颈前路撑开螺钉提拉复位在创伤性颈椎骨折脱位中的临床应用

目的探讨颈椎前路撑开螺钉提拉与常规复位治疗创伤性颈椎骨折脱位的疗效差异。方法选取我院2012-01-2016-05,收治的120例创伤性颈椎骨折脱位患者,依据手术方法不同分为观察组和常规组各60例,观察组行颈椎前路撑开螺钉提拉复位术治疗,常规组患者行常规复位术治疗。记录两组手术时间、术中出血量,比较两组患者椎体完全复位率及并发症发生率;所有患者均随访24个月以上,对两组患者的临床疗效进行比较。结果观察组患者手术时间较常规组明显缩短(P0.05),组间术中出血量差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。观察组术中、术后的并发症发生率为8.33%,明显低于常规组的21.67%;术后椎体完全复位率为95.00%,明显高于常规组的83.33%;术后Frankel分级为E级患者占比70.00%,明显高于常规组的51.67%,上述差异均有统计学意义(均为P0.05)。两组术后JOA评分及VAS评分均较术前明显改善,其中观察组患者术后24个月的JOA评分明显优于常规组,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论与常规复位治疗相比,对创伤性颈椎骨折脱位患者采用颈椎前路撑开螺钉提拉治疗的疗效更为突出,不仅手术时间短、并发症少,且预后较好。     

颈前路撑开螺钉提拉复位与颈前路常规复位治疗创伤性颈椎骨折脱位的疗效比较

目的对比颈前路撑开螺钉提拉复位与颈前路常规复位治疗创伤性颈椎骨折脱位的临床疗效。方法选择86例创伤性颈椎骨折脱位患者,将颈前路撑开螺钉提拉复位治疗的46例设为观察组,颈前路常规撬拨复位治疗的40例为对照组。比较两组患者手术情况及疗效,并记录并发症发生情况。结果观察组手术时间显著低于对照组,差异具有统计学意义(P0.05);两组住院时间、术中出血量差异无统计学意义(P0.05);两组术后Frankel神经功能分级均显著改善,但组间差异无统计学意义(P0.05);两组治疗7d、3月、末次随访JOA评分均显著高于术前,VAS评分显著低于术前,但组间差异无统计学意义(P0.05);观察组并发症总发生率为8.70%,对照组为20.00%,观察组显著低于对照组(P0.05)。结论颈前路撑开螺钉提拉复位与常规撬拨复位均能显著降低疼痛症状,提升颈椎活动及神经功能,具有相似的近远期疗效,但前者手术操作更为简便,并发症控制效果更优。     

颈前路撑开提拉复位法治疗外伤性颈椎脱位

目的探讨外伤性颈椎脱位的改良复位术式及应用价值。方法对24例外伤性颈椎脱位采用前入路撑开提拉复位并行植骨内固定。采用日本骨科协会评分(JOA)、疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)对术前和术后1周、3个月、6个月、12个月、48个月治疗效果进行评定。结果所有患者获得随访3~48个月,术后颈椎脱位矫正率、受损椎体间高度及颈椎稳定性恢复良好、颈椎生理曲度和内固定装置位置良好,植骨融合;脊髓功能恢复情况:B级2例,C级3例,D级10例,E级9例。术后1周~48个月VAS、JOA评分均较术前明显改善,差异有统计学意义(P0.01)。结论前路撑开提拉复位法可早期对颈椎脱位进行有效复位,前路植骨内固定术后并发症少,减少受损神经细胞的死亡,进一步保护了神经功能,术后缩短了神经功能的恢复时间,适合临床推广应用。     

严重颈椎脱位手术治疗策略探讨

目的探讨严重颈椎骨折脱位前路手术的复位率及手术策略。方法回顾性分析2001年3月至2006年3月,手术治疗颈椎骨折移位程度在1／2以上的92例患者的临床资料。所有患者术前均行小重量颅骨牵引（1～3ks）。手术时,先行损伤节段椎间盘摘除,以Caspar撑开器撑开复位;不能复位者,行脱位椎体次全切除,再次复位;仍不能复位者,则同时行后路手术。记录患者前路手术复位成功率,气管切开率,评价植骨融合率、Frankel评分、VAS疼痛评分（10分法）。结果单纯椎间隙减压复位者38例,椎体次全切除减压复位者44例,前路-后路-前路手术解剖复位者7例,仍未完全复位者3例。行气管切开29例。末次随访时Frankel评分平均提高0．5级,VAS疼痛评分平均2分。结论严重颈椎脱位前路手术复位率可达89．2％,需联合后路手术再前路手术者占10．8％。C4以上脱位伴完全性瘫痪者以及C5以下脱位但脊髓水肿平面高于C4水平的完全性瘫痪者,应积极行气管切开,待病情稳定后再行手术治疗;而对于脊髓水肿平面低于C4水平或水肿平面高于C4水平但为不完全性瘫痪的患者,可考虑尽早手术。     

