Suppr超能文献

经皮椎弓根螺钉固定与皮质骨轨迹经椎间孔融合治疗的临床疗效比较。

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes After Transforaminal Interbody Fusion Using Cortical Bone Trajectory versus Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation.

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hyogo College of Medicine, Nishinomiya, Hyogo, Japan.

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hyogo College of Medicine, Nishinomiya, Hyogo, Japan.

出版信息

World Neurosurg. 2021 Jul;151:e821-e827. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2021.04.130. Epub 2021 May 6.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The study aim was to compare clinical outcomes between patients undergoing transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) using percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) and cortical bone trajectory (CBT) by a single surgeon.

METHODS

This was a retrospective matched-cohort study of 77 patients (mean age, 71.7 years; 56% female) who underwent TLIF using CBT or PPS. Thirty-nine consecutive patients in the CBT group and 38 patients in the PPS group were matched for age, sex, and fused levels. All CBT screws were inserted by using a three-dimensional patient-specific guide (MySpine MC, Medacta). Perioperative outcomes of operative time, estimated blood loss, numeric rating scale scores, and serum concentration of creatine kinase were compared between the 2 groups. At 1 year postoperatively, clinical outcomes and radiographic outcomes, including cage subsidence, screw loosening, and fusion rates, were compared between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

The numeric rating scale scores on postoperative days 3 and 7 and serum creatine kinase levels on postoperative days 1 and 3 were significantly lower in the CBT group than in the PPS group (all P < 0.005). There were no significant intergroup differences in operation time and estimated blood loss. At postoperative 1 year, there were no significant differences in cage subsidence, screw loosening, and fusion rates between the CBT group and PPS group. Clinical outcomes were equivalent between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The CBT technique using three-dimensional patient-specific guides resulted in lower perioperative pain and quicker recovery after surgery, which suggests that CBT is a less invasive procedure than PPS.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在比较同一术者采用经皮椎弓根螺钉(PPS)和皮质骨轨迹(CBT)行经椎间孔腰椎体间融合术(TLIF)的临床疗效。

方法

这是一项回顾性匹配队列研究,纳入了 77 例(平均年龄 71.7 岁,56%为女性)接受 CBT 或 PPS 行 TLIF 的患者。CBT 组 39 例连续患者和 PPS 组 38 例患者按年龄、性别和融合节段匹配。所有 CBT 螺钉均通过三维个体化患者导向器(MySpine MC,Medacta)置入。比较两组患者的手术时间、估计失血量、数字评分量表评分和肌酸激酶血清浓度等围手术期指标。术后 1 年时,比较两组患者的临床和影像学疗效,包括椎间融合器沉降、螺钉松动和融合率。

结果

CBT 组术后第 3、7 天的数字评分量表评分和术后第 1、3 天的肌酸激酶血清水平均显著低于 PPS 组(均 P < 0.005)。两组患者的手术时间和估计失血量无显著差异。术后 1 年时,CBT 组和 PPS 组患者的椎间融合器沉降、螺钉松动和融合率均无显著差异。两组患者的临床疗效相当。

结论

使用三维个体化患者导向器的 CBT 技术可减轻围手术期疼痛并促进术后快速康复,这表明与 PPS 相比,CBT 是一种侵袭性更小的手术方法。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验