MRI放射状扫描成像诊断半月板撕裂的价值

【摘要】 目的 探讨MRI放射状扫描序列对膝关节半月板撕裂的诊断价值及对临床治疗的指导意义。方法 回顾性分析58 例疑有膝关节半月板撕裂患者的MRI常规扫描及放射状扫描图像,两者相互比较,并将常规扫描诊断结果、常规和放射状扫描两者相互结合后的结果分别与关节镜结果对比分析。结果 常规扫描序列和放射状扫描序列对半月板撕裂的诊断结果无统计学差异;放射状扫描和常规扫描相结合能增加诊断的敏感性和特异性。MRI常规检查(常规扫描结合放射状扫描)对于内侧半月板前角、体部及后角撕裂的诊断灵敏度分别为62.50%(62.50%),80.90%(95.23%),72.72%(78.78%);特异度为98.00%(94.00%),89.19%(78.37%),92.30%(92.30%)。MRI常规检查(常规扫描结合放射状扫描)对于外侧半月板前角、体部及后角撕裂的诊断灵敏度分别为64.28%(78.57%),76.47%(88.00%),82.35%(94.11%);特异度为97.72%(96.45%),92.68%(85.36%),97.56%(97.56%)。结论 MRI 常规扫描结合放射状扫描对半月板边缘部、近根部的损伤以及半月板损伤的细节显示优于常规扫描,二者结合可减少假阴性率和假阳性率,放射状扫描序列可作为重要的辅助诊断方法。     

Performance Status Enhances the Selection of Treatment for Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma Within the Milan Criteria

Background

Performance status (PS) is closely linked with survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We investigated its impact on treatment strategy for small HCC(s).

Methods

A total of 360 and 362 HCC patients within the Milan criteria undergoing surgical resection (SR) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA), respectively, were prospectively enrolled. Patients were classified into PS 0 (n = 558) and PS ≥1 (n = 164) groups. Propensity score analysis was performed, and 168 and 35 matched pairs were selected from patients with PS 0 and ≥1, respectively.

Results

The SR group was younger and had a higher male-to-female ratio, higher prevalence of hepatitis B, lower prevalence of hepatitis C, better PS, better liver functional reserve, and larger tumor burden than the RFA group (all p < 0.05). Among patients with PS 0, the SR group was consistently younger, less cirrhotic, and had larger tumor burden (all p < 0.05). The long-term survival was comparable between SR and RFA group in patients with PS 0. After propensity score matching, SR provided significantly better long-term survival than RFA for patients within the Milan criteria classified as PS 0 (p = 0.016); the Cox proportional hazards model showed consistent results. There was no significant difference of overall survival between the SR and RFA group in patients with PS ≥1 before or after propensity score matching (both p > 0.05).

Conclusions

For HCC patients within the Milan criteria and classified as PS 0, SR provides a better long-term survival compared with RFA. Performance status may enhance treatment selection and stratify the risk of survival in these patients.     

三种不同植骨方式在胸、腰椎结核手术治疗中的观察

目的:对比观察块状植骨、颗粒植骨和钛网植骨三种不同植骨方式在后路胸腰椎结核手术中的临床应用效果.方法:选取我院93例胸、腰椎结核患者,分为三组,彻底结核病灶清除后,分别采用块状植骨(32例)、颗粒植骨(35例)、钛网植骨(26例)三种不同植骨方式,对三组术中植骨所需时间,术中出血量,术后后凸畸形角纠正状况,末次随访后凸畸形角丢失状况,植骨融合时间进行对比.结果:患者均得到12～36个月随访,植骨所需手术时间A组为23.4±4.3min,B组为5.2±2.4min,C组为25.6±3.6min,B组植骨所需时间明显短于A组、C组(P＜0.05),A组、C组比较差异无统计意义(P＞0.05);术中出血量A组为553±53ml,B组为352±48ml,C组为564±47ml,B组明显少于A组、C组(P＜0.05),A组、C组比较差异无统计意义(P＞0.05);术前Cobb角A组为36.5°±5.9°,B组为36.2°±4.7°,C组为36.8°±5.1°,三组差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05),术后Cobb角A、B、C三组分别为15.3°±3.6°、15.6°±3.1°及15.1°±2.9°,三组间差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05);末次随访时Cobb角A组为16.9°±3.6°,平均丢失1.6°,B组为17.5°±3.1°,平均丢失1.9°,C组为16.8°±2.9°,平均丢失1.7°,三组差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05);植骨融合时间A组为5.9±0.4个月,B组为4.1±0.3个月,C组为6.2±0.5个月,B组明显短于A组、C组(P＜0.05),A组、C组比较差异无统计意义(P＞0.05).结论:颗粒骨植骨较传统块状植骨和钛网植骨植入方便易行,植入时间短,出血量少,植骨融合时间短,是后路胸椎结核病灶清除术后理想的植骨方式.     

