Suppr超能文献

经皮多裂肌间隙入路与经椎间孔入路腰椎间融合术治疗退变性腰椎疾病的比较:回顾性放射倾向评分匹配分析。

Comparison of prone transpsoas lateral lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spine disease: A retrospective radiographic propensity score-matched analysis.

机构信息

Department of Neurosurgery, Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences at University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA; Department of Neurosurgery, Buffalo General Medical Center, Kaleida Health, Buffalo, NY, USA; Department of Neurosurgery, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt.

Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences at University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA.

出版信息

Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2022 Feb;213:107105. doi: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2021.107105. Epub 2021 Dec 28.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

This is the first study to compare the prone transpsoas (PTP) approach for lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) through an analysis of radiographic and clinical outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective chart review of data for patients who underwent the PTP approach or TLIF for degenerative lumbar spine disease was conducted. Propensity score matching was completed through the utilization of a linear regression model with the classification of surgery (PTP vs. TLIF) being used as the indicator (dependent variable) and the radiographic outcomes as covariates (independent variables). Both cohorts (PTP and TLIF) were propensity score matched according to preoperative radiographic parameters using a 1-to-1 ratio to the nearest neighbor. Eleven patients in the TLIF group were matched to an equal number of patients in the PTP group who had similar propensity scores to perform a thorough analysis of clinical and radiographic outcomes.

RESULTS

The PTP approach significantly improved the lumbar lordosis angle, pelvic tilt, and the pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis value when compared to TLIF (p < 0.05). Clinically, the PTP group improved significantly in terms of the Oswestry Disability Index (p < 0.05). That approach also significantly minimized blood loss and hospital stay (p < 0.05). Furthermore, significantly more cages were placed anteriorly in the PTP group than in the TLIF group (p < 0.05). However, the PTP group had a significantly longer duration of radiation exposure (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The PTP approach resulted in greater improvement in postoperative radiographic measurements as well as patient-reported outcomes.

摘要

介绍

这是第一项比较经皮椎间孔入路腰椎体间融合术(PTP)和经椎间孔腰椎体间融合术(TLIF)的研究,通过分析影像学和临床结果进行比较。

材料与方法

对接受 PTP 入路或 TLIF 治疗退行性腰椎疾病的患者进行回顾性图表审查。通过使用线性回归模型完成倾向评分匹配,将手术分类(PTP 与 TLIF)作为指标(因变量),将影像学结果作为协变量(自变量)。根据术前影像学参数,使用 1 比 1 最近邻匹配的方式,对 PTP 和 TLIF 两组患者进行倾向评分匹配。TLIF 组中有 11 例患者与 PTP 组中具有相似倾向评分的患者进行匹配,以对临床和影像学结果进行全面分析。

结果

与 TLIF 相比,PTP 入路明显改善了腰椎前凸角、骨盆倾斜度和骨盆入射角与腰椎前凸角差值(p<0.05)。临床方面,PTP 组在 Oswestry 残疾指数方面有显著改善(p<0.05)。该方法还显著减少了出血量和住院时间(p<0.05)。此外,PTP 组有更多的椎间融合器被放置在前方(p<0.05)。然而,PTP 组的辐射暴露时间明显更长(p<0.05)。

结论

PTP 入路可显著改善术后影像学测量和患者报告的结果。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验