Suppr超能文献

骨水泥强化椎弓根螺钉与常规椎弓根螺钉治疗骨质疏松性腰椎退变性疾病的比较。

Comparison of cement-augmented pedicle screw and conventional pedicle screw for the treatment of lumbar degenerative patients with osteoporosis.

机构信息

Department of Orthopedics, Shanghai Songjiang District Central Hospital, Shanghai, China.

Department of Orthopedics, Shanghai General Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Shanghai, China.

出版信息

Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2024 Apr;34(3):1609-1617. doi: 10.1007/s00590-024-03849-2. Epub 2024 Feb 16.

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the safety and clinical efficacy between using cement-augmented pedicle screws (CAPS) and conventional pedicle screws (CPS) for the treatment of lumbar degenerative patients with osteoporosis. Management of lumbar degenerative patients with osteoporosis undergoing spine surgery is challenging. The clinical efficacy and potential complications of the mid-term performance of the CAPS technique in the treatment of lumbar degenerative patients with osteoporosis remain to be evaluated.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The data of 131 lumbar degenerative patients with osteoporosis who were treated with screw fixation from May 2016 to December 2019 were retrospectively analyzed in this study. The patients were divided into the following two groups according to the type of screw used: (I) the CAPS group (n = 85); and (II) the CPS group (n = 46). Relevant data were compared between two groups, including the demographics data, clinical results and complications.

RESULTS

The difference in the VAS, ODI and JOA scores at three and 6 months after the operation between the two groups was statistically significant (P < 0.05). At 12 months after surgery and the final follow-up, a significant difference in the fusion rate was found between the two groups (P < 0.05). Four cemented screws loosening were observed in the CAPS group (loosening rate 4/384, 1.04%) and 15 screws loosening were observed in the CPS group (loosening rate 15/214, 7.01%). In the CAPS group, a total of 384 augmented screws were used, and cement leakage was observed in 25 screws (25/384, 6.51%), but no obvious clinical symptoms or serious complications were observed. Adjacent vertebral fractures occurred in six patients in the CAPS group and one in the CPS group.

CONCLUSIONS

CAPS technique is an effective strategy for the treatment of lumbar degenerative patients with osteoporosis, with a higher fusion rate and lower screw loosening rate than CPS.

摘要

研究设计

回顾性队列研究。

目的

比较骨水泥增强椎弓根螺钉(CAPS)和传统椎弓根螺钉(CPS)治疗腰椎退行性骨质疏松患者的安全性和临床疗效。骨质疏松性腰椎退行性疾病患者的脊柱手术管理具有挑战性。CAPS 技术治疗腰椎退行性骨质疏松症患者的中期疗效及其潜在并发症仍有待评估。

患者和方法

回顾性分析了 2016 年 5 月至 2019 年 12 月采用螺钉固定治疗的 131 例腰椎退行性骨质疏松症患者的数据。根据使用的螺钉类型,将患者分为以下两组:(I)CAPS 组(n=85);和(II)CPS 组(n=46)。比较两组间相关数据,包括一般资料、临床结果及并发症。

结果

术后 3 个月和 6 个月时两组 VAS、ODI 和 JOA 评分差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。术后 12 个月和末次随访时,两组融合率差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。CAPS 组有 4 枚骨水泥螺钉松动(松动率 4/384,1.04%),CPS 组有 15 枚螺钉松动(松动率 15/214,7.01%)。在 CAPS 组中,共使用 384 枚增强螺钉,25 枚螺钉出现水泥渗漏(25/384,6.51%),但未观察到明显的临床症状或严重并发症。CAPS 组有 6 例患者发生邻近椎体骨折,CPS 组有 1 例患者发生邻近椎体骨折。

结论

CAPS 技术是治疗腰椎退行性骨质疏松症的有效策略,融合率高于 CPS,螺钉松动率较低。

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