Murakami Eiichi, Kurosawa Daisuke, Aizawa Toshimi
1Department of Orthopaedic Surgery/Low Back Pain and Sacroiliac Joint Center, JCHO Sendai Hospital; and.
2Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Tohoku University School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan.
J Neurosurg Spine. 2018 Sep;29(3):279-285. doi: 10.3171/2018.1.SPINE17115. Epub 2018 Jun 22.
OBJECTIVE The authors evaluated the outcomes of sacroiliac joint (SIJ) arthrodesis via an original anterior approach to the upper anterior surface of the SIJ in patients with a minimum of 5 years' follow-up. METHODS The authors performed anterior SIJ arthrodesis in 45 patients between 2001 and 2015. Of these patients, 27 (11 men and 16 women; mean age at surgery 49 [24-86] years) were followed up for a minimum of 5 years (average 113 months, range 61-157 months). In the 14 patients in the earlier period of this study, the authors used an anterior approach to expose the SIJ by separating the iliac muscle from the iliac bone and performed internal fixation. In the 13 patients later in the study, the authors changed to a pararectal approach, which involved an incision along the lateral border of the rectus abdominal muscle. Then, extraperitoneally, the upper anterior surface of the SIJ was exposed between the psoas major muscle and the iliac muscle. RESULTS Among the 27 patients, 21 had unilateral anterior arthrodesis alone, 4 required additional posterior arthrodesis, and 2 required pelvic ring arthrodesis because of later pain on the opposite side. In the 21 patients with a unilateral anterior arthrodesis, outcome according to the modified Macnab criteria was excellent in 7, good in 11, and fair in 3. Outcomes were excellent, good, fair, and poor in 1 patient each among the 4 with additional posterior fusion. Outcomes were good and poor for 1 patient each among those with pelvic ring arthrodesis. All 27 patients demonstrated bone union of the SIJ on CT. Lateral femoral cutaneous neuralgia developed in 7 of the 27 patients; 6 patients had undergone the initial anterior method and 1 the later method. CONCLUSIONS Anterior SIJ arthrodesis was effective in most patients with severe SIJ pain resistant to conservative therapy. This approach has the advantage of direct curettage and bone graft into the wide area of the SIJ, which result in good bone union. In particular, the authors' current pararectal approach could decrease the potential risk of lateral cutaneous injury.
作者评估了通过一种新颖的前路方法对骶髂关节(SIJ)上前表面进行关节融合术的疗效,对患者进行了至少5年的随访。方法:作者在2001年至2015年间对45例患者实施了前路骶髂关节融合术。其中,27例(11例男性和16例女性;手术时平均年龄49[24 - 86]岁)接受了至少5年的随访(平均113个月,范围61 - 157个月)。在本研究早期的14例患者中,作者采用前路方法,通过将髂肌与髂骨分离来暴露骶髂关节并进行内固定。在研究后期的13例患者中,作者改为直肠旁入路,即沿腹直肌外侧缘做切口。然后,在腹膜外,在腰大肌和髂肌之间暴露骶髂关节的上前表面。结果:27例患者中,21例仅进行了单侧前路关节融合术,4例需要额外的后路关节融合术,2例因对侧后期疼痛需要进行骨盆环关节融合术。在21例单侧前路关节融合术患者中,根据改良Macnab标准,结果为优的有7例,良的有11例,可的有3例。在4例额外进行后路融合的患者中,结果分别为优、良、可、差各1例。在进行骨盆环关节融合术的患者中,结果分别为良和差各1例。所有27例患者在CT上均显示骶髂关节骨融合。27例患者中有7例发生股外侧皮神经痛;6例采用了最初的前路方法,1例采用了后期的方法。结论:前路骶髂关节融合术对大多数保守治疗无效的严重骶髂关节疼痛患者有效。这种方法具有直接刮除和向骶髂关节广泛区域植骨的优点,从而实现良好的骨融合。特别是,作者目前的直肠旁入路可以降低外侧皮肤损伤的潜在风险。