下颈椎骨折脱位并脊髓损伤的治疗术式探讨

[目的]探讨不同入路手术方式治疗下颈椎骨折脱位合并脊髓损伤的临床疗效。[方法]2011年7月~2015年6月收治下颈椎骨折脱位合并脊髓损伤患者39例,术前Frankel分级A级5例,B级12例,C级14例,D级8例。根据骨折类型、脱位程度、脊髓受压评估情况、是否存在关节突骨折及交锁或者前后复合体损伤等因素选择手术方案。其中24例椎体骨折、椎间盘损伤、术前经颅骨牵引可复位者采用前路减压椎间植骨内固定术;7例颈椎脱位伴小关节骨折或脱位但不伴明显前中柱损伤者采用后路复位侧块螺钉内固定术;8例颈椎椎体骨折、椎间盘损伤、椎小关节脱位交锁、术前经大重量颅骨牵引不能复位者采用前后路联合复位减压固定融合术。比较三种手术方式的手术时间、术中出血量和平均固定节段数;术后定期复查,观察损伤节段的稳定性和融合率,测量Cobb角、椎体水平移位和Frankel评分表,评估脊髓功能恢复与脊柱损伤重建稳定性等情况。[结果]患者获得有效随访,随访时间6~30个月,平均18个月,术后4~6个月均获得良好的骨性融合,均未出现严重并发症。联合入路组手术时间、出血量和平均固定节段数均较单纯前路或后路组长,而后路手术的手术时间、出血量和平均固定节段数明显多于前路手术组(P<0.05);除2例术前Frankel分级A级无恢复外,其余患者均有不同程度恢复,脊髓功能平均提高1.2级。所有患者的术前JOA评分和颈椎复位参数较术后均有改善,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。[结论]采用前路手术、后路手术或前后路联合手术治疗下颈椎骨折脱位并脊髓损伤均能获得不错的治疗效果,但应根据颈椎损伤部位及类型采取适合的手术入路,根据病情制订个性化治疗方案。     

下颈椎骨折脱位手术方式的初步探讨

[目的]探讨下颈椎骨折脱位合理的手术方式及相关处理.[方法]回顾性分析自2006年2月-2008年8月,分别采用颈椎前路、后路、前后联合入路减压、植骨内固定治疗颈椎骨折脱位23例,其中前路手术12例,后路手术7例,前后联合入路4例,观察手术前后神经功能恢复、脱位纠正、椎体高度恢复、植骨融合等情况,评估手术疗效.[结果]术后随访5～32个月,平均18个月,所有病例术后神经症状无加重;7例完全截瘫患者(神经功能Frankel A级)无任何恢复,14例不完全截瘫患者中,5例Frankel B级恢复到Frankel C级,4例 Frankel C级恢复到Frankel D级,3例Frankel D级恢复到Frankel E级,2例 Frankel D级术后仍为Frankel D级;2例Frankel E级术后无加重.Frankel分值平均由术前的1.6增加到术后2.1(P<0.05);所有病例均复位、颈椎椎体高度恢复;椎体间植骨全部融合,平均融合时间为3.5个月;术后X线片上提示钢板位置正常,椎体螺丝钉无折断及松动,无植骨块松动和脱出.[结论]对于下颈椎骨折脱位来说,应当根据不同的伤情采取合理的手术方式.前路手术可以直接处理损伤椎间盘、即刻消除颈椎不稳;后路手术可以直接解除关节绞锁、脱位,但需排除颈椎间盘损伤的存在,以免在复位时加重脊髓损伤;前后联合入路可以同时处理脱位和损伤椎间盘,但手术创伤和风险较大,应有充分的认识和准备.     

