Suppr超能文献

80 岁及以上患者微创腰椎减压术后的改善情况与年轻患者相比。

Improvement following minimally invasive lumbar decompression in patients 80 years or older compared with younger age groups.

机构信息

1Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York; and.

2Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York.

出版信息

J Neurosurg Spine. 2022 Jul 1;37(6):828-835. doi: 10.3171/2022.5.SPINE22361. Print 2022 Dec 1.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess the outcomes of minimally invasive lumbar decompression in patients ≥ 80 years of age and compare them with those of younger age groups.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study. Patients who underwent primary unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (ULBD) (any number of levels) and had a minimum of 1 year of follow-up were included and divided into three groups by age: < 60 years, 60-79 years, and ≥ 80 years. The outcome measures were 1) patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) (visual analog scale [VAS] back and leg, Oswestry Disability Index [ODI], 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey [SF-12] Physical Component Summary [PCS] and Mental Component Summary [MCS] scores, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function [PROMIS PF]); 2) percentage of patients achieving the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and the time taken to do so; and 3) complications and reoperations. Two postoperative time points were defined: early (< 6 months) and late (≥ 6 months).

RESULTS

A total of 345 patients (< 60 years: n = 94; 60-79 years: n = 208; ≥ 80 years: n = 43) were included in this study. The groups had significantly different average BMIs (least in patients aged ≥ 80 years), age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Indices (greatest in the ≥ 80-year age group), and operative times (greatest in 60- to 79-year age group). There was no difference in sex, number of operated levels, and estimated blood loss between groups. Compared with the preoperative values, the < 60-year and 60- to 79-year age groups showed a significant improvement in most PROMs at both the early and late time points. In contrast, the ≥ 80-year age group only showed significant improvement in PROMs at the late time point. Although there were significant differences between the groups in the magnitude of improvement (least improvement in ≥ 80-year age group) at the early time point in VAS back and leg, ODI, and SF-12 MCS, no significant difference was seen at the late time point except in ODI (least improvement in ≥ 80-year group). The overall MCID achievement rate decreased, moving from the < 60-year age group toward the ≥ 80-year age group at both the early (64% vs 51% vs 41% ) and late (72% vs 58% vs 52%) time points. The average time needed to achieve the MCID in pain and disability increased, moving from the < 60-year age group toward the ≥ 80-year age group (2 vs 3 vs 4 months). There was no significant difference seen between the groups in terms of complications and reoperations except in immediate postoperative complications (5.3% vs 4.8% vs 14%).

CONCLUSIONS

Although in this study minimally invasive decompression led to less and slower improvement in patients ≥ 80 years of age compared with their younger counterparts, there was significant improvement compared with the preoperative baseline.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在评估≥80 岁老年患者行微创腰椎减压术的疗效,并与较年轻的年龄组进行比较。

方法

这是一项回顾性队列研究。纳入了行单侧小关节突切除术行双侧减压(ULBD)(任意节段数)且随访时间至少 1 年的患者,并按年龄分为三组:<60 岁、60-79 岁和≥80 岁。评估指标为:1)患者报告的结果测量指标(PROMs)(视觉模拟量表[VAS]背部和腿部、Oswestry 残疾指数[ODI]、12 项简明健康调查量表[SF-12]生理成分综合评分[PCS]和心理成分综合评分[MCS]评分以及患者报告的测量信息系统生理功能[PROMIS PF]);2)达到最小临床重要差异(MCID)的患者比例和达到该差异的时间;3)并发症和再手术。定义了两个术后时间点:早期(<6 个月)和晚期(≥6 个月)。

结果

本研究共纳入 345 名患者(<60 岁:n=94;60-79 岁:n=208;≥80 岁:n=43)。各组的平均 BMI(80 岁以上患者最低)、年龄调整后的 Charlson 合并症指数(≥80 岁组最大)和手术时间(60-79 岁组最大)差异均有统计学意义。各组间的性别、手术节段数和估计失血量无差异。与术前相比,<60 岁和 60-79 岁年龄组在早期和晚期的大多数 PROMs 均有显著改善。相比之下,≥80 岁年龄组仅在晚期时 PROMs 才有显著改善。虽然在早期 VAS 背部和腿部、ODI 和 SF-12 MCS 方面,各组之间的改善幅度(≥80 岁年龄组最小)存在显著差异,但在晚期时,除了 ODI(≥80 岁年龄组最小)外,差异无统计学意义。早期时,总体 MCID 达标率呈下降趋势,从<60 岁年龄组到≥80 岁年龄组分别为 64%、51%和 41%,晚期时分别为 72%、58%和 52%。从<60 岁年龄组到≥80 岁年龄组,疼痛和残疾方面达到 MCID 的平均时间也逐渐增加(分别为 2、3 和 4 个月)。除了术后即刻并发症(5.3%、4.8%和 14%)外,各组间的并发症和再手术发生率无显著差异。

