Lee Nam, Kim Keung Nyun, Yi Seong, Ha Yoon, Shin Dong Ah, Yoon Do Heum, Kim Keun Su
Department of Neurosurgery, Spine and Spinal Cord Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Department of Neurosurgery, Spine and Spinal Cord Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
World Neurosurg. 2017 May;101:216-226. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2017.01.114. Epub 2017 Feb 9.
The fusion rate in spinal surgery may vary in relation to the technique, and it remains unknown which surgical technique provides the best fusion rate and surgical outcome. We aimed to compare radiologic and surgical results between 3 surgical techniques used for lumbar interbody fusion.
Participants included 77 patients diagnosed with degenerative spinal stenosis including spondylolytic spondylolisthesis. Patients were divided into 3 groups according to surgical technique: anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF, n = 26), transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF, n = 21), and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF, n = 30). Various radiologic parameters were measured, including fusion rates.
Significant changes after surgery were observed in the ALIF group for the percentage of vertebral body slippage, anterior disk height, posterior disk height, and segmental range of movement (ROM). The fusion rate on computed tomography (CT) scan at the final follow-up was 69.2% in the ALIF group, 72.7% in the TLIF group, and 64.3% in the PLIF group. The cage subsidence rate 2 years after surgery was 15.4% in the ALIF group, 38.1% in the TLIF group, and 10% in the PLIF group.
ALIF was associated with better restoration of segmental lordosis. The fusion rate on CT scan and with segmental ROM did not differ between the 3 groups. TLIF was associated with a better postoperative visual analog scale. PLIF showed the lowest cage subsidence rate. Therefore, it is difficult to know which surgical technique is better among the 3 groups because each surgical method has its own advantages.
脊柱手术中的融合率可能因技术不同而有所差异,目前尚不清楚哪种手术技术能提供最佳的融合率和手术效果。我们旨在比较用于腰椎椎间融合的三种手术技术的影像学和手术结果。
参与者包括77例诊断为退行性腰椎管狭窄症(包括峡部裂性腰椎滑脱)的患者。根据手术技术将患者分为3组:前路腰椎椎间融合术(ALIF,n = 26)、经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术(TLIF,n = 21)和后路腰椎椎间融合术(PLIF,n = 30)。测量了包括融合率在内的各种影像学参数。
ALIF组术后椎体滑移百分比、前椎间盘高度、后椎间盘高度和节段活动范围(ROM)有显著变化。末次随访时,ALIF组计算机断层扫描(CT)的融合率为69.2%,TLIF组为72.7%,PLIF组为64.3%。术后2年,ALIF组椎间融合器下沉率为15.4%,TLIF组为38.1%,PLIF组为10%。
ALIF与节段性前凸的更好恢复相关。三组之间CT扫描的融合率和节段ROM无差异。TLIF与术后更好的视觉模拟评分相关。PLIF显示椎间融合器下沉率最低。因此,很难说这三种手术技术中哪种更好,因为每种手术方法都有其自身的优势。