陈旧性下颈椎骨折脱位的手术治疗（附42例报告）

目的探讨陈旧性下颈椎骨折脱位的发生原因、手术方法及临床疗效。方法2005年6月～2008年12月,借助椎体间撑开器经颈前路整复脱位椎体、椎体间植骨融合钢板内固定术以及颈后路整复脱位椎体联合应用前路椎体间植骨融合钢板内固定术治疗陈旧性下颈椎骨折伴脱位42例患者。其中,18例患者单纯经颈前路完成脱位颈椎椎体复位,24例前路整复失败病例联合颈后路整复脱位椎体并前路椎体间植骨融合钢板内固定术。观察术后颈椎的稳定性、植骨融合率及神经功能恢复情况。结果全部病例均获得解剖复位,颈椎生理弧度及椎间隙高度恢复正常,术中无神经损害加重及血管损伤等并发症发生,术后颈椎获得即刻稳定性。经6～48个月随访,椎间植骨均获得骨性愈合,螺钉无松动、退出或断裂,颈椎脱位矫正度无丢失,神经功能均有不同程度恢复。结论陈旧性下颈椎骨折脱位应先行前路整复,如失败再行后路手术整复脱位椎体并前路椎体间植骨融合内固定术,对于颈椎陈旧性骨折脱位仍强调恢复颈椎解剖对位的重要性。     

前路减压植骨内固定治疗颈椎骨折脱位

目的　探讨前路手术在治疗颈椎骨折、脱位中的价值。方法　 16例颈椎骨折、脱位伴脊髓损伤的患者 ,均在全麻下行颈前路减压、复位、钛网植骨及 ORION钢板内固定。按神经功能 Frankel分级标准 ,于术前、术后对所有病例进行分级评定。结果　 16例获访患者中 ,平均随访时间 13.6个月 ,骨折、脱位复位均满意 ,植骨于术后 3～ 6个月融合 ,无钢板螺钉松动、断裂等并发症 ,术后 Frankel分级改善一级左右。结论　严重颈椎骨折脱位伴脊髓损伤选择经前路手术治疗可获得满意的复位、神经功能的改善和即刻稳定性的重建。     

颈椎360°手术治疗严重下颈椎骨折脱位

[目的]探讨颈椎一期前-后-前入路360°手术治疗严重下颈椎骨折脱位的临床疗效和应用价值。[方法]11例严重下颈椎骨折脱位患者,在颅骨牵引下经鼻腔气管插管全身麻醉下进行手术。首先采用仰卧位,经颈椎前路摘除脱位椎间的椎间盘和其他致压物;然后变换体位为俯卧位,经后路手术切开撬拨复位,采用侧块螺钉固定脱位椎节并植骨融合;最后将患者重新置仰卧位,经颈椎前路彻底清除残留的椎间盘和上下终板,常规髂骨块植骨及自锁钛板内固定。术后定期复查X线片以观察损伤节段的稳定性和融合率,以Frankel分级判定脊髓功能的恢复情况。[结果]术后11例患者全部获得随访,随访8～32个月,平均17.6个月。颈椎脱位均完全复位,无植骨不融合。未出现内固定断裂、松动及脱落,无血管、神经、食道损伤等并发症。无1例出现神经损伤加重,Frankel分级平均提高0.8级。[结论]颈椎一期360°手术治疗严重下颈椎骨折脱位,可以完全恢复颈椎序列,解除颈髓压迫,损伤节段术后获得即刻稳定,不易造成脊髓损伤加重,可为脊髓功能恢复创造有利条件。     

两种术中复位方式治疗绞锁性下颈椎骨折脱位

[目的]比较推送螺钉及改良撑开复位下前路椎体次全切除减压植骨融合治疗关节突绞锁性颈椎骨折脱位的临床疗效.[方法]回顾性分析2014年8月-2019年9月收治的128例关节突绞锁性下颈椎骨折脱位患者的临床资料,依据术前医患沟通结果,67例采用推送复位,61例采用撬拨复位,复位后均行椎体次全切除植骨融合内固定术.比较两组患...     

前路颈椎椎间盘切除融合术与动态装置植入术治疗单节段颈椎椎间盘突出症

目的 对比前路颈椎椎间盘切除融合术(ACDF)与颈椎前路动态装置植入术(DCI)对单节段颈椎椎间盘突出症(CDH)患者颈椎活动度(ROM)及术后颈椎曲度的影响.方法 回顾性分析2018年6月—2019年9月海军军医大学长征医院收治的78例单节段CDH患者临床资料,其中42例采用ACDF治疗(ACDF组),36例采用DC...     