下颈椎骨折脱位的治疗术式选择

目的:探讨下颈椎骨折脱位的手术方式选择及其疗效.方法:我院2007年1月至2012年10月收治下颈椎骨折脱位患者32例,男23例,女9例;年龄28～78岁,平均56.4岁.术前伴脊髓损伤22例,Frankel分级A级5例,B级9例,C级6例,D级2例.根据患者骨折类型、椎间盘突出及压迫脊髓程度、小关节交锁情况、颈椎损伤程度等因素选择手术方案,其中21例椎体骨折但不伴有椎间小关节绞锁的病例采用单纯前路于术治疗(单间隙或椎体次全切除减压、椎间植骨钢板内固定);4例颈椎脱位伴有小关节绞锁但不伴有明显的椎体骨折、MRI示脊髓前方无明显受压,或屈曲牵张型双侧关节突骨折/绞锁者行后路减压、复位、内固定;7例有椎体骨折和椎间盘损伤,并存在椎体脱位、椎间小关节绞锁,或椎板骨折、骨块脱入椎管者采用前后联合入路手术.随访患者神经功能改善情况,影像学评价骨折愈合、植骨融合及颈椎稳定性情况:结果:32例均顺利完成手术,术中无神经、气管和食管损伤等并发症.4例术中发现硬脊髓破损,术后发生脑脊液漏,经对症处理后愈合.术后佩戴颈托3个月.均获随访,随访时间6～24个月,平均18.5个月,术后6个月22例有脊髓神经功能损伤患者除1例B级无恢复外,其余患者Frankel分级提高1～2级.术后复查X线片示颈椎序列恢复良好,骨折愈合,植骨均在6个月内获骨性融合(平均4.5个月),无假关节、骨不连发生,椎体间高度、生理曲度及颈椎稳定性维持良好,随访期间无钢板螺钉脱出、断裂.结论:术前对下颈椎骨折脱位患者的损伤类型、损伤节段、颈椎间盘突出压迫脊髓位置及受伤程度等因素进行综合分析,采取合理的手术方式,能够使损伤节段获得早期稳定,有利于提高患者神经功能的恢复.     

胸腰椎骨巨细胞瘤手术治疗后复发的原因分析

目的:探讨胸腰椎骨巨细胞瘤(giant cell tumor,GCT)手术治疗后复发的原因.方法:2005年1月～2010年9月我院手术治疗胸腰椎GCT共20例,男10例,女10例;年龄11～49岁,平均34.0岁,＜30岁者7例,30～60岁者13例.病变位于胸椎13例,腰椎7例;病灶仅累及单节段脊椎15例,双节段1例,3个节段4例;均为Enneking S3期.15例为首次手术治疗,5例因复发而再次手术.行刮除术9例,经瘤包膜外彻底切除术7例,全脊椎整块切除术(TES)4例.手术时间168～690min,平均440.5min;术中出血量为1050～8500ml,平均3286ml.术后放疗7例.采用卡方Fisher精确检验,分析术后GCT复发率与患者性别、年龄、病变节段、首次手术与否、手术方式、手术时间、术中出血量、术后放疗与否的相关性.结果:3例失访,17例随访18～86个月,平均48.0个月.11例患者未见复发,6例患者局部复发.病灶累及胸椎者的术后复发率为3/11,腰椎为3/6;男性患者术后复发率为2/9,女性为4/8;年龄＜30岁者术后复发率为1/6,30～60岁者为5/11;首次手术治疗的术后复发率为5/13,因复发再次手术的复发率为1/4;手术时间＜7h者复发率为4/6,≥7h者为2/11;术中出血量＜3000ml者术后复发率为2/7,≥3000ml者为4/10;采用刮除术者术后复发率为6/7,采用经瘤包膜外彻底切除术及整块切除术者无复发,采用刮除术的复发率明显高于另外两组;术后放疗者复发率为5/7,未行放疗者为1/10.局部复发组患者的性别、年龄、病变受累节段、手术次数、手术时间及术中出血量与未复发组比较无统计学差异(P＞0.05),手术方式及术后放疗与否复发组与未复发组比较有统计学差异(P＜0.05).结论:胸腰椎GCT手术治疗后的复发与手术方式直接相关,整块切除或经瘤的包膜外彻底切除可明显降低复发率.     

