes, and 30.8% and 23.8% in groups II and III (P>0.05). Forty percent of group I patients were unsatisfied with the result, compared to 38.4% and 33.3% in the other groups (P>0.05). Overall, 25 of 72 patients (34.7%) had severe constant back and/or leg pain requiring daily administration of analgesics. We conclude that the long-term outcome of decompressive surgery of the lumbar spinal canal, without and with instrumented fusion, is less favourable than was previously reported. Received: 26 June 1998 / Accepted: 19 August 1998     

退变性腰椎侧凸合并椎管狭窄的阶梯性治疗策略

目的退变性腰椎侧凸合并椎管狭窄多为中老年患者,治疗方法选择复杂。探讨退变性腰椎侧凸合并椎管狭窄的阶梯性治疗策略及疗效。方法 2005年1月-2009年12月,收治退变性腰椎侧凸合并椎管狭窄患者117例,根据患者意愿、内科合并症、腰腿痛症状、腰椎侧凸后凸旋转三维畸形、腰椎稳定性的情况(侧方滑移、退变性滑脱),以及脊柱整体平衡状态,阶梯性地选择保守治疗(43例)、后路单纯减压术(18例)、后路短节段融合术(1～2个节段,41例)、后路长节段融合畸形矫正(≥3个节段,15例)方法治疗。比较患者治疗前后腰痛及腿痛的疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)、Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)、腰椎前凸角、侧凸Cobb角的变化。结果术后获1年以上随访72例;无死亡及内固定失败。保守治疗19例平均随访19.3个月(1～5年),无症状加重,末次随访时腰痛及腿痛VAS评分、ODI较治疗前明显降低(P<0.05),腰椎前凸角减小、侧凸Cobb角增大,但与治疗前比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。后路单纯减压术12例平均随访36个月(1～5年),末次随访时腿痛VAS评分、ODI较治疗前均明显降低(P<0.05),腰痛VAS评分较治疗前减小,但差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);腰椎前凸角减小、侧凸Cobb角增大,但进展缓慢,与治疗前比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。后路短节段融合31例平均随访21.3个月(1～3年),术后发生血肿、切口愈合不良、脑脊液漏、浅表感染各1例,经对症处理后治愈;末次随访时腰痛及腿痛VAS评分、ODI较治疗前均明显降低(P<0.05),腰椎前凸角及侧凸Cobb角均明显改善(P<0.05)。后路长节段融合10例平均随访17.1个月(1～3年),术后症状加重1例,经理疗及药物治疗3个月后缓解;术后深部感染1例,经清创切口持续冲洗引流后治愈;末次随访时腰痛及腿痛VAS评分、ODI、腰椎前凸角及侧凸Cobb角均较治疗前明显改善(P<0.05)。结论退变性腰椎侧凸合并椎管狭窄的治疗应个体化、阶梯性地选择治疗方案。手术治疗以减压为主、矫形为辅,应准确判断症状责任节段、侧凸责任节段、后凸责任节段,防止手术扩大化,积极控制出血,提高手术安全性。     

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。     

改良经椎板间入路经皮内窥镜下减压术治疗退行性腰椎椎管狭窄

目的观察改良经椎板间入路经皮内窥镜下减压术(PEID)治疗退行性腰椎椎管狭窄症(DLSS)的临床效果,为此项技术在临床推广使用提供依据。方法 2013年6月—2015年6月,共74例符合纳入标准的DLSS患者纳入研究,其中男40例,女34例;随机将患者分为传统手术组(传统组)和改良PEID组(改良组),每组各37例。记录2组患者住院天数、手术时间、术中出血量、中央椎管矢径和横径的变化,以及术前、术后3 d、术后3个月、术后6个月疼痛视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分和Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI),以评估手术效果。结果所有手术顺利完成,所有患者随访6个月。在住院天数、术中出血量方面,改良组优于传统组,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。2组患者术后3、6个月时VAS评分和ODI均较术前明显改善,差异有统计学意义(P0.05);但2组间各时间点VAS评分和ODI改善差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论改良PEID可以取得与开放减压术同样的临床效果。且改良PEID在住院天数、术中出血量等方面明显优于传统开放减压术,提示它是治疗DLSS的安全有效的手术方法。     