Anterior cervical microforaminotomy for cervical radiculopathy--results and review

Analysis of anterior cervical microforaminotomy performed at the North Staffordshire University Hospital along with a review of literature of this minimally invasive procedure is presented. METHODS: A retrospective-prospective study was performed on 34 patients (24 males, 10 females) with cervical disc disease who had been surgically treated with anterior cervical microforaminotomy between 1999 and 2005. Age ranged from 37 to 75. MRI findings were disc prolapse in 28 and additional osteophytes in six. Microforaminotomy was performed according to the published technique. RESULTS: Single level operations were performed in 22 patients (21 unilateral, 1 bilateral) and multi-level operations were performed in 12 patients (7 unilateral and 5 bilateral). The short-term outcomes were excellent in 65% (i.e., complete resolution of all symptoms), good in 29% (relief of radiculopathy but some non-radicular discomfort persists), and fair in 6% (mild residual radiculopathy with or without non-radicular symptoms). Postoperative complications include one patient with partial C6 root damage, which was identified intraoperatively, but had excellent results at 2 months post operation. Long-term follow-up (using the cervical spine research society questionnaire) ranged from 2-48 months. The average pain score, neurological outcome and functional outcome improved after this operation. RE-OPERATION: One patient, who had 2 level bilateral surgeries, needed discectomies with fusion for new onset myelopathy 18 months later. CONCLUSION: Appropriate patient selection is cardinal in achieving good outcome in anterior microforaminotomy.     

Postoperative instability of cervical OPLL and cervical radiculomyelopathy

The presence of cervical spine instability with respect to preoperative and postoperative changes in angular, horizontal, and rotational displacement of the vertebral body were studied. With the anterior approach, the instability in the remaining unfused segments, and their relation to the kyphotic or lordotic fused segment were studied. With the posterior approach, postoperative ROM (range of motion) could be better maintained, and horizontal displacement was improved in more cases by laminoplasty compared with laminectomy. With the anterior approach, the compensatory function for the loss of motion of the segments resulting from fusion was most remarkable at the levels of C2-3 and C6-7. In the alignment of the anterior fused segments, it appears important that the physiologic lordotic position be maintained.     

Comparison of cervical kinematics between patients with cervical artificial disc replacement and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for cervical disc herniation

Background contextAlthough anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is an effective treatment option for patients with cervical disc herniation, it limits cervical range of motion, which sometimes causes discomfort and leads to biomechanical stress at neighboring segments. In contrast, cervical artificial disc replacement (ADR) is supposed to preserve normal cervical range of motion than ACDF. A biomechanical measurement is necessary to identify the advantages and clinical implications of ADR. However, literature is scarce about this topic and in those available studies, authors used the static radiological method, which cannot identify three-dimensional motion and coupled movement during motion of one axis.PurposeThe purpose of this study was to compare the clinical parameters and cervical motion by three-dimensional motion analysis between ACDF and ADR and to investigate the ability of ADR to maintain cervical kinematics.Study designThis was a prospective case control study.Patient samplePatients who underwent ADR or ACDF for the treatment of single-level cervical disc herniation.Outcome measuresVisual analog scale (VAS), Korean version of Neck Disability Index (NDI, %), and three-dimensional motion analysis were used.MethodsThe patients were evaluated by VAS and the Korean version of the NDI (%) to assess pain degree and functional status. Cervical motions were assessed by three-dimensional motion analysis in terms of sagittal, coronal, and horizontal planes. Markers of 2.5 cm in diameter were attached at frontal polar (Fpz), center (Cz), and occipital (Oz) of 10–20 system of electroencephalography, C7 spinous process, and both acromions. These evaluations were performed preoperatively and 1 month and 6 months after surgery.ResultsThe ACDF and ADR groups revealed no significant difference in VAS, NDI (%), and cervical range of motion preoperatively. After surgery, both groups showed no significant difference in VAS and NDI (%). In motion analysis, significantly more range of motion was retained in flexion and extension in the ADR group than the ACDF group at 1 month and 6 months. There was no significant difference in lateral tilt and rotation angle. In terms of coupled motion, ADR group exhibited significantly more preserved sagittal plane motion during right and left rotation and also showed significantly more preserved right lateral bending angle during right rotation than ACDF group at 1 month and 6 months. There was no significant difference in other coupled motions.ConclusionThree-dimensional motion analysis could provide useful information in an objective and quantitative way about cervical motion after surgery. In addition, it allowed us to measure not only main motion but also coupled motion in three planes. ADR demonstrated better retained cervical motion mainly in sagittal plane (flexion and extension) and better preserved coupled sagittal and coronal motion during transverse plane motion than ACDF. ADR had the advantage in that it had the ability to preserve more cervical motions after surgery than ACDF.     

