Hallett Alison, Huntley James S, Gibson J N Alastair
Spinal Unit, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, and the University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007 Jun 1;32(13):1375-80. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318064520f.
A randomized controlled trial with 5-year outcome data.
To compare clinical outcomes following spinal decompression (Group 1) with those following decompression and instrumented posterolateral fusion (Group 2) and decompression and instrumented posterolateral fusion plus transforaminal interbody fusion (TLIF) (Group 3).
Decompression is frequently advocated for the relief of nerve root stenosis in the presence of degenerate disc disease. It is uncertain if spinal fusion is also necessary.
Following completion of a standardized physiotherapy program, 44 patients with single-level disc disease were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 surgical groups. In those patients undergoing instrumentation, segmental pedicle screw fixation was used to stabilize the spine. Titanium interbody cages filled with autologous bone were inserted into patients in Group 3. Spinal disability, quality of life, and pain were assessed before surgery, and then at 1, 2, and 5 years by an independent researcher.
At 2 years, 82% of the patients were pain free or moderately improved. Disability (Low Back Outcome Score and Roland Morris index) were both better in Group 1, but only Low Back Outcome Score was better in Group 2 (P < 0.05). By 5 years, although patients in all 3 groups showed some improvements in all the ratings used (Low Back Outcome Score, SF-36 Physical Functioning, and Roland Morris score), only Group 1 patients showed significant changes in all 3 outcomes (P < 0.05). There was no difference in any score between groups (P > 0.05). Two had secondary surgery for adjacent level stenosis (Group 2 and 3). One patient (Group 1) underwent subsequent lateral mass fusion for chronic pain. No patient required revision surgery for instrumentation failure, cage displacement, or pseudarthrosis. Evidence of at least unilateral lateral mass bone graft incorporation was evident in 95% of Groups 2 and 3.
The results are encouraging in that almost all patients had improved by 5 years. However, it is a concern that no significant additional benefit has been noted from the more complex surgery. This suggests that patients are optimally treated by decompression alone, with the proviso that further operations may be required.
一项具有5年随访数据的随机对照试验。
比较单纯脊柱减压手术组(第1组)、减压并后路外侧器械融合组(第2组)以及减压并后路外侧器械融合联合经椎间孔椎间融合术(TLIF)组(第3组)的临床疗效。
对于伴有椎间盘退变疾病的神经根狭窄患者,减压手术常被推荐用于缓解症状。脊柱融合术是否必要尚不明确。
完成标准化物理治疗方案后,44名单节段椎间盘疾病患者被随机分配至3个手术组之一。对于接受内固定手术的患者,采用节段性椎弓根螺钉固定以稳定脊柱。第3组患者植入填充自体骨的钛制椎间融合器。由一名独立研究人员在术前以及术后1年、2年和5年评估患者的脊柱功能障碍、生活质量和疼痛情况。
在2年时,82%的患者疼痛消失或有中度改善。第1组的功能障碍(下腰痛疗效评分和罗兰·莫里斯指数)均更佳,但第2组仅下腰痛疗效评分更佳(P < 0.05)。到5年时,尽管所有3组患者在所有评估指标(下腰痛疗效评分、SF - 36身体功能评分和罗兰·莫里斯评分)上均有一定改善,但只有第1组患者在所有3项指标上有显著变化(P < 0.05)。各组之间在任何评分上均无差异(P > 0.05)。2名患者因相邻节段狭窄接受了二次手术(第2组和第3组各1例)。1名患者(第1组)因慢性疼痛接受了后续的侧块融合手术。没有患者因内固定失败、椎间融合器移位或假关节形成而需要翻修手术。第2组和第3组中95%的患者至少有单侧侧块植骨融合的证据。
结果令人鼓舞,因为几乎所有患者在5年时都有改善。然而,令人担忧的是,更复杂的手术并未带来显著的额外益处。这表明对于患者而言,仅行减压手术可能是最佳治疗方式,但前提是可能需要进一步手术。