后路椎管减压结合椎旁肌间隙入路复位植骨内固定治疗胸腰段骨折伴神经损伤

[目的]探讨采用后路椎管减压结合椎旁肌间隙入路复位植骨内固定治疗胸腰段骨折伴神经损伤的优越性。[方法]本院2011年10月~2014年2月间,收治胸腰段骨折伴神经损伤患者42例,均采用后路椎板减压复位植骨内固定治疗,其中传统组24例采用传统术式(后正中入路)完成整个手术,改良组18例采用后正中入路减压结合椎旁肌间隙入路复位植骨内固定治疗。对两组手术切口长度、手术时间、术中失血量、手术效果加以对比分析。[结果]相对于传统组,改良组手术切口较小,手术时间较短,术中失血量较少,差异有统计学意义(P0.05),手术效果则无显著差异(P0.05)。[结论]采用后路椎管减压结合椎旁肌间隙入路复位植骨内固定治疗胸腰段骨折伴神经损伤是一种合理、微创的手术方式。     

后路经关节突人路微创减压植骨内固定术治疗胸腰段爆裂性骨折研究

[目的]通过对比研究观察后路经关节突入路微创减压植骨内固定术患者的手术疗效。[方法]2007年6月～2009年6月,选择胸腰段外伤性爆裂性骨折患者共62例,男47例,女15例,年龄22～41岁。按自愿的方式随机分为两组,常规后路全椎板减压植骨融合组(N=32例):伤椎临近节段椎弓根螺钉置入复位后路全椎板减压后外侧植骨融合术;经关节突入路微创减压植骨内固定组(N=30例):伤椎及临近上下节段椎弓根螺钉置入复位经关节突入路微创减压植骨融合内固定。[结果]所有患者均完成1年随访,主要观察指标为术后随访时胸腰段骨折术后矫正率、患者术后腰痛JOA评分,通过对比研究分析可见微创手术组效果明显优于常规手术组。[结论]后路经关节突入路微创减压植骨内固定术对于胸腰段爆裂性骨折有很好的治疗效果,用微创减压植骨内固定技术可以在减少手术创伤的同时达到较好的稳定脊柱的效果,此方面的研究是脊柱微创外科的一个热点。     

同节段出口根减压对严重腰椎间盘脱出症治疗的影响

目的研究同节段出口根减压对严重腰椎间盘脱出手术效果的影响,探讨同节段出口根减压与腰椎术后邻近节段退变的关系。方法选择70例严重腰椎间盘脱出症患者,将其随机分为两组,所有患者均行腰椎后路全椎板减压植骨融合内固定术。实验组:术中对双侧同节段出口根进行充分减压;对照组:未对同节段出口根进行减压。对两组进行JOA评分,测量术后腰椎动力位像上手术邻近节段椎间隙高度和椎间活动度。结果实验组与对照组JOA改善指数比较有统计学意义(P<0.05),两组间术前与术后椎间高度差及邻近节段椎间活动度变化比较无明显统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论对于严重腰椎间盘脱出症患者行腰椎后路椎间融合术+同节段出口根减压术,可以有效缓解腰腿痛症状,并且术后6个月内不会增加邻近节段退变的危险。     

