Matsudaira Ko, Yamazaki Takashi, Seichi Atsushi, Takeshita Katsushi, Hoshi Kazuto, Kishimoto Junji, Nakamura Kozo
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-0033, Japan.
J Orthop Sci. 2005 May;10(3):270-6. doi: 10.1007/s00776-005-0887-7.
The management of grade I lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis remains controversial. There have been few reports comparing any form of surgery with conservative treatment. As for surgical management, the need for arthrodesis with instrumentation has not been established. A series of 53 patients with single-level spinal stenosis at L4/5 due to grade I degenerative spondylolisthesis entered into a study to compare outcomes of two surgical methods of treatment with those of a control group treated conservatively: group 1, 19 patients treated by decompression laminectomy combined with posterolateral fusion and pedicle screw instrumentation; group 2, 18 patients treated by decompression of the spinal canal using a laminoplasty technique to preserve the integrity of the midline structure; group 3, 16 patients treated conservatively after being recommended that they have surgery. We compared the 2-year results among the three groups. Alleviation of symptoms was noted in groups 1 and 2, whereas the controls (group 3) showed no improvement. There was no significant difference in the degree of clinical improvement between groups 1 and 2. Spondylolisthesis was controlled in group 1, but it did not lead to better clinical results than those achieved in group 2. Our findings indicate that the technique for decompressing the spinal canal with preservation of the posterior elements of its roof can be useful for treating patients with grade I degenerative spondylolisthesis with symptoms of spinal stenosis.
I度腰椎退行性椎体滑脱的治疗仍存在争议。很少有报告比较任何形式的手术与保守治疗的效果。至于手术治疗,是否需要进行融合内固定尚未确定。一项研究纳入了53例因I度退行性椎体滑脱导致L4/5单节段椎管狭窄的患者,比较两种手术治疗方法与保守治疗对照组的疗效:第1组,19例患者接受椎板减压术联合后外侧融合及椎弓根螺钉内固定治疗;第2组,18例患者采用椎板成形术减压椎管以保留中线结构的完整性;第3组,16例患者在被建议手术治疗后接受保守治疗。我们比较了三组患者2年的治疗结果。第1组和第2组患者症状得到缓解,而对照组(第3组)没有改善。第1组和第2组在临床改善程度上没有显著差异。第1组的椎体滑脱得到了控制,但与第2组相比,并未带来更好的临床效果。我们的研究结果表明,保留椎管后壁结构进行椎管减压的技术可用于治疗有椎管狭窄症状的I度退行性椎体滑脱患者。