Departments of Orthopaedic Surgery, Wooridul Spine Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011 Feb 1;36(3):E172-8. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181db998c.
A retrospective review of clinical and radiographic data was performed at a single institution.
To compare clinical and radiologic outcomes between unilateral and bilateral laminotomies for bilateral decompression in patients with L4–L5 spinal stenosis.
Laminotomy has been shown to be comparable with laminectomy with the advantage of potentially maintaining more stability by preserving more of the osseous structures. However, the comparison between unilateral and bilateral laminotomies is available only for short-term follow-up.
Fifty-three patients at one institution having decompressive surgery for L4–L5 spinal stenosis, including grade 1 degenerative spondylolisthesis without instability, were entered into this study with a minimum of 3-year follow-up. Clinical outcomes were assessed with visual analog scale for back and leg pain and the Oswestry disability index. Radiographic measurements were performed and included translational motion, angular motion, and epidural cross-sectional area.
The average age of the patients was 62.4 years (range: 31–82). The mean follow-up period was 49.3 months (range: 40–61). Clinical outcomes and complication rates were similar in both groups. Intraoperative blood loss and operative time were less in the unilateral laminotomy group. Radiographically, the amount of increased translational motion was significantly increased in the bilateral laminotomy group (P 0.012), but the amount of increased angular motion was not significantly different (P 0.195) between the two groups. Postoperative radiographic instability was detected more frequently in bilateral laminotomy group than in the unilateral group, without statistical significance.
Both unilateral and bilateral laminotomies provide sufficient decompression of spinal stenosis and excellent pain reduction. However, unilateral laminotomy can be performed with shorter operative times and less blood loss. Radiologically, the use of a unilateral laminotomy induces less translational motion increase after surgery; thus, it may reduce the risk of late instability when compared with a bilateral laminotomy.
对一家机构的临床和影像学数据进行回顾性分析。
比较单侧和双侧椎板切开术治疗 L4-L5 椎管狭窄症双侧减压的临床和影像学结果。
椎板切开术已被证明与椎板切除术相当,其优势在于通过保留更多的骨性结构,可能保持更高的稳定性。然而,单侧和双侧椎板切开术之间的比较仅适用于短期随访。
一家机构的 53 例 L4-L5 椎管狭窄症减压手术患者,包括无不稳定的 1 级退行性脊椎滑脱,至少随访 3 年,纳入本研究。临床结果采用视觉模拟评分法(VAS)评估腰痛和腿痛,采用 Oswestry 残疾指数(ODI)评估。进行影像学测量,包括平移运动、角运动和硬膜外横截面积。
患者平均年龄为 62.4 岁(范围:31-82 岁)。平均随访时间为 49.3 个月(范围:40-61 个月)。两组的临床结果和并发症发生率相似。单侧椎板切开组术中出血量和手术时间较少。影像学上,双侧椎板切开组的平移运动增加量明显增加(P 0.012),但两组的角运动增加量无显著差异(P 0.195)。双侧椎板切开组术后放射学不稳定的检出率高于单侧组,但无统计学意义。
单侧和双侧椎板切开术均可充分减压椎管狭窄,减轻疼痛。然而,单侧椎板切开术的手术时间和出血量更少。影像学上,单侧椎板切开术后的平移运动增加量较小,与双侧椎板切开术相比,可能降低晚期不稳定的风险。