单侧椎弓根螺钉联合腰椎后路椎间融合术治疗腰椎椎间盘突出症伴腰椎不稳

目的观察单侧椎弓根螺钉联合腰椎后路椎间融合术(posterior lumbar interbody fusion,PLIF)治疗腰椎椎间盘突出症伴腰椎不稳的短期临床疗效,评估该手术方式的有效性和安全性。方法回顾分析2011年3月~2013年4月2所医院随访完整的患者临床资料65例,分别在术前、术后及末次随访时采用疼痛视觉模拟量表(visual analogue scale,VAS)评分、Oswestry功能障碍指数(Oswestry disability index,ODI)、日本骨科学会(Japanese Orthopaedic Association,JOA)评分评价患者功能恢复和痛疼缓解情况,评估改善率、优良率及并发症情况。结果随访18~35个月,平均26个月,术后及末次随访时患者的功能和痛疼评分均优于术前,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论单侧椎弓根螺钉联合PLIF治疗腰椎椎间盘突出症合并腰椎不稳,可有效缓解患者症状,重建腰椎稳定,改善患者生活质量,短期疗效满意。     

不同术式治疗伴终板Modic改变的腰椎椎间盘突出症的疗效分析

目的 评估采用后路椎间盘镜下髓核摘除术(microendoscopic discectomy,MED)或后路椎间融合术(posterior lumbar interbody fusion,PLIF)治疗伴有终板Modic改变的腰椎椎间盘突出症患者的手术疗效.方法 回顾性分析2005年5月～2009年12月收治的73例伴...     

三种手术方法治疗腰椎椎间盘突出症的影像学及临床疗效比较

目的比较单纯髓核摘除术（lumber discectomy,LD）、腰椎后外侧融合术（posterolateral lumbar fusion,PLF）和腰椎后路椎体间融合术（posterior lumbar interbody fusion,PLIF）治疗腰椎椎间盘突出较大或椎间盘突出伴有节段不稳的差异,进一步明确PLIF治疗腰椎间盘突出症的指征。方法回顾性分析2006年5月~2008年12月行手术治疗的腰椎椎间盘突出较大或椎间盘突出伴有节段不稳的患者102例。按手术方式分为3组,LD组37例,PLF组31例,PLIF组34例。比较各组手术前、后及随访时的椎间高度、椎间孔面积、腰椎生理曲度等影像学指标以及视觉模拟量表（visual analog scale,VAS）评分、Oswestry功能障碍评分等临床症状指标。同时,比较2个融合手术组的融合率。结果 PLIF组椎间高度及节段角度的恢复与维持明显优于其他组,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）,各组椎间孔面积手术前后均无明显变化;PLIF组融合率高于PLF组,但差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）;PLIF组术后腰痛VAS评分低于其他组,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）,下肢疼痛VAS评分和Oswestry功能障碍评分差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）,但随访发现PLIF组Oswestry功能障碍评分有逐渐优于其他组的趋势。结论与其他2种手术方式相比,PLIF治疗腰椎椎间盘突出较大或椎间盘突出伴有节段不稳时能更好的恢复腰椎的生理曲度,维持腰椎的稳定性,并能明显改善患者的腰痛症状。     

Changes in the total Oswestry Index and its ten items in females and males pre- and post-surgery for lumbar disc herniation: a 1-year follow-up

To study the characteristics and changes in the total Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and in its ten component items in female and male patients pre- and post-surgery for lumbar disc herniation. Ninety-eight patients [mean (SD) age 43 (13), 61% males] undergoing lumbar disc herniation surgery were selected for this clinical 12-month follow-up. Subjective disability and back and leg pain were assessed by ODI version 1.0 and the visual analog scale. Pre-operatively females had a significantly higher mean (SD) total ODI [59(3)] than males [51(2)] (P = 0.030). Females were more disabled in the walking, sex life, social life and travelling items of the ODI compared to males. The total Oswestry decreased by 38 (95% CI − 44 to − 31) in females and by 34 (− 39 to − 30) in males at the 1-year follow-up. Most of the improvement (88% in females and 80% in males) occurred during the first 6 weeks; thereafter the changes were minor. In males the changes were greatest in pain, social life and travelling and in females in walking, social life and travelling. Internal consistency value of ODI was 0.88 (95% CI 0.82–0.91). Item analysis of the ODI showed that all the items except pain had high corrected item correlation. As recovery following lumbar disc surgery occurred to a great extent during the first 6 weeks, the early post-operative outcome appears to be quite a reliable indicator of the overall post-operative outcome over the 1-year follow-up. The ODI proved to capture a wide range of disability in these lumbar disc surgery patients, thereby supporting the future use of the index. The “pain intensity” component, which collects data on the use of painkillers in version 1.0 of the ODI did not support the item structure of the index in this study. The use of ODI version 2.0 might remove this problem.     

