腰椎管狭窄症的手术治疗

目的探讨腰椎管狭窄症手术治疗的相关问题,进一步提高手术效果。方法回顾总结本院自2000～2007年底收治的208例腰椎管狭窄症患者的临床资料,其中腰椎管狭窄症单纯行腰椎管扩大术120例,腰椎管狭窄合并腰椎退变性滑脱、腰椎不稳定及脊柱退变性侧弯,行腰椎管扩大、椎弓根螺钉内固定,后外侧植骨融合术88例。观察手术前后腰及下肢疼痛,间歇性跛行的改善率。结果随访1～7年,平均4年,术后患者的症状、体征均有明显改善,疼痛改善率为91.2%,间歇性跛行的改善率为93.4%,仅1例术后本节段间盘复发,再次椎管狭窄,无医源性滑脱,无相邻节段退变,无内固定物松脱折断,无植骨不融合。结论手术治疗腰椎管狭窄症,术前、术中、术后相关治疗适当,会得到满意的临床效果。     

下颈椎经关节螺钉固定的生物力学研究

目的比较下颈椎经关节螺钉3层皮质和4层皮质固定的生物力学拔出力的区别。方法10具新鲜尸体颈椎标本（C3-T1），游离成3个颈椎运动节段（C3～C4、C5～C6、C7～T1），在椎体两侧随机进行经关节螺钉3层皮质和4层皮质固定，置入直径为3．5mm的皮质骨螺钉。置入经关节螺钉行拔出力试验，比较经关节螺钉2种固定方式的最大轴向拔出力。结果下颈椎经关节螺钉4层皮质固定的平均拔出力为430N，而3层皮质固定的平均拔出力为412N，但两者间差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。经关节螺钉两种固定方式在颈椎各节段间差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论下颈椎后路经关节螺钉3层皮质固定的力学性能与4层皮质固定差异并不明显。经关节螺钉3层皮质固定可能在减少和避免置钉相关的神经血管损伤并发症方面有着重要的临床意义。     

腰椎退变性疾病的手术治疗

目的 探讨腰椎退变性疾病手术治疗的相关问题，进一步提高手术效果。方法 回顾总结我院自2000年初-2006年底收治的508例腰椎退变性疾病患者的临床资料，其中腰椎间盘突出症240例，行单纯摘除术，腰椎管狭窄症150例，行单纯椎管扩大术，腰椎退变性滑脱，不稳定，侧弯118例，行椎管扩大，椎弓根螺钉内固定，后外侧植骨融合术。观察手术前后腰及下肢疼痛，间歇性跛行的改善率。结果 随访卜7年，平均4年，术后患者的症状、体征均有明显改善，疼痛改善率为91、2％，间歇性跛行的改善率为9．3．4％，仅1例术后本节段间盘复发，无医源性滑脱，无相邻节段退变，无内固定物松脱折断。结论 手术治疗腰椎退变性疾病，术前、术中、术后相关治疗适当，会得到满意的临床效果。     

经皮椎弓根螺钉内固定治疗胸腰椎单椎体A3型骨折

【目的】探讨经皮椎弓根螺钉内固定治疗胸腰椎单椎体A3型骨折的临床疗效。【方法】选取2016年8月至2018年8月在南方医科大学附属郴州市第一人民医院脊柱外科诊治的40例胸腰椎单椎体A3型骨折患者,按照患者意愿分为观察组和对照组,每组20例。观察组采用经皮椎弓根螺钉内固定手术,对照组采用后路开放手术,比较两组围术期指标及术前、术后视觉模拟疼痛评分(VAS)和Cobb's角、椎体前缘高度百分比。【结果】观察组患者术中出血量、手术时间、切口长度、术后渗出量和住院天数均少于对照组,其差异均有统计学意义(均P>0.05)。两组患者术前VAS评分比较差异无统计学意义(均P>0.05);观察组患者术后1周、术后1个月、术后3个月及术后6个月的VAS评分均显著低于对照组,其差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。两组患者入院时、术后1个月和术后1年Cobb's角、椎体前缘高度百分比比较差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。【结论】采用经皮椎弓根螺钉内固定治疗胸腰椎单椎体A3型骨折,切口小、住院时间短、出血量少、疼痛轻,疗效显著,值得临床推广应用。     