Coflex棘突间动力内固定装置治疗退行性腰椎管狭窄

目的：评价采用Coflex棘突间动力内固定装置治疗退行性腰椎管狭窄的疗效及其影像学变化。方法：2007年10月至2009年2月对诊断为退行性腰椎管狭窄的30例行Coflex棘突间动力内固定治疗。其中男17例,女13例;年龄39～65岁,平均45岁。手术在L4,5节段20例,L5S1节段9例,1例同时行L4,5、L5S1双节段治疗。所有患者手术前后均行Oswestry功能障碍指数评分（ODI）和日本骨科学会评分（JOA）。影像学观察指标包括X线中立位椎间隙腹、背侧高度,动力位手术节段上下两椎体的边缘与其相邻椎体的边缘连线的夹角变化;CT测量指标包括椎管面积、硬膜囊面积、椎管矢状径、硬膜囊横矢状径。手术采用椎板开窗或部分切除,椎管减压后棘突间植入Coflex装置。结果：随访5～19个月,ODI分值由术前的平均（62.41±10.38）分下降到平均（10.49±5.93）分（P〈0.01）,JOA分值由术前的平均（8.96±2.76）分提高到平均（25.36±1.55）分（P〈0.01）。3例术后疼痛改善不明显而需药物或封闭治疗,3例麻痹及感觉减退症状无改善,其余患者症状均获明显改善,未再出现间歇性跛行及神经根压迫症状。未发现与Colfex装置本身相关的并发症。X线检查椎间隙背侧高度明显增大,手术节段相邻椎体间运动幅度无明显增大。CT检查术后椎管内空间,硬膜囊面积均有所增加。结论：采用Coflex棘突间动力内固定治疗退行性腰椎管狭窄,短期相关并发症少,同时对增加椎管及硬膜囊面积,增加椎间隙后缘高度,防止相邻节段运动幅度增加以及预防邻椎病发生具有积极的作用。     

Histology of the ligamentum flavum in patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis

The degree of calcification as well as the structural changes of the elastic fibres in the ligamentum flavum in patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis were evaluated and the results were compared to those of patients without spinal stenosis. In 21 patients (13 male, 8 female) with lumbar spinal stenosis the ligamentum flavum was removed, histologically processed and stained. The calcification, the elastic/collagenous fibre ratio as well as the configuration of the fibres were evaluated with an image analyzing computer. As a control group, 20 ligaments of 10 human corpses were processed in the same way. The results were statistically analysed using the Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon test (α = 0.05) and the t-test (α = 0.05). Nearly all the ligaments of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis were calcified (average 0.17%, maximum 3.8%) and showed relevant fibrosis with decreased elastic/collagenous fibre ratio. There was a significant correlation between age and histological changes (P < 0.05). In the control group we only found minimal calcification in 3 of 20 segments (average 0.015%). No relevant fibrosis was found and the configuration of elastic fibres showed no pathologic changes. The results of this study illustrate the important role of histological changes of the ligamentum flavum for the aetiology of lumbar spinal stenosis. Received: 31 July 1998 Revised: 19 March 1999 Accepted: 12 April 1999     

Comparison of surgical procedures for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: A meta-analysis of the literature from 1975 to 1995

Therapy for spinal stenosis remains difficult. The possibilities for conservative management are limited and not satisfactory in the more severe cases. Various surgical procedures are possible, such as decompression, decompression and fusion without instrumentation and decompression and fusion with instrumentation. The aim of our meta-analysis was to compare the postoperative results of these three surgical techniques in the literature and, thus, to establish a treatment of choice for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Via Medline, 30 articles met the inclusion criteria for our study, leading to a total number of 1668 cases being included in the meta-analysis. The evaluation was made according to our own definition of outcomes, based on criteria most commonly used in the studies reviewed. We found that in patients suffering degenerative spinal stenosis for up to 8 years, decompression without fusion showed the best results. For a duration of symptoms of 15 years or more, decompression with instrumented fusion had the best results. Analysing all postoperative outcomes, decompression is the surgical procedure with the highest rate of success and the fewest complications, followed by decompression with instrumented fusion. In surgery for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis, decompression and fusion without instrumentation was the least successful procedure. As patients suffering from a degenerative spinal stenosis often are elderly, operations are risky and place a strain on them. This review of the literature shows that the least invasive surgical procedure can obtain the best results if the correct diagnosis is made and if the operation is carried out within the first years of the disease.     

显微镜下微创减压治疗下腰退变性椎管狭窄症

目的：观察显微镜下微创减压治疗下腰退变性椎管狭窄症的临床疗效。方法：自2007年5月至2008年11月,显微镜下微创减压治疗下腰椎管狭窄症26例,男9例,女17例;年龄47～75岁,平均53.7岁;病程2～8年,平均3.6年;单侧症状20例,双侧6例。手术前后应用JOA法评价疗效并计算改善率。结果：单节段手术时间60～90min,平均75min,出血50～120ml,平均85ml;双节段手术时间80～180min,平均95min,出血60～150ml,平均100ml。26例均获得随访,时间6～24个月,平均8.6个月。按JOA评分法,优18例,良7例,差1例,优良率96%,平均改善率86%。术前评分3.92±0.83,术后12.67±1.92,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.01）。结论：显微镜下微创减压手术治疗下腰退变性椎管狭窄症手术时间短、创伤小、操作精细、恢复快,同时可以获得良好疗效,但不适用于椎体后缘明显骨化或钙化、椎管内粘连较重的患者。     

