两种介入方式治疗颈椎间盘突出症的对照研究

目的对比观察臭氧溶核术及椎间盘切吸术治疗颈椎间盘突出症的疗效。方法选择63例经临床、CT及MRI明确诊断的单纯性颈椎间盘突出症患者,将其随机分为两组:应用臭氧溶核术治疗的为A组(33例),应用经皮颈椎间盘切吸术治疗的为B组(30例)。对两组患者的治疗效果、穿刺治疗时间、住院时间及治疗期间并发症发生率进行观察比较。结果治疗后A组有效率为75.8%,B组为83.3%,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。A组穿刺治疗时间为(18.2±3.9)min,B组为(43.3±6.7)min;A组平均住院时间为(4.8±0.6)d,B组为(6.0±0.8)d,两组穿刺治疗时间及住院时间比较,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.01)。两组患者并发症发生率间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论臭氧溶核术及椎间盘切吸术均是治疗颈椎间盘突出症安全、有效的方法,但臭氧溶核术由于其操作更为简单,住院时间更短,效价比更有优势,因此更适于中小医院开展。

Comparing Research of Two Interventional Therapy for Cervical Disc Herniation

Objective To compare the curative effect of ozone chemonucleolysis and intervertebral incision absorbing method to cure cervical disc herniation.Methods 63 patients were divided into two groups through the diagnosis by clinic,CT and MRI,group A(33 cases)through ozone chemonucleolysis,group B(30 cases)through neck intervertebral absorbing method.Compare the therapeutic efficacy,acupuncture curing time,hospitalization time and complications of two groups.Results The efficiency of group A was 75.8%,the efficiency of group B was 83.3%,there had no statistical significance between two groups(P>0.05),the acupuncture curing time of group A was(18.2±3.9)min,the acupuncture curing time of group B was(43.3±6.7)min,the average hospitalization time of group A was(4.8±0.6)days,the average hospitalization time of group B was(6.0±0.8)days,the acupuncture curing time and average hospitalization time of two groups had statistical significance(P<0.01),but the complication of two groups had no statistical significance(P>0.05).Conclusion Both the ozone chemonucleolysis and intervertebral incision absorbing method were safe,efficient to cure cervical disc herniation.but the ozone chemonucleolysis was more simple,the hospitalization time was shorter,the potency ratio was more predominant,so the ozone chemonucleolysis was adapted to middle and small hospitals.