Cahueque Mario, Grajeda Javier, Ardebol Javier, Azmitia Enrique
Orthopedic Surgery, Hospital Centro Médico, Guatemala, 01010, Guatemala.
Faculty of Medicine, Universidad Francisco Marroquín, Guatemala, 01010, Guatemala.
N Am Spine Soc J. 2023 Aug 5;15:100259. doi: 10.1016/j.xnsj.2023.100259. eCollection 2023 Sep.
Management of chronic sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain among patients who do not respond to nonsurgical treatment is increasingly turning toward minimally invasive SIJ fusion. There are different techniques available to perform this procedure, with the lateral technique being more commonly studied than the posterior oblique technique. This study examined the effects of these techniques on pain relief and functional improvement, both preoperatively and at a 12-month follow-up.
This retrospective cohort study analyzed data from 45 patients who underwent SIJ fusion. Included patients were ≥50 years old, nonresponsive to conservative treatment. Subjects were divided into 2 cohorts based on the SIJ fusion technique. Primary outcomes were pain relief, measured by Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and functional improvement, determined by the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI); both were recorded and assessed at baseline, postoperative, and the change from pre- to postoperative. Additionally, data regarding patient demographics, previous lumbar fusion, operative time, and duration of hospital stay were collected and analyzed.
Baseline demographic and clinical variables exhibited no significant differences in distribution between groups. The posterior oblique cohort demonstrated a substantial reduction in operative time (over 50%) and duration of hospital stay compared to lateral cohort. Pain relief (postoperative VAS: lateral 3.5±1.7 vs. posterior oblique 2.4±1.5 [p=.02]) and functional improvement (postoperative ODI: lateral 29.6±7.3 vs. posterior oblique 21±5.7 [p≤.001]) were significantly better in the posterior oblique group. Pre- to postoperative improvement analysis indicated greater reduction in pain (VAS: lateral -4.4±1.9 vs. posterior oblique -6.1±1.5 [p=.002]) in the posterior oblique group.
Compared to the lateral technique group, patients undergoing minimally invasive SIJ fusion through the posterior oblique technique experienced greater pain relief and demonstrated a trend toward better functional improvement, with shorter operative times and duration of hospital stay. The posterior oblique technique may be more efficient and beneficial to manage patients suffering from chronic SIJ pain through joint fusion.
对于非手术治疗无反应的慢性骶髂关节(SIJ)疼痛患者的管理,越来越多地转向微创骶髂关节融合术。有多种不同技术可用于实施该手术,其中外侧技术的研究比后斜技术更为常见。本研究探讨了这些技术在术前及术后12个月随访时对疼痛缓解和功能改善的影响。
这项回顾性队列研究分析了45例行骶髂关节融合术患者的数据。纳入患者年龄≥50岁,对保守治疗无反应。根据骶髂关节融合技术将受试者分为2个队列。主要结局指标为疼痛缓解情况(采用视觉模拟量表(VAS)测量)和功能改善情况(由Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)确定);在基线、术后以及术前至术后的变化时均进行记录和评估。此外,收集并分析了患者人口统计学数据、既往腰椎融合情况、手术时间和住院时间。
基线人口统计学和临床变量在两组间的分布无显著差异。与外侧队列相比,后斜队列的手术时间(超过50%)和住院时间显著缩短。后斜组的疼痛缓解情况(术后VAS:外侧3.5±1.7 vs.后斜2.4±1.5 [p = 0.02])和功能改善情况(术后ODI:外侧29.6±7.3 vs.后斜21±5.7 [p≤0.001])明显更好。术前至术后的改善分析表明,后斜组的疼痛减轻幅度更大(VAS:外侧-4.4±1.9 vs.后斜-6.1±1.5 [p = 0.002])。
与外侧技术组相比,通过后斜技术进行微创骶髂关节融合术的患者疼痛缓解更明显,功能改善趋势更好,手术时间和住院时间更短。后斜技术对于通过关节融合治疗慢性骶髂关节疼痛的患者可能更有效且有益。