椎间盘镜辅助 X-Tube下椎体间融合术治疗退变性腰椎间盘疾病

 目的 探讨椎间盘镜辅助 X-Tube下腰椎后路椎体间融合术(posterior lumbar interbody fusion, PLIF)和经椎间孔腰椎椎体间融合术(transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion, TLIF)治疗退变性椎间盘疾病的临床疗效。方法 2007年 11月至 2008年 4月, 采用椎间盘镜辅助 X-Tube下 TLIF和 PLIF治疗退变性椎间盘疾病 32例: PLIF 13例, TLIF 19例。单节段腰椎间盘突出症伴相应节段腰椎不稳定 21例, 腰椎滑脱症 11例(玉度 6例, 域度 5例)。病变节段: L3-4 2例, L4-5 18例, L5S1 12例。年龄 38~72岁, 平均 51.2岁;男 19例, 女 13例。术后进行定期随访和影像学检查, 并进行 Oswestry功能障碍指数评定以评价术后康复情况。结果手术时间 90~180 min, 平均 120 min;手术出血量 100~400 ml, 平均 190 ml。切口均为甲级愈合, 未见切口及椎管、椎间隙感染、内固定失败等并发症发生。所以患者均获随访, 随访时间 13~41个月, 平均 21个月。 Oswestry功能障碍指数由术前 40.1%±4.1%下降到术后 3个月的 9.5%±3.7%。疗效评价: 优 19例, 良 10例, 可 3例;优良率为 90.6豫。骨融合均取得成功。结论椎间盘镜辅助 X-Tube下 TLIF和 PLIF治疗退变性椎间盘疾病具有切口小, 创伤小, 术后恢复快等优点。     

Surgical technique and effectiveness of microendoscopic discectomy for large uncontained lumbar disc herniations: a prospective,randomized, controlled study with 8 years of follow-up

Background

There is a long-held concept among spine surgeons that endoscopic lumbar discectomy procedures are reserved for small-contained disc herniation; 8-year follow-up has not been reported. The purpose of this study is to assess microendoscopic discectomy (MED) in patients with large uncontained lumbar disc herniation (the antero-posterior diameter of the extruded fragment is 6–12 mm or more on axial cuts of MRI) and report long-term outcome.

Methods

One hundred eighty-five patients with MED or standard open discectomy underwent follow-up for 8 years. Primary (clinical) outcomes data included Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) for back and leg symptoms and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) to quantify pain and disability, respectively. Secondary (objective) outcomes data included operative time, blood loss, postoperative analgesics, length of hospital stay, time to return to work, reoperation and complication rate, patient satisfaction index (PSI), and modified (MacNab) criteria.

Results

At the end of the follow-up, the leg pain relief was statistically significant for both groups. NRS back pain, ODI, PSI and MacNab criteria showed significant deterioration for control group. Secondary outcomes data of MED group were significantly better than the control group.

Conclusions

Large, uncontained, lumbar disc herniations can be sufficiently removed using MED which is an effective alternative to open discectomy procedures with remarkable long-term outcome. Although the neurological outcome of the two procedures is the same, the morbidity of MED is significantly less than open discectomy. Maximum benefit can be gained if we adhere to strict selection criteria. The optimum indication is single- or multi-level radiculopathy secondary to a single-level, large, uncontained, lumbar disc herniation.     

