Aihara Takato, Toyone Tomoaki, Murata Yasuaki, Inage Kazuhide, Urushibara Makoto, Ouchi Juntaro
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Funabashi Orthopedic Hospital, Funabashi, Japan.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, School of Medicine, Showa University, Tokyo, Japan.
Asian Spine J. 2018 Feb;12(1):132-139. doi: 10.4184/asj.2018.12.1.132. Epub 2018 Feb 7.
Retrospective review of prospectively collected outcome data.
To compare 5-year outcomes following decompression with fusion (FU) and microendoscopic decompression (MED) in patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) and to define surgical indication limitations regarding the use of MED for this condition.
There have been no comparative studies on mid- or long-term outcomes following FU and MED for patients with DLS.
Forty-one consecutive patients with DLS were surgically treated. Sixteen patients first underwent FU (FU group), and 25 then underwent MED (MED group). The 5-year clinical outcomes following the two surgical methods were compared using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire.
The degree of improvement (DOI) for social life function was significantly greater in the MED group than in the FU group. Although not statistically significant, DOIs for the other four functional scores were also greater in the MED group than in the FU group. However, patients with a large percentage of slippage in the neutral position might experience limited improvement in low back pain, those with a large percentage of slippage at maximal extension might experience limited improvement in three functional scores, and those with a small intervertebral angle at maximal flexion might have limited improvement in three functional scores after MED for DLS. Therefore, we statistically compared the DOIs between the FU and MED groups regarding the preoperative percentage of slippage in the neutral position among patients with greater than 20% slippage, the preoperative percentage of slippage at maximal extension among patients with greater than 15% slippage, and the intervertebral angle at flexion among patients with angles lesser than -5°; however, there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups.
MED is a useful minimally invasive surgical procedure that possibly offers better clinical outcomes than FU for DLS.
对前瞻性收集的结果数据进行回顾性分析。
比较退行性腰椎滑脱症(DLS)患者减压融合术(FU)与显微内镜下减压术(MED)后的5年疗效,并确定MED用于该病症的手术适应症限制。
尚无关于DLS患者FU和MED术后中长期疗效的比较研究。
对41例连续的DLS患者进行手术治疗。16例患者首先接受FU(FU组),25例随后接受MED(MED组)。使用日本骨科协会背痛评估问卷比较两种手术方法后的5年临床疗效。
MED组社会生活功能的改善程度(DOI)显著高于FU组。尽管其他四个功能评分的DOI在MED组中也高于FU组,但差异无统计学意义。然而,中立位滑脱百分比大的患者腰痛改善可能有限,最大伸展位滑脱百分比大的患者三个功能评分改善可能有限,最大屈曲位椎间角小的患者MED治疗DLS后三个功能评分改善可能有限。因此,我们对滑脱大于20%的患者中立位术前滑脱百分比、滑脱大于15%的患者最大伸展位术前滑脱百分比以及椎间角小于-5°的患者屈曲位椎间角的FU组和MED组DOI进行了统计学比较;然而,两组之间无统计学显著差异。
MED是一种有用的微创手术,对于DLS可能比FU提供更好的临床疗效。