微创经椎间孔及后路腰椎椎间融合术对腰椎滑脱症患者术后隐性失血的 影响

目的:探究微创经椎间孔腰椎间融合术(MIS-TLIF)与后路腰椎椎间融合术(PLIF)对腰椎滑脱症患者术后隐性失血的影响。方法:选取2014年03月~2014年08月腰椎滑脱症患者共48例,其中行MIS-TLIF术治疗患者23例,行PLIF术治疗患者25例,记录两组手术相关指标,及手术前后红细胞平均压积(Hct),依据Gross循环血量线性方程计算患者失血总量及隐性失血量,比较两组患者术后并发症情况。结果:MIS-TLIF组手术时间长于PLIF组(P0.05),而住院时间明显少于PLIF组(P0.05);MIS-TLIF组患者隐性失血量低于PLIF组(P0.05);MIS-TLIF组术后并发症发生率低于PLIF组(P0.05)。结论:与传统PLIF术式相比,MIS-TLIF治疗腰椎滑脱症具有隐性失血少,术后并发症少,恢复快的优点,值得临床推广。     

腰椎管狭窄症脊椎融合术适应症研究进展

腰椎管狭窄症主要由腰椎关节强硬引起。腰椎狭窄症的临床表现分为两类:一类为局域性症状,如下腰痛,僵硬等,一类为神经根症状,如神经性跛行。适当保护性治疗可以改善这些症状,但是一些顽固病例仍需手术治疗。单纯腰椎管减压术适用于以神经根症状为初发表现并且脊椎生物力学稳定的患者。术前评估时如出现背部手术失败综合征,退行性不稳定,严重畸形,有症状的椎骨脱离,难治性退行性椎间盘疾病,以及邻近节段病的患者可行腰椎融合术。术中评估出现广泛椎体压缩合并椎间隙大或者骨储存量不足的患者可行腰椎融合术。     

椎弓根螺钉用于植骨融合术治疗胸腰椎结核的临床研究

目的:探讨椎弓根内固定联合植骨融合术治疗胸腰椎结核的临床效果。方法:回顾性分析2013年5月至2014年5月在我院接受治疗的50例胸腰椎结核患者的临床资料,结合影像资料评价患者手术前后的红细胞沉降率、后凸畸形矫正情况、Frankel分级及术后并发症的发生情况等。结果:所有患者术后病理均证实为脊柱结核,术中27例植入大块自体髂骨,23例植入自体肋骨捆绑植骨。24例采用椎体侧前方钉棒内固定,26例采用后路椎弓根螺钉系统内固定。术中未出现脊髓、神经、血管损伤及血气胸等并发症。患者术后红细胞沉降率获得改善,差异具有统计学意义(P0.05)。术后Cobb角明显获得矫正,差异具有统计学意义(P0.05)。患者术后脊柱损伤程度明显改善,差异具有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:椎弓根内固定联合椎体间植骨融合术治疗胸腰椎结核具有良好的临床效果,不仅可以改善红细胞沉降率,而且可以矫正患者脊柱后凸畸形,值得临床推广应用。     

微创腰椎后路减压融合术与传统全椎板切除术治疗老年腰椎管狭窄的疗效对比分析

目的:对老年腰椎管狭窄的两种治疗方式,微创腰椎后路减压融合术和传统全椎板切除术的治疗疗效进行比较,以及研究其临床应用价值。方法:选取2009年7月至2013年1月来我院治疗的76例老年腰椎管狭窄症患者,其中43例采用微创腰椎后路减压融合术(A组),33例患者接受全椎板切除手术(B组)。对所有患者进行术后随访6个月~2年,平均随访时间1年零7个月。比较分析两组的手术情况、术后不良反应发生率及JOA评分情况。结果:A组的患者手术切口小,术中出血量少及住院时间缩短,并且较B组差异有统计学意义(P0.05);两组患者发生不良反应的情况差异无统计学意义(P0.05);A组患者的JOA评分明显优于B组患者,说明A组疗效优于B组。结论:老年腰椎管狭窄患者采用微创腰椎后路减压融合手术方法创口小,术中出血量少,降低术后不良反应发生的风险,疗效明显,值得推广应用。     