椎弓根器械复位固定后两种不同融合方法对腰椎峡部裂型滑脱的疗效比较

目的观察比较椎弓根器械复位固定后两种不同融合法PLF与PLIF对峡部裂型滑脱的疗效。方法Ⅱ度以内腰椎峡部裂型滑脱共47例,一组22例,椎弓根器械复位固定后行PLF(PLF组);另一组25例,椎弓根器械复位固定后行PLIF(PLIF组)。对两组的临床疗效(ODI评分)、X线影像学结果(包括:滑脱矫正、滑脱节段椎间隙高度改变、滑脱节段前突角改变及骨融合)及并发症进行对比观察。结果术后即刻X线影像学结果,包括:滑脱矫正、滑脱节段椎间盘高度、滑脱节段前突角,两组间无显著差异(P>0.05);术后2年随访时,滑脱矫正及滑脱节段椎间隙高度的维持上PLIF组优于PLF组(P<0.05),骨融合率及滑脱节段前突角两组间无显著差异(P>0.05),但两组间临床疗效(ODI评分)及并发症发生率无显著差异(P>0.05),内固定失败率PLF组高于PLIF组。结论椎弓根器械复位固定并PLF与PLIF都是治疗Ⅱ度以内腰椎峡部裂型滑脱的有效方法,PLIF在对滑脱矫形的维持及结构的稳定上具有优越的力学性能,PLF后期易出现矫正丢失及内固定失败,但临床疗效不受明显影响。     

腰椎间盘摘除加cage植骨融合内固定治疗腰椎间盘突出症

目的探讨腰椎间盘摘除加cage植骨融合内固定治疗腰椎间盘突出症的临床疗效。方法对32例腰椎间盘突出症患者行腰椎间盘摘除加cage植骨融合内固定术,采用Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)和疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)对手术疗效进行评估。结果患者均获得随访,时间12~36(18±6.5)个月。患者术后疼痛均明显缓解,功能改善,术后ODI与VAS评分均较术前明显降低,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。术后融合节段均骨性愈合。随访期间内cage位置正常,内固定物无断裂及滑脱。结论腰椎间盘摘除加cage植骨融合内固定术能增加脊柱的稳定性及脊柱融合率,缓解患者症状及改善功能,临床疗效满意。     

经椎间孔内窥镜脊柱系统技术治疗脱垂型腰椎椎间盘突出症

目的探讨经椎间孔内窥镜脊柱系统(TESSYS)技术治疗脱垂型腰椎椎间盘突出症的疗效、围手术期并发症及处置对策。方法 2014年6月—2016年6月,泰州市人民医院骨科应用TESSYS技术治疗28例脱垂型腰椎椎间盘突出症患者,记录术前及术后各随访时间点的疼痛视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分及Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI),分析术中、术后并发症的发生情况,并探讨处置对策。结果所有患者随访3~24个月,平均11个月。患者术后VAS评分和ODI较术前明显降低,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。未发生神经损伤、椎管内血肿、感染等严重并发症。26例患者一次性顺利摘除脱垂髓核;2例患者术后即刻疗效不佳,1例经非手术治疗好转,1例再次行微创手术,末次随访疗效满意。结论 TESSYS技术是治疗脱垂型腰椎椎间盘突出症的有效方法,具有创伤小、恢复快等特点,但需注意预防并发症,谨慎的术中操作和严格的围手术期处理可预防或减少并发症的发生。     

Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a safe technique with satisfactory three to five year results

The unilateral transforaminal approach for lumbar interbody fusion as an alternative to the anterior (ALIF) and traditional posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) combined with pedicle screw instrumentation is gaining in popularity. At present, a prospective study using a standardized tool for outcome measurement after the transforaminal lumber interbody fusion (TLIF) with a follow-up of at least 3 years is not available in the current literature, although there have been reports on specific complications and cost efficiency. Therefore, a study of TLIF was undertaken. Fifty-two consecutive patients with a minimum follow-up of 3 years were included, with the mean follow-up being 46 months (36–64). The indications were 22 isthmic spondylolistheses and 30 degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine. Thirty-nine cases were one-level, 11 cases were two-level, and two cases were three-level fusions. The pain and disability status was prospectively evaluated by the Oswestry disability index (ODI) and a visual analog scale (VAS). The status of bony fusion was evaluated by an independent radiologist using anterior–posterior and lateral radiographs. The operation time averaged 173 min for one-level and 238 min for multiple-level fusions. Average blood loss was 485 ml for one-level and 560 ml for multiple-level fusions. There were four serious complications registered: a deep infection, a persistent radiculopathy, a symptomatic contralateral disc herniation and a pseudarthrosis with loosening of the implants. Overall, the pain relief in the VAS and the reduction of the ODI was significant (P<0.05) at follow-up. The fusion rate was 89%. At the latest follow-up, significant differences of the ODI were neither found between isthmic spondylolistheses and degenerative diseases, nor between one- and multiple-level fusions. In conclusion, the TLIF technique has comparable results to other interbody fusions, such as the PLIF and ALIF techniques. The potential advantages of the TLIF technique include avoidance of the anterior approach and reduction of the approach related posterior trauma to the spinal canal.     

