• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

1级腰椎滑脱症行微创经椎间孔腰椎椎体间融合术与单纯减压术的五年随访:结果是否存在差异?

Five-year follow-up after minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus decompression alone for grade 1 spondylolisthesis: are there any differences in outcomes?

作者信息

Chan Andrew K, Ambati Vardhaan S, Upadhyayula Pavan, Chou Dean, Bydon Mohamad, Bisson Erica F, Glassman Steven D, Foley Kevin T, Shaffrey Christopher I, Potts Eric A, Yen Chun-Po, Coric Domagoj, Knightly John J, Park Paul, Wang Michael Y, Fu Kai-Ming, Slotkin Jonathan R, Asher Anthony L, Virk Michael S, Haid Regis W, Mummaneni Praveen V

机构信息

1Department of Neurological Surgery, Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, The Och Spine Hospital at NewYork-Presbyterian, New York, New York.

2Department of Neurosurgery, University of California, San Francisco, California.

出版信息

J Neurosurg Spine. 2025 Aug 29:1-10. doi: 10.3171/2025.5.SPINE25324.

DOI:10.3171/2025.5.SPINE25324
PMID:40882242
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The Spinal Laminectomy Versus Instrumented Pedicle Screw trial reported the superiority of fusion compared to laminectomy alone for patients with grade 1 degenerative spondylolisthesis. However, it remains unclear if the advantages of fusion extend to using minimally invasive surgical (MIS) techniques. This study compared 60-month outcomes following minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) versus decompression for grade 1 spondylolisthesis.

METHODS

The authors analyzed patients who underwent single-segment MIS TLIF or MIS tubular decompression for grade 1 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis from the prospective Quality Outcomes Database's 12 highest enrolling sites (SpineCORe team). Uni- and multivariable analyses compared outcomes including the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), numeric rating scale (NRS) for back pain (NRS-BP), NRS for leg pain (NRS-LP), EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D), North American Spine Society (NASS) satisfaction score, and cumulative related reoperation rate.

RESULTS

Of 608 total patients, 143 underwent MIS TLIF (n = 72, 50.3%) or MIS decompression (n = 71, 49.7%). The overall study cohort's 60-month follow-up rate was 86.8%. The MIS TLIF cohort was significantly younger (mean 62.1 ± 10.6 vs 72.3 ± 9.7 years), had lower rates of diabetes (9.7% vs 22.5%), higher rates of private insurance utilization (65.3% vs 26.8%), was more likely to be employed preoperatively (54.2% vs 23.9%), and had higher baseline NRS-BP scores (mean 6.9 ± 2.6 vs 5.6 ± 3.2, p < 0.05). Otherwise, the cohorts were similar in baseline characteristics. Sixty months postoperatively, both cohorts had significant mean improvements in ODI, NRS-LP, NRS-BP, and EQ-5D scores compared to their respective baselines (p < 0.05). MIS TLIF had a significantly lower reoperation rate (2.8% vs 15.5%, p = 0.008). The minimal clinically important difference rates for the ODI, NRS-LP, NRS-BP, and EQ-5D were equivalent (p > 0.05). MIS TLIF demonstrated significantly larger reductions in NRS-BP scores (-4.0 ± 3.5 vs -2.2 ± 3.4) and higher rates of satisfaction (NASS score 1 or 2 = 87.7% vs 74.5%; p < 0.05) but similar absolute 60-month ODI, NRS-LP, NRS-BP, and EQ-5D scores (p > 0.05). On multivariable analyses, fusion significantly reduced the odds of reoperation (OR 0.07, 95% CI 0.008-0.39; p = 0.006), but fusion status was neither a significant predictor of ODI, NRS-LP, NRS-BP, or EQ-5D scores, nor NASS satisfaction scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Regardless of the surgical approach, a dorsal-based MIS technique was associated with clinical benefits in patients with grade 1 spondylolisthesis. These 60-month results demonstrate that MIS TLIF and MIS decompression are associated with similar patient-reported outcomes. However, MIS TLIF is associated with significantly fewer reoperations.

摘要

目的

“脊柱椎板切除术与椎弓根螺钉内固定术”试验报告称,对于1级退变性腰椎滑脱患者,融合术优于单纯椎板切除术。然而,融合术的优势是否能扩展到使用微创外科(MIS)技术仍不清楚。本研究比较了1级腰椎滑脱患者行微创经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术(TLIF)与减压术后60个月的疗效。

方法

作者分析了前瞻性质量结果数据库中12个入组患者最多的研究点(脊柱核心团队)接受单节段MIS TLIF或MIS管状减压术治疗1级退变性腰椎滑脱的患者。单变量和多变量分析比较了包括Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)、背痛数字评定量表(NRS-BP)、腿痛数字评定量表(NRS-LP)、欧洲五维健康量表(EQ-5D)、北美脊柱协会(NASS)满意度评分以及累计相关再手术率等结果。