不同手术方式对腰椎间盘突出症治疗的效果比较分析

目的:探讨应用微创技术治疗腰椎间盘突出症的疗效.方法:对我院脊柱骨科自2005年l1月～2010年10月收治的128例腰椎间盘突出症患者应用不同手术方式进行治疗,其中应用APLD( automated percutaneous lumbar discectomy)治疗单纯腰椎间盘突出症48例;应用MED(microendoscopic discectomy)治疗复杂型腰椎间盘突出症42例;应用传统后路椎板开窗技术治疗单纯腰椎间盘突出症38例;比较各组手术时间、术中出血、术后住院时间、疗效及并发症.术后均随访8个月～3年,观察复发情况.结果:三组不同手术方式手术时间及优良率比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05),APLD及MED组术中出血量及术后住院时间与传统手术组比较,差异有显著性(P＜0.05);术后随访疼痛全部缓解,无复发.结论:在严格掌握适应症的基础上,采用微创技术和采用传统手术治疗腰椎间盘突出症疗效相当,但微创技术创伤小、术中出血量少,术后住院日短,恢复快,优于传统手术.     

椎弓根内固定联合椎体间植骨融合术治疗退行性腰椎滑脱症的临床探讨

目的:探讨椎弓根内固定联合椎体间植骨融合术治疗退行性腰椎滑脱症的临床效果。方法:回顾性分析我院2012年3月至2014年3月收治的30例采用椎弓根内固定联合椎体间植骨融合术治疗的退行性腰椎滑脱症患者临床资料,观察患者对手术效果的满意度,并对症状进行JOA评分。比较患者术前术后的腰椎X线的影像学变化,观察术后临近节段的退变发生率与影像的融合率。结果:术后随访1-3年发现患者JOA评分的平均改善率为(73.81±16.12)%,术后滑脱率与椎间高度均有明显改善,与术前比较差异具有统计学意义(P0.05)。术后影像学显示植骨融合A级15例,B级12例,C级3例,融合优良率为90%。结论:椎弓根内固定联合椎体间植骨融合术对退行性腰椎滑脱症具有显著的临床效果,不仅可以缓解疼痛,改善功能评分,而且使患者影像学变化恢复正常生理形态,是理想的手术方法之一。     

MIS-TLIF结合钉棒系统治疗极外侧型腰椎间盘突出症的临床研究

目的:观察和比较使用通道下经椎间孔腰椎融合术(Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion;MIS-TLIF)与常规开放手术治疗极外侧型腰椎间盘突出症的临床疗效。方法:回顾性分析2012.01至2016.01经纳入及排除标准筛选后的共计61例腰椎间盘突出症患者。根据不同的手术方法,将上述患者分别纳入实验组(MIS-TLIF组)与对照组(常规开放手术组)。对患者手术前后的疼痛程度(VAS),功能障碍程度(JOA)及各围手术期指标(出血量,手术时间,透视次数,卧床时间,花费,并发症)进行统计学比较。结果:MIS-TLIF组与对照组患者在术前的VAS评分及JOA评分的比较中无显著性差异,经外科手术后,都有显著性改善(P0.05)且两组间无显著统计学差异(P0.05)。但MIS-TLIF组在出血量,卧床时间,并发症等指标中都显著优于对照组(P0.05)。结论:通道下经椎间孔腰椎融合术作为一种微创术式,能够显著改善极外侧型腰椎间盘突出症患者的临床症状,并具有其独有的优势和长处,在临床工作中可以进行进一步的使用和推广。     

经后路椎体间融合术与经椎间孔椎体间融合术治疗老年退行性 腰椎滑脱合并腰椎管狭窄的疗效

目的：研究经后路椎体间融合术（PLIF）与经椎间孔椎体间融合术（TLIF）治疗老年退行性腰椎滑脱合并腰椎管狭窄症的临 床疗效。方法：选取2011 年12 月到2014 年12 月我院收治的老年退行性腰椎滑脱合并腰椎管狭窄症患者40 例,根据手术方式 将患者分为PLIF组和TLIF组,比较两组手术时间、术中出血量、术后引流量、术后卧床时间、视觉疼痛评分（VAS）、Oswestry功能 不良指数（ODI）以及并发症的发生率。结果：TLIF组术中出血量、术后引流量及术后卧床时间均显著优于PLIT 组,差异具有统计 学意义（P＜ 0.05）;两组手术时间差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）;两组术后半年VAS评分及ODI评分均显著优于手术前,差异具有 统计学意义（P＜0.05）;但两组之间比较,差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）;TLIF 组并发症发生率显著低于PLIF 组,差异具有统计学 意义（P＜ 0.05）。结论：TLIF治疗老年退行性腰椎滑脱合并腰椎管狭窄症具有较好的临床疗效,且术后并发症较少。     