经皮内镜治疗老年腰椎间盘突出与椎管狭窄的比较

目的针对脊柱经皮内镜减压(PELD)治疗老年腰椎间盘突出症与腰椎管狭窄症的疗效进行比较。 方法对2014年6月起,在解放军总医院骨科使用脊柱PELD技术治疗的连续30例老年腰椎间盘突出症(腰椎间盘突出组)患者、30例老年腰椎管狭窄症(腰椎管狭窄组)进行回顾性分析,比较两组的手术时间,通过VAS、ODI评分及MacNab评定标准评价手术疗效。 结果通过分别对腰椎间盘突出组与腰椎管狭窄组的组内术前与术后VAS、ODI评分进行比较,两组术后[(2.30±1.12)分和(0.93±1.07)分vs (2.63±1.32)分和(1.43±1.78)分、(16.88±6.40)分和(17.33±6.31)分 vs (18.33±12.24)分和(16.03±12.91)分]VAS、ODI评分较术前[(8.40±1.43)分 vs (7.43±1.76)分、(59.13±11.62)分 vs (51.53±10.81)分]均明显降低,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05);腰椎间盘突出组的术后3个月随访时恢复较腰椎管狭窄组更显著[(41.80±14.71)分 vs (33.20±9.48)分,P< 0.05],但术后12个月随访时两者康复差异无统计学意义(P> 0.05)。根据MacNab标准,末次随访时腰椎间盘突出组与腰椎管狭窄组的优良率分别为86.7%、76.7%。腰椎管狭窄组有1例转为开放手术。 结论术后3个月随访时,PELD治疗老年腰椎间盘突出症组的效果优于治疗老年腰椎管狭窄症组,但术后12个月随访时两组疗效差异无统计学意义。通过PELD治疗老年腰椎间盘突出症和老年腰椎管狭窄症安全有效,疗效满意。     

Dynesys动态稳定系统治疗腰椎多节段退变性疾病

目的 探讨Dynesys 动态稳定系统在腰椎多节段退变性疾病治疗中的临床疗效.方法回顾性分析2009 年7月～2012年7月采用Dynesys动态固定系统治疗的多节段腰椎退变性疾病患者30例.其中男10例,女20例;年龄为30～64岁,平均49.2岁.患者中腰椎退变性侧凸L2/L3/L4/L5/S1 1例;腰椎椎管狭窄症16例,L1/L2/L3/L4/L5 1例,L2/L3/L4/L5/S1 1例,L3/L4/L5 3例,L4/L5/S111例; 椎间盘突出症13例,L4/L5 椎间盘突出合并L5/S1退变5例,L5 /S1椎间盘突出合并L4/L5退变4例,L4/L5/S1 双节段突出者4例.临床症状包括下腰痛、下肢放射痛以及间歇性跛行.所有患者均有腰痛和/或腿痛的症状,经非手术治疗＞3个月无效.术前腰椎疼痛视觉模拟量表（ visual analogue scale,VAS） 评分为6.30分（3～9分）,腿痛VAS评分6.40分（ 0～9分）,Oswestry功能障碍指数（Oswestry disability index,ODI）为62.67%.测量术后末次随访时患者腰痛、腿痛的VAS评分及ODI.结果 患者随访12～48个月,平均25个月.患者腰痛VAS评分在末次随访时较术前有明显的降低（1.77分）,腿痛VAS评分也较术前有明显的降低（1.36分）,ODI较术前也有明显的降低（12.50%）.与术前相比,差异均有统计学意义（ P＜0.05）.结论 Dynesys 动态固定系统手术操作简单、易掌握,可避免融合术相关并发症,效果满意.其长期临床疗效还需长时间临床观察.     

