Suppr超能文献

微创显微镜下腰椎管狭窄症的放射学分析,重点是多节段狭窄和脊椎滑脱。

Radiological Analysis of Minimally Invasive Microscopic Laminectomy for Lumbar Canal Stenosis with a Focus on Multilevel Stenosis and Spondylolisthesis.

机构信息

Department of Neurosurgery, Nagoya University Hospital, Nagoya, Japan.

Department of Neurosurgery, Nagoya University Hospital, Nagoya, Japan.

出版信息

World Neurosurg. 2022 Aug;164:e224-e234. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2022.04.079. Epub 2022 Apr 25.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

We retrospectively compared the radiological and clinical outcomes of two different surgical techniques (lumbar spinous process splitting laminectomy [LSPSL] and unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression [ULBD]) to treat lumbar spinal canal stenosis (LCS).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective comparative study of 141 consecutive patients with an average age of 70.8 ± 9.4 years who had undergone LSPSL or ULBD for LCS between April 2015 and April 2019. None of the patients had developed remote fractures of the spinous processes using either technique. These cases were divided into 2 groups: group L, 73 patients who had undergone LSPSL from April 2015 to April 2017; and group U, 68 patients who had undergone ULBD from May 2017 to April 2019. The clinical and radiological outcomes and surgical complications at the 1-year postoperative follow-up period were evaluated.

RESULTS

We found no significant differences in the operative time between the 2 groups. However, group U had had significantly less blood loss than group L. The facet joints were significantly well preserved in group U. We examined the multilevel and spondylolisthesis cases separately and found that both surgical procedures were equally effective and that the visual analog scale scores for back or leg pain and Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores had significantly improved postoperatively in each group. Group U showed better outcomes in terms of LCS recurrence, with 3 patients in the group L requiring repeat surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

We found both ULBD and LSPSL to be safe and effective techniques for LCS, even for patients with spondylolisthesis and multilevel disease. ULBD was superior in terms of recurrence prevention, preservation of the facet joints, and less blood loss.

摘要

目的

我们回顾性比较了两种不同手术技术(腰椎棘突劈开椎板切除术[LSPSL]和单侧椎板切除术双侧减压术[ULBD])治疗腰椎管狭窄症(LCS)的影像学和临床结果。

方法

我们对 141 例平均年龄为 70.8±9.4 岁的连续患者进行了回顾性比较研究,这些患者因 LCS 接受 LSPSL 或 ULBD 治疗,手术时间在 2015 年 4 月至 2019 年 4 月之间。两种技术均未发生棘突远处骨折。这些病例分为 2 组:L 组,73 例,2015 年 4 月至 2017 年 4 月接受 LSPSL;U 组,68 例,2017 年 5 月至 2019 年 4 月接受 ULBD。评估术后 1 年的临床和影像学结果以及手术并发症。

结果

我们发现两组手术时间无显著差异。然而,U 组术中出血量明显少于 L 组。U 组关节突关节保存良好。我们分别检查了多节段和滑脱病例,发现两种手术程序均同样有效,每组患者的腰背或腿痛的视觉模拟评分和日本矫形协会评分均有显著改善。U 组在 LCS 复发方面表现出更好的结果,L 组中有 3 例需要再次手术。

结论

我们发现 ULBD 和 LSPSL 都是治疗 LCS 的安全有效技术,甚至对于伴有滑脱和多节段疾病的患者也是如此。在预防复发、保留关节突关节和减少出血量方面,ULBD 更具优势。

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