Zigler Jack E, Burd Timothy A, Vialle Emiliano N, Sachs Barton L, Rashbaum Ralph F, Ohnmeiss Donna D
Texas Back Institute and Texas Back Institute Research Foundation, Plano, Texas 75093, USA.
J Spinal Disord Tech. 2003 Aug;16(4):352-61. doi: 10.1097/00024720-200308000-00007.
This study represents the first 39 patients with at least 6-month follow-up enrolled in a prospective randomized Food and Drug Administration study evaluating the safety and efficacy of the ProDisc II versus the control, a 360 degrees lumbar spinal fusion. Data were collected preoperatively and at 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months postoperatively. Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire (ODQ), and patient satisfaction rates were evaluated at these intervals, as well as range of motion, return to work, and recreational and ambulatory status. There were 28 ProDisc patients and 11 who underwent fusion. Six patients had two-level surgery. Estimated blood loss (ProDisc = 69 mL versus fusion = 175 mL) and operative time (ProDisc = 75 minutes versus fusion = 219 minutes) were significantly different (P < 0.01). Hospital stays were shorter (ProDisc = 2.1 days versus fusion = 3.5 days [P < 0.01]) for ProDisc patients. There was a significantly greater reduction in the ODQ scores at 3 months in the ProDisc group compared with the fusion group (P < 0.05). No difference was noted in VAS. A trend was identified at 6 months in patient satisfaction rates favoring ProDisc versus fusion (P = 0.08), and motion was significantly improved in ProDisc patients compared with the fusion group (P = 0.02). Ambulatory status as well as recreational activity improved faster in the ProDisc group. The data suggest that total disc arthroplasty may be an attractive option as opposed to lumbar fusion for the surgical treatment of disabling mechanical low back pain secondary to lumbar disc disease.
本研究纳入了首批39例患者,这些患者参与了一项前瞻性随机食品药品监督管理局研究,该研究对ProDisc II与对照(360度腰椎融合术)的安全性和有效性进行评估,随访时间至少为6个月。术前以及术后6周、3个月和6个月收集数据。在这些时间点评估视觉模拟量表(VAS)、Oswestry下腰痛残疾问卷(ODQ)以及患者满意度,同时评估活动范围、重返工作岗位情况以及娱乐和步行状态。有28例接受ProDisc治疗的患者和11例接受融合术的患者。6例患者接受了两节段手术。估计失血量(ProDisc组为69毫升,融合术组为175毫升)和手术时间(ProDisc组为75分钟,融合术组为219分钟)存在显著差异(P < 0.01)。ProDisc组患者的住院时间更短(ProDisc组为2.1天,融合术组为3.5天[P < 0.01])。与融合术组相比,ProDisc组在术后3个月时ODQ评分的降低幅度显著更大(P < 0.05)。VAS评分未发现差异。在术后6个月时发现患者满意度存在有利于ProDisc组而非融合术组的趋势(P = 0.08),与融合术组相比,ProDisc组患者的活动明显改善(P = 0.02)。ProDisc组的步行状态以及娱乐活动改善得更快。数据表明,对于因腰椎间盘疾病导致的致残性机械性下腰痛的手术治疗,与腰椎融合术相比,全椎间盘置换术可能是一个有吸引力的选择。