PE-MFD与Endo-LOVE治疗腰椎间盘突出症疗效比较

目的比较内镜辅助椎间孔内口入路椎间盘摘除术(Percutaneous endoscopic medial foraminal discectomy,PEMFD)与全内镜下椎板开窗椎间盘摘除术(Full endoscopic fenestration discectomy,Endo-LOVE)治疗腰椎间盘突出症的临床疗效。方法回顾性分析自2016-12—2018-01诊治的78例腰椎间盘突出症,38例采用PE-MFD治疗(PE-MFD组),40例采用Endo-LOVE治疗(Endo-LOVE组)。比较2组手术时间、住院时间、术中透视次数、术中疼痛VAS评分以及术后1周、术后3个月、末次随访时疼痛VAS评分、ODI指数,比较2组末次随访时的临床疗效。结果 2组均顺利完成手术并获得完整随访,随访时间12~24个月,平均16个月。PE-MFD组手术时间较Endo-LOVE组少,术中透视次数较Endo-LOVE组多,术中疼痛VAS评分较Endo-LOVE组高,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。2组住院时间、术后1周、术后3个月、末次随访时的疼痛VAS评分以及ODI指数比较差异无统计学意义(P<0.05),末次随访时疗效按改良MacNab标准评价2组比较差异无统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论 PE-MFD与Endo-LOVE治疗腰椎间盘突出症早期都可取得显著疗效。相对于Endo-LOVE,PE-MFD手术时间较短,但患者术中舒适感较差。     

Higher preoperative Oswestry Disability Index is associated with better surgical outcome in upper lumbar disc herniations

To evaluate the surgical outcome in terms of functional and subjective recovery, patients who needed discectomies at L1–L2, L2–L3 and L3–L4 levels were compared with an age and sex-matched group of patients who required L4–L5 and L5–S1 discectomies. We prospectively enrolled 50 consecutive patients, referred to our center, who had L1–L2, L2–L3 and L3–L4 herniations and required surgical intervention. Likewise, a comparative group of 50 consecutive patients with herniations at L4–L5 and L5–S1 were selected. All 100 patients were treated and followed for a 1 year period. Physical examination findings as well as Oswestry Disability Questionnaire before surgery were recorded. After 1 year, patients were requested to fill the same questionnaire. Significant decline in the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores was considered to be a measure of functional improvement and recovery. The mean age of patients with upper lumbar disc herniation (L1–L2, L2–L3, L3–L4) was 45.7 years and patients with lower lumbar disc herniation (L4–L5, L5–S1) had a mean age of 41.2 years. There was no statistically significant difference in age between the two groups. The preoperative Oswestry Disability (ODI) Index score had a statistically significant impact on ODI score improvement after surgery in both lower and upper lumbar disc groups. All 100 patients with either lower or upper lumbar disc herniation had statistically significant ODI change after surgical intervention (P < 0.0001 for both groups). However, patients with upper disc herniations and moderate preoperative disability (ODI of 21–40%) did not show significant improvement, while patients with ODI greater than 40% had significant reduction (P = 0.018). Surprisingly, as many as 25% of the former had even an increase in ODI scores after surgery. Gender was also a conspicuous factor in determining the surgical outcome of patients with upper lumbar disc herniation, and male patients had more reduction in ODI score than female patients (P = 0.007). Since the functional recovery in patients with herniated lumbar disc, especially upper lumbar herniation, is influenced by preoperative ODI scores, the use of ODI or any other standard pain assessment tool is a sensible consideration as an inherent investigative method to preclude unfavorable surgical outcome.     

