Suppr超能文献

腰椎侧方椎间融合术(LLIF)是否需要直接减压?一项在特定患者中比较LLIF直接减压与间接减压的随机对照试验。

Is Direct Decompression Necessary for Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion (LLIF)? A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Direct and Indirect Decompression With LLIF in Selected Patients.

作者信息

Limthongkul Worawat, Thanapura Chayapong, Jitpakdee Khanathip, Praisarnti Pakawas, Kotheeranurak Vit, Yingsakmongkol Wicharn, Tanasansomboon Teerachat, Singhatanadgige Weerasak

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedics, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University and King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Thai Red Cross Society, Bangkok, Thailand.

Center of Excellence in Biomechanics and Innovative Spine Surgery, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.

出版信息

Neurospine. 2024 Mar;21(1):342-351. doi: 10.14245/ns.2346906.453. Epub 2024 Mar 31.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes following lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) between direct and indirect decompression in the treatment of patients with degenerative lumbar diseases.

METHODS

Patients who underwent single-level LLIF were randomized into 2 groups: direct decompression (group D) and indirect decompression (group I). Clinical outcomes including the Oswestry Disability index and visual analogue scale of back and leg pain were collected. Radiographic outcomes including cross-sectional area (CSA) of thecal sac, disc height, foraminal height, foraminal area, fusion rate, segmental, and lumbar lordosis were measured.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients who met the inclusion criteria were eligible for the analysis, with a distribution of 14 subjects in each group. The average age was 66.1 years. Postoperatively, significant improvements were observed in all clinical parameters. However, these improvements did not show significant difference between both groups at all follow-up periods. All radiographic outcomes were not different between both groups, except for the increase in CSA which was significantly greater in group D (77.73 ± 20.26 mm2 vs. 54.32 ± 35.70 mm2, p = 0.042). Group I demonstrated significantly lower blood loss (68.13 ± 32.06 mL vs. 210.00 ± 110.05 mL, p < 0.005), as well as shorter operative time (136.35 ± 28.07 minutes vs. 182.18 ± 42.67 minutes, p = 0.002). Overall complication rate was not different.

CONCLUSION

Indirect decompression through LLIF results in comparable clinical improvement to LLIF with additional direct decompression over 1-year follow-up period. These findings suggest that, for an appropriate candidate, direct decompression in LLIF might not be necessary since the ligamentotaxis effect achieved through indirect decompression appears sufficient to relieve symptoms while diminishing blood loss and operative time.

摘要

目的

比较在治疗退行性腰椎疾病患者时,腰椎侧方椎间融合术(LLIF)中直接减压与间接减压后的临床和影像学结果。

方法

接受单节段LLIF的患者被随机分为两组:直接减压组(D组)和间接减压组(I组)。收集临床结果,包括奥斯威斯利功能障碍指数以及腰背痛和腿痛的视觉模拟量表评分。测量影像学结果,包括硬膜囊横截面积(CSA)、椎间盘高度、椎间孔高度、椎间孔面积、融合率、节段性和腰椎前凸。

结果

28例符合纳入标准的患者符合分析条件,每组各14例。平均年龄为66.1岁。术后,所有临床参数均有显著改善。然而,在所有随访期内,两组之间的这些改善均无显著差异。除CSA增加外,两组所有影像学结果均无差异,D组的CSA增加显著更大(77.73±20.26mm²对54.32±35.70mm²,p = 0.042)。I组的失血量显著更低(68.13±32.06mL对210.00±110.05mL,p < 0.005),手术时间也更短(136.35±28.07分钟对182.18±42.67分钟,p = 0.002)。总体并发症发生率无差异。

结论

通过LLIF进行间接减压在1年随访期内与额外进行直接减压的LLIF临床改善效果相当。这些发现表明,对于合适的患者,LLIF中的直接减压可能不必要,因为通过间接减压实现的韧带整复效应似乎足以缓解症状,同时减少失血量和手术时间。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5e2b/10992655/f1e916a73c81/ns-2346906-453f1.jpg

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