The economic impact of individually packaged screws

BackgroundTrends in orthopaedic surgery have seen a migration towards using individually packaged screws (IPS). The manufacturers claim IPS improves sterility, traceability, and avoids the effects of repeated sterilisation. In recent times there has been increasing pressure on the NHS to be more cost-efficient. Challenging decisions must be made to make cost-efficient choices without comprising the quality of care provided.AimThis study investigates the cost-benefit of IPS compared to the conventional screw rack stored screws (SRSS).MethodsA single-centred observational study was carried out in a district general hospital between February and March 2013. One-hundred and forty-seven screws were requested intra-operatively and the screw acquisition time was measured with a digital handheld timer. Screw acquisition time was defined as the time taken from the initial verbal request to when the screw was mounted ready for use. The screws were categorised into two groups: SRSS and IPS.ResultsThe mean screw acquisition time for the SRSS group (n = 94) was 6.6 s (S.D ± 2.5). The mean screw acquisition time for the IPS group (n = 53) was 102.1 s (S.D ± 25.7). The mean difference between SRSS and IPS was 96 s (95%CI 90.3–100.8; p < 0.001).ConclusionOur study suggests that the use of IPS significantly (p < 0.001) increases the operation duration and costs compared to SRSS. Based on ankle ORIF procedures alone, the use of IPS could potentially increase department spending by approximately £76,680 per year.     

Removal of bicortical screws and other osteosynthesis material that caused symptoms after bilateral sagittal split osteotomy: a retrospective study of 251 patients,and review of published papers

Rigid fixation with either bicortical screws or miniplates is the current standard way to stabilise the mandibular segments after bilateral sagittal split osteotomy (BSSO). Both techniques are widely used and the superiority of one or other method is still debatable. One complication of rigid fixation is the need to remove the osteosynthesis material because of associated complaints. The main aim of this retrospective study was to analyse how often we needed to remove bicortical screws because they caused symptoms after BSSO in our clinic. Review of other published papers also enabled us to investigate the reported rates of removal of screws and miniplates at other centres. The mean (SD) duration of follow-up of 251 patients (502 sites) was 432 (172) days, and the number of bicortical screws removed in our clinic was 14/486 sites (3%). Other methods of fixation were used at 16 sites. We found no significant association between removal of bicortical screws and age, sex, presence of third molars, or bad splits. Published rates of removal of bicortical screws and miniplates are 3.1%–7.2% and 6.6%–22.2% per site, respectively. These findings show that fixation with bicortical screws after BSSO is associated with a low rate of removal of osteosynthesis material. Reported incidences imply a lower rate of removal for screws than for miniplates.     

PFNA和倒置股骨髁LISS钛板治疗股骨粗隆间骨折的疗效

【目的】评价新改进的股骨近端髓内钉（PFNA）和倒置股骨髁微创内固定系统（LISS）钛板治疗股骨粗隆间骨折的疗效。【方法】本院2010年8月至2012年6月股骨粗隆间骨折患者57例,均采用手术治疗,其中27例采用PFNA固定（PFNA组）,30例采用倒置股骨髁LISS钛板固定（LISS组）,比较两组平均手术时间、出血量、切口长度、骨折愈合时间、内固定失效例数、术后6个月大腿疼痛（V A S法）评分、术后髋关节评分（Harris评分）。【结果】本组中57例患者随访时间为6～24个月。PFNA组手术出血量、切口长度、内固定失效例数小于LISS组（P＜0．05）;两组手术时间、骨折愈合时间、术后6个月VAS评分、Harris评分比较无显著性差异（ P＞0．05）。【结论】两种方法治疗股骨粗隆间骨折均取得满意疗效,但PFNA操作简单、组织损伤小,优于使用倒置股骨髁LISS钛板。     