后路椎体间融合治疗退变性腰间盘疾病、腰椎滑脱和腰椎手术失败综合征的疗效比较

目的探讨后路椎体间融合(PLIF)治疗退变性腰间盘疾病、腰椎滑脱和腰椎手术失败综合征的疗效比较。方法126例应用PLIF手术治疗患者,其中退变性腰间盘疾病(degenerative lumber disc diseases,DDD)52例、腰椎滑脱(spondylolisthesis,SL)43例、腰椎手术失败综合征(failed back surgery syndrome,FBSS)31例,术前和术后行Oswestry功能障碍评分(the Oswestry disability index,ODI)、腰痛及腿痛视觉疼痛评分(visual analog scales,VAS),评价治疗效果。结果随访12~26个月,平均18个月。ODI评分:DDD组减少22.5分,SL组减少28.2分,FBSS组减少22.2分,各组手术前后有统计学差异(配对t检验,P<0.05),各组间无统计学差异(方差分析,P>0.05)。腰痛VAS评分:DDD组减少4.1分,SL组减少3.8分,FBSS组减少3.2分,各组手术前后有统计学差异(配对t检验,P<0.05)各组间无统计学差异(方差分析,P>0.05)。腿痛VAS评分:DDD组减少3.8分,SL组减少3.5分,FBSS组减少2.2分,各组手术前后有统计学差异(配对t检验,P<0.05),各组间无统计学差异(方差分析,P>0.05)。结论PLIF治疗能够明显减轻DDD、SL和FBSS 3组患者的腰腿痛及改善相关功能障碍,但3组治疗结果间无统计学差异。     

经椎间孔入路经皮内窥镜下椎间盘切除术治疗相邻节段退变型腰椎椎间盘突出症

目的探讨经椎间孔入路经皮内窥镜下椎间盘切除术(PETD)治疗经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术(TLIF)术后相邻节段退变(ASD)型腰椎椎间盘突出症的临床疗效。方法回顾性分析2012年12月—2014年12月同济大学附属第十人民医院脊柱外科行PETD治疗的28例TLIF术后相邻节段腰椎椎间盘突出患者的临床资料,记录手术时间,术中出血量,住院天数,术前、术后3个月、术后12个月及末次随访时腰部、下肢疼痛视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分及Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI),末次随访时采用Mac Nab标准评价临床疗效。结果所有手术均顺利完成,手术时间为(74.0±8.8)min,手术出血量为(32.6±6.8)m L,住院天数为(2.68±1.06)d,随访时间为(25.1±3.4)个月。术后3个月、术后12个月、末次随访时腰痛和下肢痛VAS评分及ODI与术前相比均有改善,差异均有统计学意义(P0.05)。根据Mac Nab标准,末次随访时患者临床疗效优良率为89.3%。结论 PETD治疗TLIF术后ASD型腰椎椎间盘突出症能够取得较为满意的疗效。     

Lumbar disc herniation treated by microendoscopic discectomy

Purpose

Microendoscopic discectomy (MED) is becoming an established and effective minimally invasive surgical method for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation (LDH); however, the absence of prognostic factors for long-term outcomes after MED results in a lack of specific criteria for appropriate patient selection. Therefore, we evaluated the long-term outcomes and associated predictors in patients who underwent MED for LDH.

Material and methods

Baseline and follow-up data for 664 LDH patients who suffered from sciatica and underwent primary MED were reviewed retrospectively. Variables at baseline that were analyzed as potential prognostic factors included sociodemographic characteristics, clinical findings, and imaging features. Follow-up data including improvements in the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), postoperative low back pain (LBP), reoperation, and excellent/good results according to the modified MacNab criteria were set as outcome variables for univariate and further multivariate logistic regression analyses.

Results

The mean follow-up period was 63.8?±?20.0 months (range 24–96 months). On average, sufficient improvements in both the VAS score (72.8%) and ODI (63.4%) were observed. In addition, a low postoperative LBP rate (23.9%), low reoperation rate (7.1%), and high rate of excellent/good clinical outcomes (89.9%) were achieved. A multivariate analysis indicated that older age, shorter disease duration, higher preoperative VAS score, lower preoperative ODI, shorter surgical time, lower severity of disc and adjacent disc degeneration, and lower severity of lumbar multifidus atrophy contributed to superior clinical outcomes.

Conclusion

Excellent long-term outcomes after primary MED were achieved and specific sociodemographic, clinical, and imaging variables were identified as prognostic factors that can be used to guide patient selection and clinical decision making.

