Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Carolinas Neurosurgery & Spine Associates, SpineFirst Atrium Health, Charlotte, North Carolina.
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2024 Jun 19;106(12):1041-1053. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.23.00719. Epub 2024 May 7.
The comparative effectiveness of decompression plus lumbar facet arthroplasty versus decompression plus instrumented lumbar spinal fusion in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and grade-I degenerative spondylolisthesis is unknown.
In this randomized, controlled, Food and Drug Administration Investigational Device Exemption trial, we assigned patients who had single-level lumbar spinal stenosis and grade-I degenerative spondylolisthesis to undergo decompression plus lumbar facet arthroplasty (arthroplasty group) or decompression plus fusion (fusion group). The primary outcome was a predetermined composite clinical success score. Secondary outcomes included the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS) back and leg pain, Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ), Short Form (SF)-12, radiographic parameters, surgical variables, and complications.
A total of 321 adult patients were randomized in a 2:1 fashion, with 219 patients assigned to undergo facet arthroplasty and 102 patients assigned to undergo fusion. Of these, 113 patients (51.6%) in the arthroplasty group and 47 (46.1%) in the fusion group who had either reached 24 months of postoperative follow-up or were deemed early clinical failures were included in the primary outcome analysis. The arthroplasty group had a higher proportion of patients who achieved composite clinical success than did the fusion group (73.5% versus 25.5%; p < 0.001), equating to a between-group difference of 47.9% (95% confidence interval, 33.0% to 62.8%). The arthroplasty group outperformed the fusion group in most patient-reported outcome measures (including the ODI, VAS back pain, and all ZCQ component scores) at 24 months postoperatively. There were no significant differences between groups in surgical variables or complications, except that the fusion group had a higher rate of developing symptomatic adjacent segment degeneration.
Among patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and grade-I degenerative spondylolisthesis, lumbar facet arthroplasty was associated with a higher rate of composite clinical success than fusion was at 24 months postoperatively.
Therapeutic Level I . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
对于伴有Ⅰ级退变性腰椎滑脱的腰椎管狭窄症患者,减压加腰椎小关节成形术与减压加后路腰椎融合术的疗效比较尚不清楚。
在这项随机对照的食品和药物管理局(FDA)器械豁免临床试验中,我们将单节段腰椎管狭窄症合并Ⅰ级退变性腰椎滑脱的患者随机分为减压加腰椎小关节成形术(关节成形术组)或减压加融合术(融合组)。主要结局是预先设定的综合临床成功评分。次要结局包括 Oswestry 功能障碍指数(ODI)、视觉模拟量表(VAS)腰背疼痛、苏黎世间歇性跛行问卷(ZCQ)、SF-12 量表、影像学参数、手术变量和并发症。
共纳入 321 例成年患者,2:1 随机分组,219 例患者行小关节成形术,102 例患者行融合术。其中,关节成形术组 113 例(51.6%)和融合组 47 例(46.1%)患者达到术后 24 个月随访或被认为早期临床失败,纳入主要结局分析。关节成形术组的综合临床成功比例高于融合组(73.5%比 25.5%;p<0.001),差异为 47.9%(95%置信区间,33.0%至 62.8%)。术后 24 个月,关节成形术组在大多数患者报告的结局测量(包括 ODI、VAS 腰背疼痛和所有 ZCQ 评分)上均优于融合组。两组在手术变量或并发症方面无显著差异,除融合组发生症状性邻近节段退变的发生率较高外。
在伴有腰椎管狭窄症和Ⅰ级退变性腰椎滑脱的患者中,与后路腰椎融合术相比,腰椎小关节成形术在术后 24 个月时的综合临床成功率更高。
治疗性 I 级。详见《作者须知》中对证据等级的完整描述。