结果

在608例患者中,143例接受了MIS TLIF(n = 72,50.3%)或MIS减压术(n = 71,49.7%)。整个研究队列的60个月随访率为86.8%。MIS TLIF队列患者明显更年轻(平均62.1±10.6岁对72.3±9.7岁),糖尿病发生率更低(9.7%对22.5%),私人保险使用率更高(65.3%对26.8%),术前就业可能性更大(54.2%对23.9%),且基线NRS-BP评分更高(平均6.9±2.6对5.6±3.2,p < 0.05)。除此之外,两组患者的基线特征相似。术后60个月,与各自基线相比,两组患者的ODI、NRS-LP、NRS-BP和EQ-5D评分均有显著的平均改善(p < 0.05)。MIS TLIF的再手术率显著更低(2.8%对15.5%,p = 0.008)。ODI、NRS-LP、NRS-BP和EQ-5D的最小临床重要差异率相当(p > 0.05)。MIS TLIF术后NRS-BP评分的降低幅度显著更大(-4.0±3.5对-2.2±3.4),满意度更高(NASS评分为1或2 = 87.7%对74.5%;p < 0.05),但60个月时的绝对ODI、NRS-LP、NRS-BP和EQ-5D评分相似(p > 0.05)。多变量分析显示,融合术显著降低了再手术的几率(OR 0.07,95%CI 0.008 - 0.39;p = 0.006),但融合状态既不是ODI、NRS-LP、NRS-BP或EQ-5D评分的显著预测因素,也不是NASS满意度评分的显著预测因素。

结论

无论采用何种手术方式,基于后路的MIS技术对1级腰椎滑脱患者均有临床益处。这些60个月的结果表明,MIS TLIF和MIS减压术在患者报告的结果方面相似。然而,MIS TLIF的再手术次数明显更少。

相似文献

1
Five-year follow-up after minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus decompression alone for grade 1 spondylolisthesis: are there any differences in outcomes?1级腰椎滑脱症行微创经椎间孔腰椎椎体间融合术与单纯减压术的五年随访:结果是否存在差异?
J Neurosurg Spine. 2025 Aug 29:1-10. doi: 10.3171/2025.5.SPINE25324.
2
A comparison of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and decompression alone for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.微创经椎间孔腰椎体间融合术与单纯减压治疗退变性腰椎滑脱症的对比研究。
Neurosurg Focus. 2019 May 1;46(5):E13. doi: 10.3171/2019.2.FOCUS18722.
3
Examination of clinical and radiographic outcomes after lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective analysis of TLIF, MidLIF, and MIS-TLIF procedures.腰椎椎间融合术后临床及影像学结果的检查:经椎间孔腰椎椎体间融合术、腰椎中间椎体间融合术和微创经椎间孔腰椎椎体间融合术的回顾性分析
J Neurosurg Spine. 2025 May 2;43(1):52-62. doi: 10.3171/2025.1.SPINE241286. Print 2025 Jul 1.
4
Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for grade I lumbar spondylolisthesis: 5-year follow-up from the prospective multicenter Quality Outcomes Database registry.I级腰椎滑脱症的微创与开放经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术:来自前瞻性多中心质量结果数据库登记处的5年随访
Neurosurg Focus. 2023 Jan;54(1):E2. doi: 10.3171/2022.10.FOCUS22602.
5
Minimally invasive versus mini-open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in managing low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis.微创经椎间孔腰椎体间融合术与小切口经椎间孔腰椎体间融合术治疗低度退变性腰椎滑脱症的比较。
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2024 Sep 12;166(1):365. doi: 10.1007/s00701-024-06231-7.
6
Minimally invasive versus open fusion for Grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: analysis of the Quality Outcomes Database.I度退行性腰椎滑脱症的微创与开放融合手术:质量结果数据库分析
Neurosurg Focus. 2017 Aug;43(2):E11. doi: 10.3171/2017.5.FOCUS17188.
7
Surgical Innovation: Comparative Efficacy of Navigation-Assisted Modified Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (MIS-TLIF) and Traditional MIS-TLIF in Treating Low-Grade Isthmic Spondylolisthesis in the Elderly.手术创新:导航辅助改良微创经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术(MIS-TLIF)与传统MIS-TLIF治疗老年低度峡部裂型腰椎滑脱症的疗效比较
World Neurosurg. 2024 Nov;191:e151-e159. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2024.08.087. Epub 2024 Aug 22.
8
Minimally Invasive Decompression With Noninstrumented Facet Fusion Versus Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Stenosis Associated With Grade 1 Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis.微创减压伴非器械化关节突关节融合术与微创经椎间孔腰椎体间融合术治疗伴有 1 级腰椎退变性脊柱滑脱的狭窄症。
Clin Spine Surg. 2023 Dec 1;36(10):E416-E422. doi: 10.1097/BSD.0000000000001473. Epub 2023 Jun 13.
9
Long-term clinical outcome of minimally invasive versus open single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar diseases: a meta-analysis.微创与开放单节段经椎间孔腰椎体间融合术治疗退变性腰椎疾病的长期临床疗效:一项荟萃分析。
Spine J. 2021 Dec;21(12):2049-2065. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2021.07.006. Epub 2021 Jul 14.
10
A Comparison of Minimally Invasive and Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Grade 1 Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: An Analysis of the Prospective Quality Outcomes Database.1 级退变性腰椎滑脱症微创经椎间孔腰椎体间融合术与开放经椎间孔腰椎体间融合术的比较:前瞻性质量结果数据库分析。
Neurosurgery. 2020 Sep 1;87(3):555-562. doi: 10.1093/neuros/nyaa097.