     

椎弓根器械复位固定后两种融合方法治疗腰椎滑脱症的疗效比较

目的 观察比较椎弓根器械复位固定后两种不同融合法PLF（后外侧融合）与PLIF（后路椎体间融合）对腰椎滑脱症的疗效。方法 Ⅱ度以内腰椎峡部不连型滑脱共47例，一组22例，椎弓根器械复位固定后行PLF（PLF组）；另一组25例，椎弓根器械复位固定后行PLIF（PLIF组）。对两组的临床疗效（ODI评分）、X线影像学结果（滑脱矫正、滑脱节段椎间隙高度改变、滑脱节段前突角改变及骨融合）及并发症进行对比观察。结果 术后即刻X线影像学结果（滑脱矫正、滑脱节段椎间盘高度、滑脱节段前突角），两组间无显著差异（P〉0．05）；术后2年随访时，滑脱矫正及滑脱节段椎间隙高度的维持上PLIF组优于PLF组（P〈0．05），骨融合率及滑脱节段前突角两组间无显著差异（P〉0．05），但两组间临床疗效（ODI评分）及并发症发生率无显著差异（P〉0．05），内固定失败率PLF组高于PLIF组。结论 椎弓根器械复位固定并PLF与PLIF都是治疗Ⅱ度以内峡部裂型滑脱的有效方法，PLIF在对滑脱矫形的维持及结构的稳定上具有优越的力学性能，PLF后期易出现矫正丢失及内固定失败，但临床疗效不受明显影响。     

选择性神经根阻滞辅助定位在多节段腰椎退行性疾病治疗中的应用

目的探讨选择性神经根阻滞术在多节段腰椎退行性疾病中的定位诊断作用及临床疗效。方法对2016年1月至2018年12月中国人民解放军第一七一医院骨科收治的因不能准确定位而行选择性神经根阻滞的多节段腰椎退行性疾病患者27例的临床资料进行回顾性分析。男15例,女12例;年龄(68.7±5.1)(55~78)岁。多节段腰椎间盘突出症8例,多节段腰椎管狭窄症7例,多节段腰椎间盘突出合并椎管狭窄症12例。对所有患者均行选择性神经根阻滞术确定责任间隙后采取不同手术方式治疗经皮侧路椎间孔镜手术13例,经皮后路椎间孔镜手术4例,微创经椎间孔入路腰椎椎体间融合术(TLIF)7例,开放TLIF 3例。记录术前、术后3 d、术后3个月及末次随访时的疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)和Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)并进行比较。采用SPSS 22.0软件对数据进行统计学分析。结果27例患者均获得随访,随访(28.1±5.1)(17~36)个月。VAS评分术后3 d、术后3个月和末次随访分别为3.4±1.1、3.1±1.2和2.3±1.1,与术前6.2±1.8相比差异均有统计学意义(P=0.03,0.02,0.02);ODI评分术后3 d、术后3个月和末次随访分别为28.1±11.2、20.5±9.7和16.7±5.2,与术前69.6±17.9相比差异均有统计学意义(P=0.02,0.02,0.01)。结论对于术前难以准确定位的腰椎多节段退行性疾病患者,选择性神经根阻滞是一种简单有效的确定责任间隙的方法。     

18例Charité人工腰椎椎间盘置换术后的中期随访结果

目的探讨Charité人工腰椎椎间盘置换治疗退行性腰椎椎间盘疾病及腰椎椎间盘突出症的效果及安全性。方法 2005年1～11月,采用Charité人工腰椎椎间盘置换术治疗18例腰椎椎间盘突出症患者,共计20个椎间隙。回顾性分析患者的临床资料,对比术前与术后以及术前与末次随访时的关节活动度（range of motion,ROM）、视觉模拟评分（visual analog scale,VAS）及Oswestry功能障碍指数（Oswestry disability index,ODI）,统计并发症。结果随访时间平均为45.6个月。术前平均ROM为8.1°,术后8.8°（P〉0.05）,末次随访8.4°（P〉0.05）;术前VAS平均72.8分,术后为32.2分（P〈0.01）,末次随访时为28.2分（P〈0.01）;术前ODI平均为57.0分,术后为31.4分（P〈0.01）,末次随访为27.6分（P〈0.01）。1例在随访半年时自述逆向射精。1例双节段置换的患者发生了异位骨化。无其他并发症。结论人工腰椎间盘置换术操作简便,疗效满意,并发症少,是治疗退行性腰椎间盘疾病和腰椎间盘突出症的一种安全、有效的方法 。