椎体加椎间植骨融合术在腰椎爆裂性骨折患者中的应用效果与安全性探究

目的:探讨椎体加椎间植骨融合术在治疗腰椎爆裂性骨折患者中的临床效果及安全性。方法:选取2016年12月～2017年10月我院骨科收治的腰椎爆裂性骨折患者90例,按照手术方式将患者分成研究组和对照组,每组45例。研究组给予后路内固定术联合椎体加椎间植骨术治疗,对照组给予后路内固定术联合后外侧植骨术治疗。比较两组患者的手术时间、手术出血量以及术后3个月和12个月的椎体Cobb角、患者术后骨折愈合情况、内固定有效情况。结果:研究组手术时间、术中出血量、术后3个月和12个月椎体Cobb角明显短于或低于对照组,但骨折愈合率、内固定有效率显著高于对照组,组间差异均有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:椎体加椎间植骨融合术治疗腰椎爆裂性骨折的临床综合效果显著优于后路内固定术联合后外侧植骨术治疗,且安全性较好。     

自体cage融合在治疗退行性腰椎疾病中的应用

本研究将72例腰椎退行性变患者根据随机数字表分为两组,其中,对照组予以PEEK cage融合治疗,观察组予以自体cage融合治疗。对比两组干预后的腰椎前凸角度,椎间盘高度,VAS评分,术后功能之后,发现两组治疗后的VAS评分较治疗前降低,且两组间无显著差异(p0.05);两组优良率无显著差异(p0.05);治疗后的椎间隙高度、L3/4腰椎前突角、L4/5腰椎前突角、L5/S1腰椎前突角较治疗前增大(p0.05),且两组间无显著差异(p0.05)。提示在腰椎后路融合术中行棘突骨块所制的自体cage与PEEK cage有着同等的安全性和有效性,是一种良好的椎间融合方式。     

Finite Element Analysis of Minimal Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

The purpose of our study is to develop and validate three-dimensional finite element models of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion, and explore the most appropriate method of fixation and fusion by comparing biomechanical characteristics of different fixation method. We developed four fusion models: bilateral pedicle screws fixation with a single cage insertion model (A), bilateral pedicle screws fixation with two cages insertion model (B), unilateral pedicle screws fixation with a single cage insertion model (C), and unilateral pedicle screws fixation with two cages insertion model (D); the models were subjected to different forces including anterior bending, posterior extension, left bending, right bending, rotation, and axial compressive. The von Mises stress of the fusion segments on the pedicle screw and cages was recorded. Angular variation and stress of pedicle screw and cage were compared. There were differences of Von Mises peak stress among four models, but were within the range of maximum force. The angular variation in A, B, C, and D decreased significantly compared with normal. There was no significant difference of angular variation between A and B, and C and D. Bilateral pedicle screws fixation had more superior biomechanics than unilateral pedicle screws fixation. In conclusion, the lumbar interbody fusion models were established using varying fixation methods, and the results verified that unilateral pedicle screws fixation with a single cage could meet the stability demand in minimal invasive transforaminal interbody fusion.     

SDRS联合BAK技术治疗腰椎滑脱症的研究

对后方入路SDRS内固定加BAK植骨融合治疗腰椎滑脱症的临床应用研究进行初步报告,探讨此项技术的手术要点和早期临床效果。自2001年1月至2001年8月,对13例腰椎滑脱患者行后方入路椎体间BAK植骨融合、SDRS内固定。随访6个月－14个月,平均9.1个月。结合临床症状改善程度和X线片上植骨副合、复位程度综合进行疗效评定。结果：疗效优3例,良9例,差1例,优良率92.3%。结果表明从一个切口入路行椎体间BAK植骨融合、SDRS内固定术,能对前柱和后柱同时起稳定作用,有利于滑脱的复位和维持正常的腰椎前凸,符合腰椎的生物力学要求。     

