Buttermann G R, Glazer P A, Hu S S, Bradford D S
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California-San Francisco, California.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1997 Dec 1;22(23):2748-55. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199712010-00009.
The radiographic and clinical results of two different anterior structural grafts were compared in 38 patients who had combined anterior-posterior revision surgery for failed lumbar fusion.
Failed lumbar fusion surgery, such as pseudarthrosis or flatback deformity, may result in disabling pain. The optimum revision technique has yet to be defined. The authors of the current study sought to determine which of two different types of anterior graft yields the best results.
Posterior procedures for revision of a failed lumbar fusion have not yielded reliably successful results. A combined anterior-posterior approach may be effective in restoring sagittal balance and enhancing fusion rates. Recent studies have shown femoral ring allografts to be effective in lumbar fusion revision, but no studies have compared these with other types of structural grafts.
Thirty-eight patients with pseudarthrosis were treated with combined anterior-posterior lumbar spine fusion using either femoral ring allografts (26 patients) or tricortical iliac autografts (12 patients). Radiographic follow-up examination and retrospective patient self-assessment questionnaires were used to evaluate outcomes. Results were assessed by independent reviewers after a mean follow-up period of 35 months.
Radiographic follow-up examination revealed acceptably low pseudarthrosis rates for structural autografts (0%) and allografts (6%). The questionnaires revealed significant improvement in pain for both groups. Allograft patients showed greater improvement in function, less pain medication usage, and higher overall success rates (83%) than autograft patients (64%).
Femoral ring allografts are as effective, clinically and radiographically, as tricortical iliac autografts when used as an anterior structural element in revision lumbar spine fusion in patients who have undergone multiple surgical procedures for pseudarthrosis or flatback deformity. The slightly greater improvement for the allograft group needs to be confirmed in a larger study.
对38例行前后路联合翻修手术治疗腰椎融合失败的患者,比较两种不同前路结构性植骨的影像学和临床结果。
腰椎融合手术失败,如假关节形成或平背畸形,可能导致致残性疼痛。最佳的翻修技术尚未明确。本研究的作者试图确定两种不同类型的前路植骨中哪种能产生最佳效果。
后路手术翻修失败的腰椎融合术尚未取得可靠的成功结果。前后路联合手术可能有效恢复矢状面平衡并提高融合率。近期研究表明,股骨环同种异体骨在腰椎融合翻修中有效,但尚无研究将其与其他类型的结构性植骨进行比较。
38例假关节形成患者接受了前后路联合腰椎融合术,其中26例使用股骨环同种异体骨,12例使用三面皮质髂骨自体骨。采用影像学随访检查和回顾性患者自我评估问卷来评估结果。平均随访35个月后,由独立 reviewers 评估结果。
影像学随访检查显示,自体骨(0%)和同种异体骨(6%)的假关节形成率低至可接受水平。问卷显示两组患者的疼痛均有显著改善。同种异体骨组患者在功能改善、止痛药物使用减少及总体成功率(83%)方面均优于自体骨组患者(64%)。
对于因假关节形成或平背畸形接受多次手术治疗的患者,在翻修腰椎融合术中使用股骨环同种异体骨作为前路结构性元件时,在临床和影像学方面与三面皮质髂骨自体骨同样有效。同种异体骨组稍大的改善需要在更大规模研究中得到证实。