Diniz Juliete M, Botelho Ricardo V
Department of Neurosurgery, Hospital do Servidor Público Estadual-IAMSPE, São Paulo, Brazil.
J Neurosurg Spine. 2017 Nov;27(5):584-592. doi: 10.3171/2017.1.SPINE161014. Epub 2017 Aug 4.
OBJECTIVE Thoracolumbar fractures account for 90% of spinal fractures, with the burst subtype corresponding to 20% of this total. Controversy regarding the best treatment for this condition remains. The traditional surgical approach, when indicated, involves spinal fixation and arthrodesis. Newer studies have brought the need for fusion associated with internal fixation into question. Not performing arthrodesis could reduce surgical time and intraoperative bleeding without affecting clinical and radiological outcomes. With this study, the authors aimed to assess the effect of fusion, adjuvant to internal fixation, on surgically treated thoracolumbar burst fractures. METHODS A search of the Medline and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases was performed to identify randomized trials that compared the use and nonuse of arthrodesis in association with internal fixation for the treatment of thoracolumbar burst fractures. The search encompassed all data in these databases up to February 28, 2016. RESULTS Five randomized/quasi-randomized trials, which involved a total of 220 patients and an average follow-up time of 69.1 months, were included in this review. No significant difference between groups in the final scores of the visual analog pain scale or Low Back Outcome Scale was detected. Surgical time and blood loss were significantly lower in the group of patients who did not undergo fusion (p < 0.05). Among the evaluated radiological outcomes, greater mobility in the affected segment was found in the group of those who did not undergo fusion. No significant difference between groups in the degree of kyphosis correction, loss of kyphosis correction, or final angle of kyphosis was observed. CONCLUSIONS The data reviewed in this study suggest that the use of arthrodesis did not improve clinical outcomes, but it was associated with increased surgical time and higher intraoperative bleeding and did not promote significant improvement in radiological parameters.
胸腰椎骨折占脊柱骨折的90%,爆裂型骨折占其中的20%。对于这种疾病的最佳治疗方法仍存在争议。传统的手术方法(若有指征)包括脊柱固定和融合术。最新研究对融合术与内固定联合使用的必要性提出了质疑。不进行融合术可减少手术时间和术中出血,且不影响临床和影像学结果。通过本研究,作者旨在评估融合术作为内固定辅助手段对手术治疗胸腰椎爆裂骨折的影响。
检索Medline和Cochrane对照试验中央注册数据库,以确定比较融合术与不使用融合术联合内固定治疗胸腰椎爆裂骨折的随机试验。检索涵盖了截至2016年2月28日这些数据库中的所有数据。
本综述纳入了5项随机/半随机试验,共涉及220例患者,平均随访时间为69.1个月。在视觉模拟疼痛量表或下腰痛结果量表的最终评分中,两组之间未检测到显著差异。未进行融合术的患者组手术时间和失血量显著更低(p<0.05)。在评估的影像学结果中,未进行融合术的患者组受累节段的活动度更大。在后凸畸形矫正程度、后凸畸形矫正丢失或最终后凸角方面,两组之间未观察到显著差异。
本研究回顾的数据表明,使用融合术并未改善临床结果,但与手术时间延长和术中出血增加相关,且未促进影像学参数的显著改善。