Suppr超能文献

经单通道入路行椎体盾牌成形术与经皮椎体成形术和球囊椎体后凸成形术治疗骨质疏松性胸腰椎骨折的前瞻性随机研究。

Shield kyphoplasty through a unipedicular approach compared to vertebroplasty and balloon kyphoplasty in osteoporotic thoracolumbar fracture: a prospective randomized study.

机构信息

Orthopedic and Traumatic Surgery Department, Elisabeth-Klinik, Bigge/Olsberg Sauerland Joint, endoprosthesis and spinal surgery center, Bigge, Heinrich-Sommerstrasse 4, 59939 Olsberg, Germany.

出版信息

Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2012 May;98(3):334-40. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2011.11.010. Epub 2012 Mar 31.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Currently, there are no clinical studies comparing different cement augmentation methods, and no clinical observational studies of a unipedicular approach. DESIGN, PATIENTS, INTERVENTIONS, MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: The present study compared three commercially available vertebral augmentation systems: balloon kyphoplasty, vertebroplasty and shield kyphoplasty. The primary objective was to assess change in subjective severity of backache on a visual analog scale (VAS) and subjective improvement in quality of life on the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), at a mean 6 months post-surgery. The secondary objective was to analyze current radiological imaging (X-ray, and in some cases CT) with regard to height restoration, cement distribution and leakage and recurrent fracture.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up was 5.8 months. Mean preoperative Beck vertebral height index did not significantly differ between the three augmentation system groups (P>0.05). Comparing surgery time, fluoroscopy time and dose-area-product (cGy × cm(2)) showed a statistically significant difference (P<0.01) in favor of the vertebroplasty technique. Augmentation provided significant improvement in VAS pain assessment, but with no significant difference between augmentation systems. Results on the ODI were less pronounced, with significant improvement of 22% to 45%, but again without significant difference between augmentation systems.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, apart from mostly asymptomatic cement leakage, vertebroplasty could be considered as the surgical procedure of choice.

摘要

目的

目前尚无比较不同骨水泥增强方法的临床研究,也无单侧入路的临床观察研究。

设计、患者、干预措施、主要观察指标:本研究比较了三种市售的椎体增强系统:球囊扩张椎体后凸成形术、经皮椎体成形术和盾形椎体后凸成形术。主要目的是评估术后平均 6 个月时视觉模拟量表(VAS)上腰痛主观严重程度的变化和 Oswestry 残疾指数(ODI)上主观生活质量的改善。次要目的是分析当前的影像学(X 线,在某些情况下为 CT),包括高度恢复、水泥分布和渗漏以及复发性骨折。

结果

平均随访时间为 5.8 个月。三组增强系统的术前 Beck 椎体高度指数均无显著差异(P>0.05)。比较手术时间、透视时间和剂量面积乘积(cGy×cm(2)),经皮椎体成形术技术具有统计学显著差异(P<0.01)。增强治疗在 VAS 疼痛评估方面提供了显著的改善,但增强系统之间没有显著差异。ODI 的结果不那么明显,改善幅度为 22%至 45%,但增强系统之间也没有显著差异。

结论

总的来说,除了大多数无症状的水泥渗漏外,经皮椎体成形术可以被认为是首选的手术方法。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验