结论

尽管在本研究中,微创减压术使≥80 岁老年患者的改善程度小于较年轻患者,且改善速度较慢,但与术前基线相比仍有显著改善。

相似文献

1
Improvement following minimally invasive lumbar decompression in patients 80 years or older compared with younger age groups.
J Neurosurg Spine. 2022 Jul 1;37(6):828-835. doi: 10.3171/2022.5.SPINE22361. Print 2022 Dec 1.
2
Improvement in predominant back pain following minimally invasive decompression for spinal stenosis.
J Neurosurg Spine. 2023 Jul 14;39(4):576-582. doi: 10.3171/2023.5.SPINE23278. Print 2023 Oct 1.
3
Practical answers to frequently asked questions in minimally invasive lumbar spine surgery.
Spine J. 2023 Jan;23(1):54-63. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2022.07.087. Epub 2022 Jul 15.
7
Association between muscle health and patient-reported outcomes after lumbar microdiscectomy: early results.
Spine J. 2022 Oct;22(10):1677-1686. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2022.05.013. Epub 2022 Jun 6.
9
Worse Preoperative 12-Item Veterans Rand Physical Component Scores Prognosticate Inferior Outcomes Following Outpatient Lumbar Decompression.
Clin Spine Surg. 2024 Oct 1;37(8):E339-E347. doi: 10.1097/BSD.0000000000001602. Epub 2024 Jun 28.

引用本文的文献

1
Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Decompression Alone Versus Fusion for Predominant Back Pain.
HSS J. 2025 Feb;21(1):42-48. doi: 10.1177/15563316231223503. Epub 2024 Jan 28.
4
Impact of age on comparative outcomes of decompression alone versus fusion for L4 degenerative spondylolisthesis.
Eur Spine J. 2024 Oct;33(10):3749-3759. doi: 10.1007/s00586-024-08336-0. Epub 2024 Jun 21.
5
Ninety Percent of Patients Are Satisfied With Their Decision to Undergo Spine Surgery for Degenerative Conditions.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2024 Apr 15;49(8):561-568. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000004714. Epub 2023 May 9.
6
Surgical management of spinal pathologies in the octogenarian: a narrative review.
Geroscience. 2024 Aug;46(4):3555-3566. doi: 10.1007/s11357-024-01083-6. Epub 2024 Jan 29.
7
Improvement in predominant back pain following minimally invasive decompression for spinal stenosis.
J Neurosurg Spine. 2023 Jul 14;39(4):576-582. doi: 10.3171/2023.5.SPINE23278. Print 2023 Oct 1.

本文引用的文献

3
4
Development of prediction models for clinically meaningful improvement in PROMIS scores after lumbar decompression.
Spine J. 2021 Mar;21(3):397-404. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2020.10.026. Epub 2020 Oct 31.
5
Minimally Invasive Spine Lumbar Surgery in Obese Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
HSS J. 2020 Jul;16(2):168-176. doi: 10.1007/s11420-019-09735-6. Epub 2020 Jan 18.
6
Using minimally invasive techniques adds to the value equation for select patients.
J Spine Surg. 2019 Jun;5(Suppl 1):S101-S107. doi: 10.21037/jss.2019.05.03.
7
Current state of minimally invasive spine surgery.
J Spine Surg. 2019 Jun;5(Suppl 1):S2-S10. doi: 10.21037/jss.2019.05.02.
8
The REDCap consortium: Building an international community of software platform partners.
J Biomed Inform. 2019 Jul;95:103208. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2019.103208. Epub 2019 May 9.
10
Minimally Invasive Lumbar Spinal Decompression in Elderly Patients with Magnetic Resonance Imaging Morphological Analysis.
Asian Spine J. 2018 Apr;12(2):285-293. doi: 10.4184/asj.2018.12.2.285. Epub 2018 Apr 16.

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