后路椎弓根钉固定与颈前路钢板固定治疗下颈椎骨折脱位的临床疗效比较

目的 对比分析后路椎弓根钉固定与颈前路钢板固定治疗下颈椎骨折脱位的临床疗效。 方法 回顾性分析2009年1月~2013年12月间在笔者医院行下颈椎骨折脱位手术治疗的患者共筛选48例,其中以脊柱中前柱损伤为主的患者行颈前路钢板固定术(27例)设为A组,以脊柱中后柱损伤为主的患者行后路椎弓根钉固定术(21例)设为B组。比较两种手术方法在时间、术中失血量及骨折愈合时间、颈椎生理曲度重建率、神经损伤恢复(ASIA分级)方面的差异。 结果 除B组在手术时间和术中失血量方面多于A组外,骨折愈合时间、颈椎生理曲度重建率和神经损伤恢复情况两组差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。 结论 根据各自的适应证、掌握正确的手术技巧,后路椎弓根钉固定与颈前路钢板固定治疗下颈椎骨折脱位,均可取得良好治疗效果。

Comparison of Therapeutic Effects of Anterior Cross-locking Plate Fixation and Posterior Pedicle Screw Fixation for Treatment of Lower Cervical Fracture Dislocation

Objective To comparative the clinical efficacy of anterior cross-locking plate and posterior pedicle screw fixation for treatment of lower cervical fracture dislocation. Methods Forty eight patients suffered lower cervical fractures dislocations were retrospectively analyzed from January 2009 to December 2013, of whom (27 cases) underwent anterior cross-locking plate surgery set to group A, of whom (21 cases) underwent posterior pedicle screw fixation surgery wet to group B. Comparison of two surgical methods in time, intraoperative blood loss and postoperative 6 month healing time, the rate of cervical lordosis reconstruction, nerve damage restoration differences (ASIA grade) was performed. Results After statistical analysis, the fracture healing time, the rate of cervical lordosis reconstruction and recovery of nerve damage had no significant difference, in addition to the operative time and blood loss of group B was higher than group A. Conclusion According to surgical indications and techniques, the therapeutic effects of anterior cross-locking plate and posterior pedicle screw fixation for treatment of lower cervical fracture dislocation were similar, and they can achieve the same therapeutic effect.