Suppr超能文献

单节段动态稳定与不同节段活动度及关节突(小关节)退变的相关性:一项中国北方的回顾性研究

Correlation of the single-segment dynamic stabilization with different segmental mobility and zygapophysial (facet) joint degeneration: a retrospective study in northern China.

作者信息

Guan Jianbin, Liu Tao, Chen Hao, Yang Kaitan, Liang Haohao

机构信息

Spine Surgery Department, Honghui-hospital, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, 710054, China.

Shannxi Key Laboratory of Spine Bionic Treatment, Xi'an, China.

出版信息

BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2024 Oct 1;25(1):756. doi: 10.1186/s12891-024-07837-9.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of single-segment posterior decompression combined with two different non-fusion dynamic stabilization systems, Isobar EVO and Isobar TTL, in the context of facet joint degeneration and segmental mobility.

METHOD

A retrospective study was conducted on 47 patients who underwent single-segment surgery at the L4/5 level using either the Isobar EVO (n = 23) or Isobar TTL (n = 24) systems. We assessed facet joint degeneration on both sides of the fixed (L3/4, L4/5) and superior adjacent (L2/3) segments using the Fujiwara MRI grading system. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and visual analog scale (VAS) for back and leg pain at baseline, 12 months, and 24 months postoperatively.

RESULT

Both groups exhibited significant facet joint degeneration at the fixed segments (L3/4 and L4/5) at 24 months. The TTL group also showed significant degeneration at the superior adjacent segment (L2/3), whereas the EVO group did not. Restoration of lumbar lordosis was significantly better in the EVO group. Pain and disability scores improved more in the EVO group than in the TTL group at both 12 and 24 months postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

The Isobar EVO system, with its enhanced mobility, may delay facet joint degeneration in the superior adjacent segment compared to the Isobar TTL system. However, both systems result in degeneration at the fixed segment, indicating a need for further improvements to mimic the natural biomechanics of the spine more closely.

摘要

目的

在小关节退变和节段性活动度的背景下,比较单节段后路减压联合两种不同的非融合动态稳定系统(Isobar EVO和Isobar TTL)的临床和影像学结果。

方法

对47例行L4/5节段单节段手术的患者进行回顾性研究,这些患者使用Isobar EVO系统(n = 23)或Isobar TTL系统(n = 24)。我们使用藤原MRI分级系统评估固定节段(L3/4、L4/5)两侧以及上相邻节段(L2/3)的小关节退变情况。在基线、术后12个月和24个月时,使用Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)和视觉模拟量表(VAS)评估背部和腿部疼痛的临床结果。

结果

两组在术后24个月时,固定节段(L3/4和L4/5)均出现明显的小关节退变。TTL组在上相邻节段(L2/3)也出现明显退变,而EVO组未出现。EVO组腰椎前凸的恢复明显更好。术后12个月和24个月时,EVO组的疼痛和功能障碍评分改善程度均高于TTL组。

结论

与Isobar TTL系统相比,具有增强活动度的Isobar EVO系统可能会延迟上相邻节段的小关节退变。然而,两种系统均会导致固定节段退变,这表明需要进一步改进以更接近地模拟脊柱的自然生物力学。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2344/11446058/0e068ce49018/12891_2024_7837_Fig1_HTML.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