Suppr超能文献

微创与开放经椎间孔腰椎体间融合术治疗肥胖患者的临床疗效比较。

Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: comparison of clinical outcomes among obese patients.

机构信息

Department of Neurosurgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan;

出版信息

J Neurosurg Spine. 2014 Jun;20(6):644-52. doi: 10.3171/2014.2.SPINE13794. Epub 2014 Apr 18.

Abstract

OBJECT

Minimally invasive (MI) transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) has been demonstrated in previous studies to offer improvement in pain and function comparable to those provided by the open surgical approach. However, comparative studies in the obese population are scarce, and it is possible that obese patients may respond differently to these two approaches. In this study, the authors compared the clinical benefit of open and MI TLIF in obese patients.

METHODS

The authors conducted a retrospective cohort study based on review of electronic medical records at a single institution. Eligible patients had a body mass index (BMI) ≥ 30 kg/m(2), were ≥ 18 years of age, underwent single-level TLIF between 2007 and 2011, and outcome was assessed at a minimum 6 months postoperatively. The authors categorized patients according to surgical approach (open vs MI TLIF). Outcome measures included postoperative improvement in visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), estimated blood loss (EBL), and hospital length of stay (LOS).

RESULTS

A total 74 patients (21 open and 53 MI TLIF) were studied. Groups had similar baseline characteristics. The median BMI was 34.4 kg/m(2) (interquartile range 31.6-37.5 kg/m(2)). The mean follow-up time was 30 months (range 6.5-77 months). The mean improvement in VAS score was 2.8 (95% CI 1.9-3.8) for the open group (n = 21) and 2.4 (95% CI 1.8-3.1) for the MI group (n = 53), which did not significantly differ (unadjusted, p = 0.49; adjusted, p = 0.51). The mean improvement in ODI scores was 13 (95% CI 3-23) for the open group (n = 14) and 15 (95% CI 8-22) for the MI group (n = 45), with no significant difference according to approach (unadjusted, p = 0.82; adjusted, p = 0.68). After stratifying by BMI (< 35 kg/m(2) and ≥ 35 kg/m(2)), there was still no difference in either VAS or ODI improvement between the approaches (both unadjusted and adjusted, p > 0.05). Complications and EBL were greater for the open group than for the MI group (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Obese patients experienced clinically and statistically significant improvement in both pain and function after undergoing either open or MI TLIF. Patients achieved similar clinical benefit whether they underwent an open or MI approach. However, patients in the MI group experienced significantly decreased operative blood loss and complications than their counterparts in the open group.

摘要

目的

微创(MI)经椎间孔腰椎体间融合术(TLIF)在先前的研究中已被证实可提供与开放手术相当的疼痛和功能改善。然而,肥胖人群中的对比研究很少,肥胖患者可能对这两种方法的反应不同。在这项研究中,作者比较了肥胖患者中开放和 MI TLIF 的临床获益。

方法

作者基于单一机构的电子病历回顾进行了回顾性队列研究。合格的患者 BMI≥30kg/m²,年龄≥18 岁,在 2007 年至 2011 年间接受单节段 TLIF,术后至少 6 个月进行评估。作者根据手术方法(开放与 MI TLIF)对患者进行分类。主要结果包括术后视觉模拟量表(VAS)、Oswestry 残疾指数(ODI)、估计失血量(EBL)和住院时间(LOS)的改善。

结果

共纳入 74 例患者(21 例开放 TLIF 和 53 例 MI TLIF)。两组基线特征相似。中位 BMI 为 34.4kg/m²(四分位距 31.6-37.5kg/m²)。平均随访时间为 30 个月(6.5-77 个月)。开放组(n=21)VAS 评分平均改善 2.8(95%CI 1.9-3.8),MI 组(n=53)平均改善 2.4(95%CI 1.8-3.1),差异无统计学意义(未调整,p=0.49;调整,p=0.51)。开放组(n=14)ODI 评分平均改善 13(95%CI 3-23),MI 组(n=45)平均改善 15(95%CI 8-22),两组之间无显著差异(未调整,p=0.82;调整,p=0.68)。根据 BMI(<35kg/m²和≥35kg/m²)分层后,两种方法在 VAS 或 ODI 改善方面仍无差异(未调整和调整后,p>0.05)。开放组的并发症和 EBL 均大于 MI 组(p<0.05)。

结论

肥胖患者接受开放或 MI TLIF 后,疼痛和功能均有显著的临床和统计学改善。患者无论接受开放还是 MI 方法都获得了相似的临床获益。然而,MI 组患者的手术失血量和并发症明显少于开放组。

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