Coflex系统治疗退行性腰椎管狭窄症

 目的 探讨Coflex系统治疗退行性腰椎管狭窄症的初步临床疗效。
方法 2008年3月至2009年8,采用腰椎后路椎管减压棘突间植入Coflex系统治疗退行性腰椎管狭窄症患者26例,男11例,女15例;年龄45～78岁,平均65.4岁。L_3,4节段7例,L_4,5节段13例,L_3,4合并L_4,5节段6例。术前MRI和CT扫描证实L_3,4和（或）L_4,5节段黄韧带增厚,关节突关节骨质增生,合并椎间盘突出致中央椎管及侧隐窝狭窄,神经根或马尾受压。应用eFilm及CAD软件测量术前及术后3个月、12个月手术节段椎间隙前缘高度、后缘高度、活动度,术前、术后椎管面积;采用日本骨科学会评分标准（Japanese Orthopaedic Association,JOA）进行功能评估。
结果 全部病例随访12～24个月,平均15个月。术后患者腰腿疼痛症状均明显缓解,日常生活能力改善。JOA评分由术前平均（15.46±4.30）分改善至术后3个月（24.50±1.58）分,责任节段椎管面积由术前平均（218.4±16.2）mm 2增加至术后（264.6±9.9）mm 2。单节段椎间隙前缘高度无明显变化,椎间隙后缘高度较术前增加,随时间延长高度有所下降。术后手术节段仍保留一定的活动度,但较术前明显下降。Coflex系统无松动、断裂及脱出。
结论 Coflex系统治疗退行性腰椎管狭窄症可较好地维持相应节段的稳定性,安全可行,近期疗效满意。     

单纯椎板减压治疗退变性椎管狭窄症并腰椎侧凸的疗效及其影响因素

目的：探讨单纯椎板减压治疗退变性椎管狭窄症并腰椎侧凸的效果及其影响因素。方法：1996年-2000年我科收治的资料完整的退变性椎管狭窄症合并腰椎侧凸患者57例，均采用单纯腰椎椎板减压术治疗。使用JOA评分标准进行疗效评价，根据JOA评分恢复率（recoverrate，RR）将患者分为效果满意组（RR≥50％）和效果不满意组（RR〈50％），对腰椎前凸角、侧凸角、腰椎活动度以及L4椎体倾斜率和侧向位移等影像学参数与l临床治疗效果的关系进行统计分析。结果：本组随访3～7年，平均5．1年，效果满意者42例，不满意者15例，统计分析显示腰椎前凸、活动度、L4椎体的倾斜率和手术减压节段对手术效果有显著影响（P〈0．05），与效果不满意组相比，疗效满意组患者术前腰椎前凸小，活动度低，L4椎体倾斜率不明显，需要手术减压的节段少。结论：对腰椎前凸较小、活动度低和L4椎体倾斜率较小的椎管狭窄症合并腰椎侧凸的患者使用短节段全椎板减压可以获得满意的疗效。     

腰椎棘突劈开椎管减压术治疗退变性腰椎管狭窄症

目的:总结腰椎棘突劈开、椎管减压术治疗腰椎管狭窄症的优缺点及手术疗效。方法:2008年4月～2009年4月采用棘突劈开、椎管减压术治疗退变性腰椎管狭窄症28例,男16例,女性12例;年龄40～71岁,平均63.1岁;病程0.3～10年,平均8.5年。单节段6例,双节段18例,3节段4例;L3/4 20例,L4/5 28例,L5/S1 6例,9例合并腰椎间盘突出。术前单侧下肢麻木、疼痛者22例,双侧6例。步行距离10～1000m,平均315m。术前JOA评分10.3±1.4分,腰痛、下肢痛及下肢麻木VAS分别为4.6±0.7分、7.7±1.0分和6.1±2.3分。术后第3天行血肌酸激酶(CPK)测定。术后定期随访患者症状改善情况和影像学改变。结果:手术时间65～175min,平均115±5.6min,术中失血量50～500ml,平均116±12.5ml,单、双及3节段平均显露时间分别为11.3±2.0min、20.2±2.6min及26.1±2.1min。术后第3天CPK为336±16.1u/L。术后3个月随访时,1例劈开棘突因缝合不当未完全愈合,其余患者劈开棘突均一期愈合。随访16～36个月,平均25.3个月,末次随访时JOA评分24.7±3.5分,改善率为(77.0±3.1)%,腰痛、下肢痛及下肢麻木VAS分别为1.6±0.7分、1.1±0.3分及2.5±1.3分,均较术前显著改善(P<0.05)。未出现腰椎不稳,多裂肌无明显萎缩。结论:棘突劈开椎管减压术能保护双侧多裂肌,有效减少术后腰痛,是治疗退变性腰椎管狭窄症的有效方法。