Suppr超能文献

1级和2级腰椎后路椎间融合术与经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术的生物力学比较

Biomechanical comparison of posterior lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion performed at 1 and 2 levels.

作者信息

Ames Christopher P, Acosta Frank L, Chi John, Iyengar Jaicharan, Muiru William, Acaroglu Emre, Puttlitz Christian M

机构信息

Department of Neurological Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, CA 94143-0112, USA.

出版信息

Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005 Oct 1;30(19):E562-6. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000180505.80347.b1.

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN

Biomechanical laboratory study of human cadaveric spines.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the difference in acute stability between posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) performed at 1 and 2 levels with and without posterior fixation.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Circumferential spinal fusion with both an interbody graft and posterior pedicle screw-rod construct has been advocated to decrease pseudarthrosis rates. Both PLIF and TLIF theoretically allow for 3-column fixation and fusion.

METHODS

Specimens underwent either PLIF or TLIF at L2-L3 (single-level) and L3-L4 (2-level), both with and without pedicle screw instrumentation. During TLIF, an interbody allograft was placed in the anterior or middle column. Nondestructive, nonconstraining pure moment loading was applied to each specimen.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in the range of motion after either PLIF or TLIF at 1 level. The addition of pedicle screws tended more strongly to increase rigidity after 1-level PLIF compared to TLIF. Position of the TLIF graft did not affect stability. The addition of pedicle screws to a 2-level construct significantly reduced all motions tested.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on our findings, posterior fixation with a pedicle screw-rod construct is suggested for 1-level PLIF and TLIF, and is necessary to achieve stability after interbody fusion across 2 levels using either technique.

摘要

研究设计

人体尸体脊柱的生物力学实验室研究。

目的

确定在有或没有后路固定的情况下,1节段和2节段后路腰椎椎间融合术(PLIF)与经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术(TLIF)之间急性稳定性的差异。

背景资料总结

提倡采用椎间植骨和后路椎弓根螺钉-棒结构进行环形脊柱融合术以降低假关节形成率。理论上,PLIF和TLIF都可实现三柱固定和融合。

方法

标本在L2-L3(单节段)和L3-L4(2节段)接受PLIF或TLIF手术,均有或没有椎弓根螺钉内固定。在TLIF手术中,将同种异体椎间植骨置于前柱或中柱。对每个标本施加非破坏性、无约束的纯弯矩载荷。

结果

单节段PLIF或TLIF术后的活动范围无显著差异。与TLIF相比,单节段PLIF术后增加椎弓根螺钉更倾向于增强刚性。TLIF植骨的位置不影响稳定性。在双节段结构中增加椎弓根螺钉可显著减少所有测试的运动。

结论

根据我们的研究结果,建议对单节段PLIF和TLIF采用椎弓根螺钉-棒结构进行后路固定,并且对于使用任何一种技术进行双节段椎间融合术后实现稳定性而言都是必要的。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验