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion is indicated for the operative treatment of either cervical radiculopathy orcervical myelopathy. This article discusses the indications for the procedure, as well as the advantages of this approach, compared with foraminotomy, laminectomy, as well as laminoplasty. The operative technique is described in detail, as well as the results and complications.     

Percutaneous cervical nucleoplasty and percutaneous cervical discectomy treatments of the contained cervical disc herniation

Background  

There were no studies in literature to compare the clinical outcomes of percutaneous nucleoplasty (PCN) and percutaneous cervical discectomy (PCD) in contained cervical disc herniation.     

颈椎矢状力线和颈椎间盘退变的关系

[目的]探讨T_1倾斜角等颈椎矢状力线和颈椎间盘退变的关系。[方法]回顾分析2016年8月～2017年8月60例颈椎退行性疾病患者,其中男25例,女35例,年龄51～68岁,平均(61.00±5.30)岁,病程5～13个月,平均(9.60±2.55)个月。所有患者拍摄颈椎侧位X线片以及颈椎MR,依据Pfirrmann分级评定椎间盘退变;测量矢状面位移(SVA)、颈椎前凸角(CL)、颈倾斜角(NT)、胸廓入射角(TIA)、T_1倾斜角(T_1S)。[结果] 60例患者中按T_1S测量结果分为T_1S<25°组27例,T_1S≥25°组33例, T_1S<25°组C_(5/6)和C_(6/7)节段的颈椎椎间盘退变Pfirrmann评级显著大于T_1S≥25°组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。T_1S与C_(5/6)椎间盘退变分级呈负相关(R=-0.590,P<0.05),与C_(6/7)椎间盘退变分级呈负相关(R=-0.794, P<0.05)。60例患者按椎间盘退变Pfirrmann评分分为两组,≤15分25例,>15分35例,两组间TIA、T_1S和NT的差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。≤15分组的CL显著大于>15分组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。≤15分组的C_(2-7)SVA显著小于>15分组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),CL与Pfirrmann分级呈负相关(R=-0.865,P<0.05),C_(2～7)SVA与Pfirrmann分级呈正相关(R=0.791,P<0.05)。[结论]颈椎矢状力线与颈椎椎间盘退变相关,CL与椎间盘退变呈负相关,C_(2-7)SVA与椎间盘退变呈正相关,T_1S与C_(5/6)、C_(6/7)椎间盘退变呈现负相关。     

经皮髓核成形术与椎间盘切除术治疗退变性颈椎间盘突出症

目的比较经皮髓核成形术与经皮椎间盘切除术治疗退变性颈椎间盘突出症的临床疗效及对颈椎稳定性的影响。方法2002年7月至2004年12月共收治退变性颈椎间盘突出症患者80例,行经皮髓核成形术42例(PCN组),经皮椎间盘切除术38例(PCD组)。回顾性分析两组的临床资料,比较两组在手术时间、临床效果及颈椎稳定性等的差异。结果所有病例随访6~26个月,PCN组平均(12±5)个月;PCD组平均(12±4)个月。两组手术均获成功。两组手术时间有显著差异(t=-21·70,P=0·000);两组手术临床效果(JOA评分)经自身配对t检验显示均有显著性差异(PCN:t=14·05,P=0·000;PCD:t=-14·79,P=0·000),即两组均有效;两组手术临床效果(Williams评分)经Kruskal-Wallis检验无显著差异(z=-0·377,P=0·706,>0·05),即两组临床效果相似。两组手术后均无颈椎不稳病例发生,颈椎稳定性手术前后均无显著差异(P>0·05)。结论经皮髓核成形术与经皮椎间盘切除术治疗颈椎间盘突出症的临床疗效优良,对颈椎稳定性影响小,不会造成颈椎失稳的发生。