保留棘突韧带复合体腰椎管扩大术的早期疗效

[目的]探讨保留棘突韧带复合体腰椎管扩大减压术与传统椎板减压植骨融合内固定术治疗腰椎管狭窄症的早期疗效。[方法] 2014年12月～2017年12月1～2节段腰椎管狭窄症患者60例,分为两组,每组30例,椎管扩大组采用保留棘突韧带复合体腰椎管扩大减压术,减压融合组采用传统的椎板减压植骨融合内固定术。记录围手术期资料,采用视觉疼痛指数(VAS)腰痛/腿痛评分、Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)、连续行走距离、手术满意度等评价疗效。[结果]两组患者均顺利手术,无严重并发症。两组随访6～12月,平均(8.53±2.53)月。椎管扩大组手术时间、手术出血量、术后引流量显著优于减压融合组。随时间延长,两组患者的腰痛VAS、下肢痛VAS和ODI评分均显著减少,而两组患者的连续行走距离均显著增加,不同时间点间差异有统计学意义。术前、术后1周时两组间上述指标差异均无统计学意义,但末次随访时,椎管扩大组在腰痛VAS、ODI评分和连续行走距离方面显著优于减压融合组。末次随访时,患者自我非常满意度椎管扩大组优于减压融合组(86.67%vs 60.00%)。减压融合组平均椎间融合时间为(7.26±1.32)个月,未出现内固定相关并发症;末次随访时,椎管扩大组椎管矢状径及椎管横径较术前明显增大,且差异有统计学意义。两组均未见明显相邻节段退变或病椎间隙变窄。[结论]对于1～2节段无腰椎失稳的腰椎管狭窄症,保留棘突韧带复合体腰椎管扩大减压术比传统椎板减压植骨融合内固定术创伤更小,术后恢复更快,且在术后早期缓解腰痛方面更有优势。     

K线在预测颈椎全椎板切除减压治疗多节段后纵韧带骨化症疗效中的应用

[目的]分析K线在预测颈椎后路全椎板切除减压植骨融合内固定术治疗多节段颈椎后纵韧带骨化症临床疗效及术后并发症中的作用。[方法]回顾性分析2009年6月~2013年6月期间,本科采用颈椎后路全椎板切除减压植骨融合内固定术治疗多节段(≥3个)颈椎后纵韧带骨化症患者28例。分别观察K线阳性组(骨化物未超过K线范围)及K线阴性组(骨化物超过K线范围)术前及术后JOA评分、JOA评分改善率以及两组手术并发症情况。[结果]两组患者年龄、术中出血量、手术时间及术前JOA评分差异无统计学意义(P0.05),术后JOA评分、末次随访时JOA评分、术后平均改善率及末次随访平均改善率K线阳性组患者均高于K线阴性组患者,两组之间差异有统计学意义(P0.05),术后并发症两组间比较差异均无统计学意义(P0.05)。[结论]术前通过K线与颈椎后纵韧带骨化症椎管内骨化物的关系,可以有效预测全椎板切除减压植骨融合内固定术治疗多节段颈椎后纵韧带骨化症的临床疗效。     

后路减压植骨融合内固定术治疗高位腰椎间盘突出症

[目的]探讨后路减压植骨融合内固定术治疗高位腰椎间盘突出症目的临床疗效.[方法]对26例高位腰椎间盘突出症患者行后路减压植骨融合内固定手术治疗,术前进行腰痛VAS及腰腿痛评分,术后平均随访20.8个月(8个月～3年),末次随访时进行VAS评分及腰腿痛评分,通过配对比较t检验,比较术前及术后VAS及腰腿痛功能评分.[结果]26例患者全部获得随访,术后VAS评分较术前明显减少,(P＜0.05);术腰腿痛评分较术前明显增加,下肢功能明显改善,(P＜0.05).本组22例获得优良手术效果,优良率为84.6%.[结论]后路减压植骨融合内固定治疗高位腰椎间盘突出症是一种切实可行目的手术治疗方式,手术疗效明确.术中操作轻柔、仔细,避免医源性损伤是手术成功目的关键.     

双侧下关节突切除及椎间融合治疗退变性腰椎管狭窄症的疗效分析

[目的]评价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椎间植骨融合椎弓根内固定治疗退,变性腰椎管狭窄症的手术疗效.[方法]41例患者(男23例,女18例);平均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椎间植骨融合椎弓根内固定手术,平均随访31.5个月,评价其术前及术后随访时JOA评分、手术效果、放射学结果及手术并发症.[结果]术后无内固定物松动、断裂等并发症发生.随访时植骨融合率97.56%,1例患者有腰椎不稳征象.随访时JOA评分较术前有明显提高(P<0.01),临床优良率为90.24%.手术并发症包括2例硬脊膜撕裂,1例椎弓根位置偏斜,1例假关节形成.[结论]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椎间植骨融合椎弓根内固定手术治疗退变性腰椎管狭窄症具有良好的临床疗效.     

