Yu Shang-Won, Yang Shih-Chieh, Ma Ching-Hou, Wu Chin-Hsien, Yen Cheng-Yo, Tu Yuan-Kun
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, E-Da Hospital/I-Shou University, 1, E-Da Road, Jiau-Shu Tsuen, Yan-Chau Shiang 824, Kaohsiung County, Taiwan, Republic of China.
Acta Orthop Belg. 2012 Apr;78(2):230-9.
The aim of this prospective randomized study was to compare the radiological and clinical outcome after treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis L4L5 with or without spondylolisthesis, with either posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) (26 patients) or Dynesys posterior stabilization (27 patients). Demographic characteristics were comparable in both groups. Dynesys stabilization resulted in significantly higher preservation of motion at the index level (p < 0.001), and significantly less (p < 0.05) hypermobility at the adjacent segments. Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and VAS for back and leg pain improved significantly (p < 0.05) with both methods, but there was no significant difference between groups. Operation time, blood loss, and length of hospital stay were all significantly (p < 0.001) less in the Dynesys group. The latter benefits may be of particular importance for elderly patients, or those with significant comorbidities. Complications were comparable in both groups. Dynesys posterior stabilization was effective for treating spinal stenosis L4L5 with or without spondylolisthesis.
这项前瞻性随机研究的目的是比较后路腰椎椎间融合术(PLIF)(26例患者)或Dynesys后路稳定术(27例患者)治疗伴有或不伴有椎体滑脱的L4-L5腰椎管狭窄症后的影像学和临床结果。两组的人口统计学特征具有可比性。Dynesys稳定术在目标节段导致显著更高的运动保留率(p<0.001),并且在相邻节段的活动度过大显著更少(p<0.05)。两种方法的Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)以及背部和腿部疼痛的视觉模拟评分(VAS)均显著改善(p<0.05),但两组之间无显著差异。Dynesys组的手术时间、失血量和住院时间均显著更少(p<0.001)。后一种益处对于老年患者或患有严重合并症的患者可能尤为重要。两组的并发症具有可比性。Dynesys后路稳定术治疗伴有或不伴有椎体滑脱的L4-L5椎管狭窄症有效。