帕瑞昔布钠对乳腺癌根治术后布托啡诺病人自控静脉镇痛时细胞免疫功能的影响

目的 评价帕瑞昔布钠对乳腺癌根治术后布托啡诺病人自控静脉镇痛(PCIA)时细胞免疫功能的影响.方法 择期行乳腺癌改良根治术女性病人60例,ASA分级Ⅰ或Ⅱ级,年龄36～ 60岁,体重48 ～ 82 kg,采用随机数字表法,将其分为2组(n=30):对照组(C组)和帕瑞昔布钠组(P组).术毕采用布托啡诺10 μg/kg行PCIA,背景输注速率2 ml/h,PCA量0.5 ml,锁定时间15 min.P组分别于术毕、术后12、24和36 h时静脉注射帕瑞昔布钠40 mg,C组给予等容量生理盐水.术后维持VAS评分≤4分;VAS评分≥5分时,静脉注射布托啡诺进行镇痛补救.分别于麻醉诱导前5 min、切皮后2h、术后6h、1、3和7d时,采集右颈内静脉血样,采用流式细胞仪检测T淋巴细胞亚群(CD3+、CD4+、CD8+)和NK细胞的水平,计算CD4+/CD8+.分别于术后2、6、12、24和48 h时,记录镇痛泵总按压次数、有效按压次数和镇痛补救药物用量.记录不良反应发生情况.结果 与C组比较,P组镇痛泵总按压次数和镇痛补救药物用量减少,镇痛泵有效按压次数增多,术后ld时CD3+、CD4+、CD4+/CD8+和NK细胞水平降低(P＜0.05),不良反应发生率差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 帕瑞昔布钠可增强术后布托啡诺PCIA的效果,减少其用量,从而改善乳腺癌根治术病人术后细胞免疫功能.     

多种区域组织瓣在口腔颌面部缺损修复中的应用分析

目的:寻找口腔颌面部缺损的理想修复方法。方法:对97例口腔颌面部缺损,根据缺损部位、性质、范围,分别采用鼻唇沟皮瓣(6例),邻位滑行皮瓣(13例),Abbe瓣(4例),胸大肌肌皮瓣(17例),颈阔肌肌皮瓣(14例),下斜方肌肌皮瓣(4例),前臂皮瓣(13例),额瓣(6例),颞肌筋膜瓣修复(6例),舌瓣(11例),腓骨肌皮瓣(3例),观察修复效果。结果:97例区域组织瓣中,胸大肌肌皮瓣坏死1例,下斜方肌肌皮瓣尖端坏死1例,另1例胸大肌皮瓣术后放疗后坏死(术后4月),其余皮瓣存活,外形基本满意。所有患者均能进食,97%能正常饮食(食饭),其余可流质饮食。舌、腭、咽、口底肿物T3以上,术后语音轻度影响。结论:采用以上多种区域组织瓣修复口腔颌面部缺损,建议应尽可能采用邻近带蒂皮瓣;对于较大缺损修复主要是修复组织缺损,采用不同组织修复缺损,对进食、语音影响似区别不大,日后尚需作深入研究。     

Laparoscopic versus open total mesorectal excision with anal sphincter preservation for low rectal cancer

Background The Laparoscopic approach has been applied to colorectal surgery for many years; however, there are only a few reports on laparoscopic low and ultralow anterior resection with construction of coloanal anastomosis. This study compares open versus laparoscopic low and ultralow anterior resections, assesses the feasibility and efficacy of the laparoscopic approach of total mesorectal excision (TME) with anal sphincter preservation (ASP), and analyzes the short-term results of patients with low rectal cancer.Methods We analyzed our experience via a prospective, randomized control trail. From June 2001 to September 2002, 171 patients with low rectal cancer underwent TME with ASP, 82 by the laparoscopic procedure and 89 by the open technique. The lowest margin of tumors was below peritoneal reflection and 1.5–8 cm above the dentate line (1.5–4.9 cm in 104 cases and 5–8 cm in 67 cases). The grouping was randomized.Results Results of operation, postoperative recovery, and short-term oncological follow-up were compared between 82 laparoscopic procedures and 89 controls who underwent open surgery during the same period. In the laparoscopic group, 30 patients in whom low anterior resection was performed had the anastomosis below peritoneal reflection and more than 2 cm above the dentate line, 27 patients in whom ultralow anterior resection was performed had anastomotic height within 2 cm of the dentate line, and 25 patients in whom coloanal anastomosis was performed had the anastomosis at or below the dentate line. In the open group, the numbers were 35, 27, and 27, respectively. There was no statistical difference in operation time, administration of parenteral analgesics, start of food intake, and mortality rate between the two groups. However, blood loss was less, bowel function recovered earlier, and hospitalization time was shorter in the laparoscopic group.Conclusion Totally laparoscopic TME with ASP is feasible, and it is a minimally invasive technique with the benefits of much less blood loss during operation, earlier return of bowel function, and shorter hospitalization.     

A simple method for bone-graft handling during spine surgery

Morsellized bone-graft handling during spine surgery to get vertebral fusion can be a slow, laborious and time-consuming procedure. It is not absolutely exempt from complication risk. An easy, quick and inexpensive alternative technique is described.