经皮椎弓根空心螺钉微创椎体间融合治疗腰椎间盘突出的临床效果分析

目的：探究经皮椎弓根空心螺钉微创椎体间融合治疗腰椎间盘突出的临床效果及安全性。方法：病例来源于我院2009 年12 月~2013 年12 月收治的确诊为腰椎间盘突出症的病患174 例,依据随机数字表法将其均分为观察组与对照组,每组87 例。其 中,观察组施行Quadrant微创通道经皮椎弓根空心螺钉椎间融合术,对照组施行经后入路开放性椎间融合术。评估和比较两组病 患术前和随访结束时的视觉模拟评分系统(VAS)疼痛评分与Oswestry 功能障碍指数(ODI)的变化及术后并发症的发生情况。结 果：观察组治疗前、出院时及随访一年时的VAS 评分与ODI指数与对照组比较差异均不显著(P>0.05)。观察组手术切口长度、术 后住院时间及术中出血量均明显优于对照组(P<0.01),而其手术所需时间明显长于对照组(P<0.01)。对照组患者术后出现20 例神 经根损伤(22.99%),3 例椎间隙感染(3.45%),其并发症总发生率为(26.44%),而观察组患者术后仅出现3 例神经根损伤,发生率为 3.45%,显著低于对照组(P<0.01)。结论：经皮椎弓根空心螺钉微创椎体间融合治疗的临床效果肯定,能减少对病患的创伤,控制术 后并发症的发生,具有较高的临床应用价值。     

Mechanical study of spinal interbody implants--characteristics and limits of standardized testing]

Spinal interbody fusion has proved to be a useful procedure for the surgical stabilization of spinal segments, for which fusion cases made of metal or reinforced polymers are increasingly being used. For the mechanical testing of spinal interbody implants, a test setup has been developed on the basis of an ASTM proposal. Initially, testing of lumbar fusion cages made of CFRP (carbon fibre reinforced polymer) was carried out. The implants (UNION Cages, Medtronic Sofamor Danek), which are characterised by their radiolucency on radiography, NMR and CT scans, have a cube-shaped body with three table-tracks on the under and upper surfaces. The cages were tested at different loads. Modifications of the proposed standardized method were carried out to enable implementation of implant-oriented testing. The tested cages were shown to have adequate axial compression, shear and torsional strengths with regard to the implant body. The maximum axial compression force tolerated by the table-tracks was less than the maximal potential loading of the lumbar spine, and, with account being taken of implant design, consequences with regard to surgical technique were drawn. As dictated by the geometry of the table-tracks, parallel grooves have to be made intra-operatively in the vertebral end plates. Axial compressive loads then act on the implant body, and the table-tracks are protected from damage. To avoid in vivo failure, the tested cages should be implanted only when this specific surgical technique is employed. Using supplementary anterior or posterior instrumentation, in vivo failure of the table-tracks under physiological spinal loading is not to be expected.     

PLIF与TLIF手术治疗老年单节段腰椎退变性疾病的临床疗效对比

目的:探讨改良后路腰椎体间融合术(PLIF)与改良经椎间孔入路腰椎体间融合术(TLIF)手术治疗老年单节段腰椎退变性疾病的临床疗效。方法:收集2009年1月-2015年1月期间我院收治的经确诊为老年单节段腰椎退变性疾病的80例患者,按照随机数字表法分为观察组和对照组,各40例;观察组患者采用TLIF手术,对照组患者采用PLIF手术;比较两组患者手术前后腰背部疼痛程度(VAS评分)与活动功能(ODI评分),临床指标及并发症发生率。结果:观察组患者手术时间、术中出血量及术后引流量均明显短于或少于对照组患者(P0.05);两组患者手术前腰背部VAS评分与ODI评分比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05),手术后6个月,两组患者腰背部VAS评分与ODI评分均明显低于手术前(P0.05),而组间比较差异无统计学差异(P0.05);观察组术后并发症总发生率为5.00%(2/40),显著低于对照组的22.50%(9/40),差异有统计学差异(P0.05)。结论:PLIF与TLIF手术治疗老年单节段腰椎退变性疾病患者在改善腰背部疼痛程度与腰椎活动功能中的疗效相当,但TLIF手术有助于显著缩短手术时间,降低术中出血量与术后引流量,降低术后并发症发生风险,值得临床推广应用。     

