Department of Neurosurgery, Harvard Medical School, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
St. Louis Minimally Invasive Spine Center, St. Louis, Missouri.
Neurosurgery. 2019 Jan 1;84(1):E59-E62. doi: 10.1093/neuros/nyy364.
Treatment of thoracolumbar burst fractures has traditionally involved spinal instrumentation with fusion performed with standard open surgical techniques. Novel surgical strategies, including instrumentation without fusion and percutaneous instrumentation alone, have been considered less invasive and more efficient treatments.
To review the current literature and determine the role of fusion in instrumented fixation, as well as the role of percutaneous instrumentation, in the treatment of patients with thoracolumbar burst fractures.
The task force members identified search terms/parameters and a medical librarian implemented the literature search, consistent with the literature search protocol (see Appendix I), using the National Library of Medicine PubMed database and the Cochrane Library for the period from January 1, 1946 to March 31, 2015.
A total of 906 articles were identified and 38 were selected for full-text review. Of these articles, 12 articles met criteria for inclusion in this systematic review.
There is grade A evidence for the omission of fusion in instrumented fixation for thoracolumbar burst fractures. There is grade B evidence that percutaneous instrumentation is as effective as open instrumentation for thoracolumbar burst fractures.
Does the addition of arthrodesis to instrumented fixation improve outcomes in patients with thoracic and lumbar burst fractures?
It is recommended that in the surgical treatment of patients with thoracolumbar burst fractures, surgeons should understand that the addition of arthrodesis to instrumented stabilization has not been shown to impact clinical or radiological outcomes, and adds to increased blood loss and operative time. Strength of Recommendation: Grade A.
How does the use of minimally invasive techniques (including percutaneous instrumentation) affect outcomes in patients undergoing surgery for thoracic and lumbar fractures compared to conventional open techniques?
Stabilization using both open and percutaneous pedicle screws may be considered in the treatment of thoracolumbar burst fractures as the evidence suggests equivalent clinical outcomes. Strength of Recommendation: Grade B The full version of the guideline can be reviewed at: https://www.cns.org/guideline-chapters/congress-neurological-surgeons-systematic-review-evidence-based-guidelines/chapter_12.
胸腰椎爆裂骨折的传统治疗方法是采用脊柱内固定器,并结合标准的开放式手术技术进行融合。新型手术策略,包括不融合和单纯经皮内固定器,被认为是一种更具侵入性和更有效的治疗方法。
回顾当前文献,确定融合在器械固定中的作用,以及经皮器械在治疗胸腰椎爆裂骨折患者中的作用。
专家组确定了搜索词/参数,医学图书馆员根据文献搜索协议(见附录 I),使用美国国立医学图书馆 PubMed 数据库和 Cochrane 图书馆,对 1946 年 1 月 1 日至 2015 年 3 月 31 日期间的文献进行了搜索。
共检索到 906 篇文章,其中 38 篇文章进行了全文审查。这些文章中,有 12 篇文章符合本系统综述的纳入标准。
有 A 级证据表明,在胸腰椎爆裂骨折的器械固定中,融合可以被省略。有 B 级证据表明,经皮器械与开放器械治疗胸腰椎爆裂骨折同样有效。
在胸腰椎爆裂骨折的手术治疗中,关节融合术的加入是否能改善患者的预后?
在胸腰椎爆裂骨折患者的手术治疗中,外科医生应认识到,在器械固定的基础上增加关节融合并不能改善临床或影像学结果,反而会增加出血量和手术时间。
A级。
与传统的开放式技术相比,微创技术(包括经皮器械)的使用如何影响胸腰椎骨折患者的预后?
在胸腰椎爆裂骨折的治疗中,可以考虑使用开放和经皮椎弓根螺钉固定,因为证据表明这两种方法的临床结果相当。
B 级。