两种融合方式治疗腰椎滑脱的比较

目的对比研究后外侧融合与后路椎间融合治疗Ⅰ～Ⅱ度腰椎滑脱的疗效。方法57例采取植骨融合附加椎弓根内固定的手术方法,29例采用后外侧融合,其余采用椎间融合,比较两种植骨方式术后植骨融合率和临床症状改善情况。结果临床优良率分别为83.82%、86.37%,两者无显著性差异(P>0.05);骨融合率分别为75.76%、90.7%,两者有显著性差异(P<0.05)。结论后外侧融合与椎间融合治疗Ⅰ～Ⅱ度腰椎滑脱的疗效相似,后外侧更容易出现断钉的现象,椎间植骨融合优于后外侧融合。

Posterolateral Fusion Versus Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Pedicle Screw System for Grade Ⅰ and Ⅱ Isthmic Spondylolysis

Objective To evaluate the outcome of posterolateral fusion with pedicle screw system and posterior Lumbar interbody fusion with pedicle screw system for treatment of grade I and II isthmic spondylolysis. Methods 57 patients with spondylolisthesis operated by the same surgeon underwent decompression and posterior lumbar fusion with a pedicle screw system. One group 29 patients underwent PLF while patients in the other group 28 patients underwent PLIF. The clinical outcome and fusion rate in these two groups were compared. Results The excellent and good rate was 83.82% for patients with PLF and 86.37% with PLIF(P >0.05).The fusion rate was 75.76 % with PLF and 90.7% with PLIF(P<0.05). Conclusion The clinical outcome of PLIF is better than PLF with in the treatment of spondylolysis.