• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

微创与标准开放后路腰椎椎间融合术之间的生化反应比较。

Comparison of biochemical response between the minimally invasive and standard open posterior lumbar interbody fusion.

作者信息

Linzer Petr, Filip Michal, Jurek Patrik, Šálek Tomáš, Gajdoš Miroslav, Jarkovský Jiří

机构信息

Department of Neurosurgery, Bata Hospital, Zlín, Czech Republic.

Department of Neurosurgery, Bata Hospital, Zlín, Czech Republic.

出版信息

Neurol Neurochir Pol. 2016;50(1):16-23. doi: 10.1016/j.pjnns.2015.10.008. Epub 2015 Nov 6.

DOI:10.1016/j.pjnns.2015.10.008
PMID:26851685
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The mini-invasive open posterior lumbar fusion procedure (mini PLIF) procedure is an alternative to standard open procedure (open PLIF) and is intended to reduce surgery-related trauma. The measuring of suitable biochemical factors enables objective comparison of the invasiveness of spinal surgery procedures.

METHODS

Prospectively collected data on myoglobin, creatine kinase, interleukin-6, C-reactive protein levels and intensity of low back pain and radicular pain in one-level mini PLIF and open PLIF procedures were analysed. The mini PLIF and the open PLIF groups included 27 and 23 patients, respectively. The collection of blood samples and clinical data were performed preoperatively and on postoperative days 1, 3 and 7. The non-paired t-test was used for statistical evaluation.

RESULTS

We did not found any statistically significant differences of myoglobin and creatine kinase levels between the groups. In the open PLIF group the IL-6 levels were significantly higher than in the mini PLIF group on postoperative day 3. CRP levels showed significant lower stress response in favour of the mini PLIF group on postoperative days 3 and 7. Levels of post-op low back pain on day 3 were significantly lower in mini PLIF group. Also intensity of radicular pain on day 1 and 3 were lower also mini PLIF group.

CONCLUSION

The extent of myonecrosis was comparable in both techniques. The analysis of the IL-6 and CRP levels showed significantly lower systemic inflammatory response in mini PLIF technique. The mini PLIF technique provides transiently lower postoperative pain levels.

摘要

背景

微创开放式后路腰椎融合术(mini PLIF)是标准开放式手术(开放式PLIF)的替代方案,旨在减少与手术相关的创伤。测量合适的生化因子能够客观比较脊柱手术的侵袭性。

方法

对前瞻性收集的关于单节段mini PLIF和开放式PLIF手术中肌红蛋白、肌酸激酶、白细胞介素-6、C反应蛋白水平以及腰痛和神经根性疼痛强度的数据进行分析。mini PLIF组和开放式PLIF组分别包括27例和23例患者。术前以及术后第1、3和7天采集血样和临床数据。采用非配对t检验进行统计学评估。

结果

我们未发现两组之间肌红蛋白和肌酸激酶水平有任何统计学上的显著差异。在开放式PLIF组中,术后第3天的IL-6水平显著高于mini PLIF组。在术后第3天和第7天,CRP水平显示mini PLIF组的应激反应明显较低。mini PLIF组术后第3天的腰痛水平显著较低。mini PLIF组术后第1天和第3天的神经根性疼痛强度也较低。

结论

两种技术的肌坏死程度相当。对IL-6和CRP水平的分析显示,mini PLIF技术的全身炎症反应明显较低。mini PLIF技术术后疼痛水平暂时较低。

相似文献

1
Comparison of biochemical response between the minimally invasive and standard open posterior lumbar interbody fusion.微创与标准开放后路腰椎椎间融合术之间的生化反应比较。
Neurol Neurochir Pol. 2016;50(1):16-23. doi: 10.1016/j.pjnns.2015.10.008. Epub 2015 Nov 6.
2
Comparison of serum markers for muscle damage, surgical blood loss, postoperative recovery, and surgical site pain after extreme lateral interbody fusion with percutaneous pedicle screws or traditional open posterior lumbar interbody fusion.经皮椎弓根螺钉极外侧椎间融合术与传统开放性后路腰椎椎间融合术后肌肉损伤、手术失血、术后恢复及手术部位疼痛的血清标志物比较
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2017 Oct 16;18(1):415. doi: 10.1186/s12891-017-1775-y.
3
Comparison of Biochemical Markers of Muscle Damage and Inflammatory Response Between the Open Discectomy, Microsurgical Discectomy, and Microsurgical Discectomy Using Tubular Retractor.开放式椎间盘切除术、显微外科椎间盘切除术和使用管状牵开器的显微外科椎间盘切除术之间肌肉损伤和炎症反应的生化标志物比较
J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg. 2015 Sep;76(5):384-91. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1393929. Epub 2015 May 29.
4
Mini-open versus conventional open posterior lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis: comparison of paraspinal muscle damage and slip reduction.微创与传统开放后路腰椎体间融合术治疗腰椎退行性滑脱:椎旁肌损伤和滑脱复位的比较。
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009 Aug 15;34(18):1923-8. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181a9d28e.
5
Comparison of one-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion performed with a minimally invasive approach or a traditional open approach.采用微创方法或传统开放方法进行单节段腰椎后路椎间融合术的比较。
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007 Mar 1;32(5):537-43. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000256473.49791.f4.
6
Intramuscular pressure of the multifidus muscle and low-back pain after posterior lumbar interbody fusion: comparison of mini-open and conventional approaches.多裂肌肌内压与后路腰椎间融合术后腰痛:微创与传统入路的比较。
J Neurosurg Spine. 2013 Dec;19(6):651-7. doi: 10.3171/2013.8.SPINE13183. Epub 2013 Sep 27.
7
The quantitative analysis of tissue injury markers after mini-open lumbar fusion.微创腰椎融合术后组织损伤标志物的定量分析
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006 Mar 15;31(6):712-6. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000202533.05906.ea.
8
Minimally invasive approach versus traditional open approach for one level posterior lumbar interbody fusion.单节段腰椎后路椎间融合术的微创入路与传统开放入路对比
Minim Invasive Neurosurg. 2010 Feb;53(1):21-4. doi: 10.1055/s-0030-1247560. Epub 2010 Apr 7.
9
Minimally invasive percutaneous posterior lumbar interbody fusion.微创经皮后路腰椎椎间融合术
Neurosurgery. 2002 Nov;51(5 Suppl):S166-81.
10
Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of degenerative lumbar diseases.经皮椎间孔入路腰椎间融合术治疗退变性腰椎疾病。
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010 Aug 1;35(17):1615-20. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181c70fe3.

引用本文的文献

1
Safety of a novel modular cage for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion - clinical cohort study in 20 patients with degenerative disc disease.一种新型模块化椎间融合器用于经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术的安全性——20例退变性椎间盘疾病患者的临床队列研究
SICOT J. 2018;4:24. doi: 10.1051/sicotj/2018019. Epub 2018 Jun 29.