Suppr超能文献

比较S2翼状髂骨螺钉与传统髂骨螺钉在脊柱转移瘤中腰骶部固定的疗效和安全性。

Efficacy and safety of lumbopelvic fixation in spinal metastasis comparing S2 Alar-iliac screw and conventional iliac screw.

作者信息

Akkarawanit Pawin, Suvithayasiri Siravich, Santipas Borriwat, Wilartratsami Sirichai, Luksanapruksa Panya

机构信息

Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Panyanantapiku Chonpratarn Medical Center, Srinakharinwirot University, Nonthaburi, Thailand.

出版信息

Eur Spine J. 2025 Mar 19. doi: 10.1007/s00586-025-08774-4.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The clinical issue of lumbosacral metastases (LM) is really significant. This study aims to compare in patients with lumbar pathology (LM) the outcomes of the conventional iliac (CI) screw technique against the S2 alar-iliac (S2AI).

METHODS

A retrospective review of institutional databases was performed for lumbar metastasis patients. who underwent lumbopelvic fixation, with or without decompression, between April 2014 and April 2022. Demographic information, reoperation rates, operational time, estimated blood loss (EBL), and length of hospital stay (LOS) were collected. Patient-reported outcomes were the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and EQ-5D-5L, which were examined both before and after surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 38 patients were involved in the study, with 21 allocated to the S2AI group and 17 to the CI group. The S2AI group demonstrated a length of stay (LOS) of 13.38 ± 8.35 days, in contrast to 24.35 ± 21.59 days, yielding a p-value of 0.047. The estimated blood loss in the S2AI group exhibited a decrease (592.86 ± 353.92 ml compared to 1073.53 ± 1122.45 ml; P = 0.137), alongside a reduction in operative time (181.19 ± 47.35 min versus 207.06 ± 105.69 min; variance = 0.648). Within the CI group, there were six patients who encountered surgical complications, accounting for 35.3%, while the S2AI group noted an absence of complications. The postoperative outcomes demonstrated a notable enhancement in both cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to CI, S2AI had better reoperation rates, estimated blood loss, operating duration, and length of stay. Both groups improved patient-reported outcomes, but the S2AI group improved significantly three months after surgery.

摘要

目的

腰骶部转移瘤(LM)的临床问题十分重要。本研究旨在比较腰椎病变(LM)患者采用传统髂骨(CI)螺钉技术与S2翼髂骨(S2AI)技术的治疗效果。

方法

对机构数据库进行回顾性分析,纳入2014年4月至2022年4月期间接受腰骶部固定术(无论是否行减压术)的腰椎转移瘤患者。收集人口统计学信息、再次手术率、手术时间、估计失血量(EBL)和住院时间(LOS)。患者报告的结局指标为视觉模拟量表(VAS)、奥斯威斯利残疾指数(ODI)和EQ-5D-5L,于术前和术后进行评估。

结果

本研究共纳入38例患者,其中21例分配至S2AI组,17例分配至CI组。S2AI组的住院时间(LOS)为13.38±8.35天,而CI组为24.35±21.59天,p值为0.047。S2AI组的估计失血量有所减少(592.86±353.92 ml对比1073.53±1122.45 ml;P = 0.137),同时手术时间也有所缩短(181.19±47.35分钟对比207.06±105.69分钟;方差 = 0.648)。CI组中有6例患者出现手术并发症,占35.3%,而S2AI组未出现并发症。术后两组患者报告的结局均有显著改善。

结论

与CI相比,S2AI的再次手术率、估计失血量、手术时长和住院时间更佳。两组患者报告的结局均有所改善,但S2AI组在术后三个月有显著改善。

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