后路减压植骨内固定治疗复发性腰椎间盘突出症

目的探讨后路减压植骨内固定治疗复发性腰椎间盘突出症疗效。方法对20例复发性腰椎间盘突出症患者行经后路椎板切除减压、椎弓根钉固定、自体骨及人工骨后外侧植骨融合手术。结果患者均获随访,时间1~3年。术后1年时X线片复查植骨均牢固融合,无内固定松动、脱落、断裂等,术前原有腰腿疼痛消失。结论后路减压植骨内固定治疗复发性腰椎间盘突出症,减压彻底,效果确切,内固定后植骨愈合良好,可作为复发性腰椎间盘突出症的常用手术方式。     

腰椎单侧固定与术后侧弯的相关分析

[目的]探求后路经椎弓根腰椎单侧固定与术后脊柱侧弯之间的关系。[方法]回顾性分析本科行后路经椎弓根腰椎单侧固定术患者45例。按照手术方式分成两组:A组为后路椎间盘摘除+单侧腰椎椎弓根钉内固定+椎间融合器(Cage)置入植骨融合术;B组为A组术式+对侧关节突关节植骨融合术。比较两组在术前和术后末次随访时下腰痛JOA评分、融合节段骨性融合情况、术后侧弯发生率、Cobb角、融合节段椎间隙高度、邻近节段椎间盘高度等的变化情况,分析术后侧弯发生情况及产生原因。[结果]A组发生轻度术后侧弯2例,发生率8.33%;B组无术后侧弯。两组间术后JOA评分、术后侧弯发生率、椎间植骨融合率、融合节段椎间隙的高度等差异无统计学意义。A组术前与术后Cobb角差异有统计学意义。A组固定侧和对侧的椎间隙高度的差异在术前和术后均无统计学意义。A组固定侧邻近节段的椎间盘高度在术前和术后的差异有统计学意义。[结论]后路经椎弓根腰椎单侧固定术会产生轻度术后侧弯,发生率8.33%。行对侧关节突关节植骨融合组术后Cobb角变化较小。术后脊柱结构不对称和固定侧邻近节段椎间盘的高度变化是术后侧弯发生的主要原因。     

经椎旁肌间隙入路与传统后正中入路腰椎融合术治疗L5S1腰椎间盘突出症对比研究

[目的]探讨经椎旁肌间隙手术入路在L5S1单节段腰椎间盘突出症患者腰椎融合手术中的应用价值。[方法]自2011年16月,对32例L5S1单节段腰椎间盘突症患者进行经椎间孔减压椎间植骨融合手术(transforaminallumbar interbody fusion,TLIF),其中采用经椎旁肌间隙手术入路15例(A组),采用后正中入路17例(B组)。统计分析两组患者手术时间、术中出血量、术后引流量、VAS评分、术后卧床时间及手术并发症的差异。[结果]A组手术时间(104.80±12.60)min、术中出血(134.00±33.55)ml、术后引流量(92.73±13.23)ml,术后VAS评分(1.93±0.59)分、术后卧床时间(2.60±0.38)d,切口愈合不良2例,无其他并发症,术后并发症发生率为13.3%。B组手术时间(129.18±33.88)min、术中出血(188.53±57.98)ml、术后引流量(125.00±53.29)ml、术后VAS评分(3.17±0.88)分、术后卧床时间(4.03±0.69)d,硬膜损伤致脑脊液漏1例,切口愈合不良2例,无其他并发症,术后并发症发生率为17.6%。两组患者手术时间、术中出血量、术后引流量、术后VAS评分及卧床时间均有显著差异(P<0.05),A组明显优于B组;两组患者术后并发症无显著差异(P>0.05)。[结论]采用经椎旁肌间隙入路行经椎间孔减压椎间植骨融合手术治疗L5S1单节段腰椎间盘突出症有助于术中减少手术创伤、保护椎旁肌及准确置入内固定物,是一种微创、便捷、安全的手术入路。     

Body composition assessment and methodology in nonathletic and athletic adolescent and adult males and females

