Xu Zhenji, Wu Ji, Li Yong, Wang Haibin, Chen Fei, Ni Bin, Lu Xuhua, Guo Qunfeng
Department of Orthopedics, Shanghai Changzheng Hospital, Naval Medical University, 415 Fengyang Road, Huangpu District, Shanghai, 200003, People's Republic of China.
Department of Orthopedics, Mile People's Hospital, Honghe Prefecture, Yunnan Province, People's Republic of China.
Sci Rep. 2025 Jan 2;15(1):482. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-84638-z.
The necessity of routinely placing closed suction wound drainage in spinal surgery has been questioned. This study aims to assess if closed suction wound drainage is necessary for posterior atlantoaxial fixation via intermuscular approach. The functional outcomes of these 40 patients who underwent posterior atlantoaxial fixation via intermuscular approach without drainage tube (Group A) were compared with that of a control group, which consisted of 68 randomly enrolled cases with posterior atlantoaxial fixation via intermuscular approach with drainage tube (Group B). Outcome assessments included American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) scoring grade and Visual Analog Scale Score for Neck Pain (VASSNP). The postoperative analgesic consumption, the incidence of subcutaneous and surrounding ecchymosis and the time of ambulation were compared between two groups. Bone fusion was evaluated through computed tomography (CT) reconstruction. Postoperative paravertebral tissue edema was evaluated by the edema coefficient. The use of drainage tube had no significant influence on the postoperative analgesic consumption, wound ecchymosis, the time of ambulation and paravertebral tissue edema (P > 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in the VASSNP and bone fusion rates during the follow-up period between the two groups (P > 0.05). All patients achieved ASIA grade E 3 months after surgery. No complications such as wound infection occurred in either group. Posterior atlantoaxial fixation via intermuscular approach does not necessitate postoperative drainage tube placement if there is no accidental vascular injury or excessive muscle bleeding occurs intraoperatively.
脊柱手术中常规放置闭式伤口引流的必要性受到了质疑。本研究旨在评估经肌间隙入路后路寰枢椎固定术是否需要闭式伤口引流。将40例经肌间隙入路后路寰枢椎固定术且未放置引流管的患者(A组)的功能结局与一个对照组进行比较,对照组由68例随机纳入的经肌间隙入路后路寰枢椎固定术并放置引流管的病例组成(B组)。结局评估包括美国脊髓损伤协会(ASIA)评分等级和颈部疼痛视觉模拟量表评分(VASSNP)。比较两组患者术后的镇痛药物用量、皮下及周围瘀斑的发生率以及下床活动时间。通过计算机断层扫描(CT)重建评估骨融合情况。通过水肿系数评估术后椎旁组织水肿情况。引流管的使用对术后镇痛药物用量、伤口瘀斑、下床活动时间和椎旁组织水肿无显著影响(P>0.05)。两组患者随访期间的VASSNP和骨融合率无统计学差异(P>0.05)。所有患者术后3个月均达到ASIA E级。两组均未发生伤口感染等并发症。如果术中没有意外血管损伤或肌肉出血过多,经肌间隙入路后路寰枢椎固定术术后无需放置引流管。