Goodarzi Amir, Clouse Jared, Capizzano Tatiana, Kim Kee D, Panchal Ripul
Neurological Surgery, University of California Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, USA.
Neurological Surgery, University of California Davis School of Medicine, Sacramento, USA.
Cureus. 2020 Feb 23;12(2):e7084. doi: 10.7759/cureus.7084.
Objective Traditionally, laminectomy has been the preferred surgical approach for the resection of intradural spinal tumors. Recent trends towards minimally invasive techniques have generated interest in hemilaminectomy as an effective alternative surgical approach to resect spinal tumors. However, it remains unclear if the potential benefits of hemilaminectomies, used in other routine spinal procedures, apply to intradural spinal tumors. This report presents a six-year single institutional analysis of open resection of intradural tumors using laminectomies as compared to hemilaminectomies. Methods A single institution, multisurgeon, retrospective review of 52 patients undergoing resection of intradural spinal tumors over a six-year period was performed. Estimated blood loss, operative time, post-operative complications, length of stay, and post-operative clinical spinal instability were analyzed and compared between the two surgical techniques. Results The mean follow-up was 34 and 20 months for the laminectomy and hemilaminectomy groups, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in operative times between the two groups (hemilaminectomy: 250.13±76.44 minutes, laminectomy: 244.49±92.85 minutes; p=0.43). Similarly, there was no difference in overall estimated blood loss (hemilaminectomy: 125±74 cc, laminectomy: 256.05±320.8 cc; p=0.27) or mean hospital length of stay (hemilaminectomy: 4.00±2.12 days, laminectomy: 5.26±3.0 days; p=0.60). No patient in either surgical group had post-operative evidence of clinical spinal instability. Conclusion Hemilaminectomy is a viable approach for the resection of intradural spinal tumors, with similar rates of post-operative complications to laminectomy when using an open surgical approach. The laminectomy allows for bilateral exposure of the entire spinal canal and neural foramina; and continues to be the preferred method for resection of large tumors with complex morphology.
目的 传统上,椎板切除术一直是切除硬脊膜内脊髓肿瘤的首选手术方法。近年来,微创技术的发展引发了人们对半椎板切除术作为切除脊髓肿瘤有效替代手术方法的兴趣。然而,半椎板切除术在其他常规脊柱手术中的潜在益处是否适用于硬脊膜内脊髓肿瘤仍不清楚。本报告对使用椎板切除术与半椎板切除术开放切除硬脊膜内肿瘤进行了为期六年的单机构分析。方法 对一家机构的52例在六年期间接受硬脊膜内脊髓肿瘤切除术的患者进行了多外科医生的回顾性研究。分析并比较了两种手术技术的估计失血量、手术时间、术后并发症、住院时间和术后临床脊柱稳定性。结果 椎板切除术组和半椎板切除术组的平均随访时间分别为34个月和20个月。两组手术时间无统计学显著差异(半椎板切除术:250.13±76.44分钟,椎板切除术:244.49±92.85分钟;p=0.43)。同样,总体估计失血量(半椎板切除术:125±74 cc,椎板切除术:256.05±320.8 cc;p=0.27)或平均住院时间(半椎板切除术:4.00±2.12天,椎板切除术:5.26±3.0天;p=0.60)也无差异。两个手术组均无患者术后出现临床脊柱不稳定的证据。结论 半椎板切除术是切除硬脊膜内脊髓肿瘤的可行方法,采用开放手术方法时,其术后并发症发生率与椎板切除术相似。椎板切除术可双侧暴露整个椎管和神经孔;仍然是切除形态复杂大肿瘤的首选方法。