经椎弓根螺钉技术治疗脊柱后凸畸形的效果分析

目的:观察经椎弓根螺钉技术治疗脊柱后凸畸形的效果。方法:对28例脊柱后凸畸形患者采用经椎弓根螺钉技术治疗。结果:患者手术时间110～200 min,平均140 min;失血量650～1 500 ml,平均850 ml。术后切口Ⅰ期愈合,无感染、脊髓神经损伤、内固定失败。有2例出现短暂的神经系统并发症,经神经营养等对症治疗后于2周后逐渐恢复。术后胸椎后凸角、腰椎前凸角、骶骨水平角、身高与术前比较均有明显增高,骶骨后上角至脊柱矢状轴线的距离有明显减少,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。随访12～36个月,平均24个月。术后腰痛均消失,无松动、断钉、断棒、假关节形成和矫正度数丢失等并发症,X线片见植骨融合良好,无延迟愈合或不愈合。结论:采用后路经椎弓根螺钉技术治疗脊柱后凸畸形,手术操作相对简单安全,植骨融合良好,无延迟愈合或不愈合,可取得较理想的矫形效果。     

No difference in clinical results between femoral transfixation and bio-interference screw fixation in hamstring tendon ACL reconstruction. A preliminary study

Hamstring tendon autograft has become a popular graft choice for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, but there is no consensus on the ideal technique of fixation. We performed a pilot randomized controlled study to compare the clinical and mechanical outcome of two femoral fixation techniques for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction using hamstrings graft. We recruited 30 patients with a chronic unilateral tear of the anterior cruciate ligament. In all patients, quadrupled hamstring graft was used for ACL reconstruction. In 15 patients, femoral graft fixation was performed using Bio-interference Screws fixation (Arthrex, Inc. Naples USA) (Group 1). In the other 15 patients, femoral graft fixation was performed using BioTransFix femur extra cortical transverse fixation (Arthrex, Inc. Naples USA) (Group 2). In both groups, tibial fixation was achieved with a Delta bio-absorbable interference screw (Arthrex). Both groups were comparable with regard to demographic data, pre-operative activity level, mechanism of injury, interval between the injury and the operation, and pre-operative knee laxity measurements. An independent observer, who was blinded with regard to the involved leg and the type of graft, performed the outcome assessment with the use of a Rolimeter® arthrometer (Aircast), and the International Knee Documentation Committee. At 13 months follow up, all patients except one had functionally normal or nearly normal IKDC objective scores. The mean IKDC subjective score was 83.38 ± 9.4 in Group 1 and 79.92 ± 11.01 in Group 2 (P > .05). The side to side laxity as measured with the Rolimeter® arthrometer was 1.5 mm ± 1 (range 0–3) for Group 1, and 2 mm ± 1 (range 0–3) for Group 2 (P > .05). Femoral Biotransfix fixation and Bio-interference Screws fixation provide comparable mechanical stability and clinical outcome at 13 months follow up. BiotransFix fixation is an effective alternative to other devices. Our preliminary study shows that there is no evidence to prefer femoral transfixation to the more traditional, technically less demanding, and more economical interference screw fixation. A full study requires 368 participants.     

The use of mini-implants in en masse retraction for the treatment of bimaxillary dentoalveolar protrusion

This case report describes the treatment of a 22-year-old girl who had incompetent lips with severe bimaxillary dentoalveolar protrusion. The treatment of choice for such patients is usually extraction of four first premolars and retraction of the anterior teeth. To maintain the extraction space, maximum anchorage is required. Mini-implants were used to provide maximum anchorage for obtaining a good facial profile.