The purpose of this review is to outline methodology for assessing body composition utilizing anthropometric and densitometric techniques. The objective of body composition assessment is to measure body fat and lean body mass. The quantity of these components varies due to growth, physical activity, dietary regimens, and aging. Anthropometric techniques incorporate selected skinfolds, circumferences, skeletal widths, or other variables to estimate body composition within k2.0-4.0%. These techniques are adequate for field testing of groups or individuals, but are population specific. Densitometry measures body volume irrespective of physique, sex, or age. This laboratory technique estimates body composition within 1.0-2.0%, is more difficult to administer, but is not population specific. Some limitation exists with any present technique due to biological variability and incomplete research of reference body composition in children, females, and the aged. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1984;5(6):336-347.     

Perioperative and long-term morbidity and mortality after above-knee and below-knee amputations in diabetics and nondiabetics

We performed a retrospective review of a vascular surgery quality assurance database to evaluate the perioperative and long-term morbidity and mortality of above-knee amputations (AKA, n = 234) and below-knee amputations (BKA, n = 720) and to examine the effect of diabetes mellitus (DM) (181 of AKA and 606 of BKA patients). All patients in the database who had AKA or BKA from 1990 to May 2001 were included in the study. Perioperative 30-day cardiac morbidity and mortality and 3-yr and 10-yr mortality after AKA or BKA were assessed. The effect of DM on 30-day cardiac outcome was assessed by multivariate logistic regression and the effect on long-term survival was assessed by Cox regression analysis. The perioperative cardiac event rate (cardiac death or nonfatal myocardial infarction) was at least 6.8% after AKA and at most 3.6% after BKA. Median survival was significantly less after AKA (20 mo) than BKA (52 mo) (P < 0.001). DM was not a significant predictor of perioperative 30-day mortality (odds ratio, 0.76 [0.39-1.49]; P = 0.43) or 3-yr survival (Hazard ratio, 1.03 [0.86-1.24]; P = 0.72) but predicted 10-yr mortality (Hazard ratio, 1.34 [1.04-1.73]; P = 0.026). Significant predictors of the 30-day perioperative mortality were the site of amputation (odds ratio, 4.35 [2.56-7.14]; P < 0.001) and history of renal insufficiency (odds ratio, 2.15 [1.13-4.08]; P = 0.019). AKA should be triaged as a high-risk surgery while BKA is an intermediate-risk surgery. Long-term survival after AKA or BKA is poor, regardless of the presence of DM.     

Postoperative nausea and vomiting and opioid-induced nausea and vomiting: guidelines for prevention and treatment

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) causes patient discomfort, lowers patient satisfaction, and increases care requirements. Opioid-induced nausea and vomiting (OINV) may also occur if opioids are used to treat postoperative pain. These guidelines aim to provide recommendations for the prevention and treatment of both problems. A working group was established in accordance with the charter of the Sociedad Espa?ola de Anestesiología y Reanimación. The group undertook the critical appraisal of articles relevant to the management of PONV and OINV in adults and children early and late in the perioperative period. Discussions led to recommendations, summarized as follows: 1) Risk for PONV should be assessed in all patients undergoing surgery; 2 easy-to-use scales are useful for risk assessment: the Apfel scale for adults and the Eberhart scale for children. 2) Measures to reduce baseline risk should be used for adults at moderate or high risk and all children. 3) Pharmacologic prophylaxis with 1 drug is useful for patients at low risk (Apfel or Eberhart 1) who are to receive general anesthesia; patients with higher levels of risk should receive prophylaxis with 2 or more drugs and baseline risk should be reduced (multimodal approach). 4) Dexamethasone, droperidol, and ondansetron (or other setrons) have similar levels of efficacy; drug choice should be made based on individual patient factors. 5) The drug prescribed for treating PONV should preferably be different from the one used for prophylaxis; ondansetron is the most effective drug for treating PONV. 6) Risk for PONV should be assessed before discharge after outpatient surgery or on the ward for hospitalized patients; there is no evidence that late preventive strategies are effective. 7) The drug of choice for preventing OINV is droperidol.