单、双枚椎间融合器在单节段腰椎后路融合术中的应用效果比较

目的:比较腰椎后路融合术(PLIF)单、双枚椎间融合器(Cage)的使用对远期疗效的影响。方法:回顾我院2004-2011年间164例因腰椎退变疾病行单节段PLIF患者的临床资料,按Cage数目将其分为单Cage组(114例)与双Cage组(50例)。获得其住院资料和术后2年以上临床与影像学随访资料并比较分析。结果:平均随访时间47.5个月。两组间的年龄、性别、术前JOA评分、术后随访时间的差别无显著性(P0.05),但单Cage组失血量更低(P0.05),但随访时相对椎间隙高度低于双Cage组(P0.05);而两组间JOA评分改善率、随访时JOA评分、优良率、手术耗时、住院天数、并发症发生率的差别无显著性(P0.05)。结论:PLIF中单、双Cage的使用均能获得满意的疗效与安全性,与双Cage相比,单Cage手术失血更少,但术后远期相对椎间隙高度更低,对于这类患者应加强随访并警惕断钉等并发症的发生。     

Biomechanical evaluation of a novel lumbosacral axial fixation device

BACKGROUND: Interbody arthrodesis is employed in the lumbar spine to eliminate painful motion and achieve stability through bony fusion. Bone grafts, metal cages, composite spacers, and growth factors are available and can be placed through traditional open techniques or minimally invasively. Whether placed anteriorly, posteriorly, or laterally, insertion of these implants necessitates compromise of the anulus--an inherently destabilizing procedure. A new axial percutaneous approach to the lumbosacral spine has been described. Using this technique, vertical access to the lumbosacral spine is achieved percutaneously via the presacral space. An implant that can be placed across a motion segment without compromise to the anulus avoids surgical destabilization and may be advantageous for interbody arthrodesis. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the in vitro biomechanical performance of the axial fixation rod, an anulus sparing, centrally placed interbody fusion implant for motion segment stabilization. METHOD OF APPROACH: Twenty-four bovine lumbar motion segments were mechanically tested using an unconstrainedflexibility protocol in sagittal and lateral bending, and torsion. Motion segments were also tested in axial compression. Each specimen was tested in an intact state, then drilled (simulating a transaxial approach to the lumbosacral spine), then with one of two axial fixation rods placed in the spine for stabilization. The range of motion, bending stiffness, and axial compressive stiffness were determined for each test condition. Results were compared to those previously reported for femoral ring allografts, bone dowels, BAK and BAK Proximity cages, Ray TFC, Brantigan ALIF and TLIF implants, the InFix Device, Danek TIBFD, single and double Harms cages, and Kaneda, Isola, and University plating systems. RESULTS: While axial drilling of specimens had little effect on stiffness and range of motion, specimens implanted with the axial fixation rod exhibited significant increases in stiffness and decreases in range of motion relative to intact state. When compared to existing anterior, posterior, and interbody instrumentation, lateral and sagittal bending stiffness of the axial fixation rod exceeded that of all other interbody devices, while stiffness in extension and axial compression were comparable to plate and rod constructs. Torsional stiffness was comparable to other interbody constructs and slightly lower than plate and rod constructs. CONCLUSIONS: For stabilization of the L5-S1 motion segment, axial placement of implants offers potential benefits relative to traditional exposures. The preliminary biomechanical data from this study indicate that the axial fixation rod compares favorably to other devices and may be suitable to reduce pathologic motion at L5-S1, thus promoting bony fusion.     

Biomechanical differences of Coflex-F and pedicle screw fixation combined with TLIF or ALIF--a finite element study

Lumbar interbody fusion is a common procedure for treating lower back pain related to degenerative disc diseases. The Coflex-F is a recently developed interspinous spacer, the makers of which claim that it can provide stabilisation similar to pedicle screw fixation. Therefore, this study compares the biomechanical behaviour of the Coflex-F device and pedicle screw fixation with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) or anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) surgeries by using finite element analysis. The results show that the Coflex-F device combined with ALIF surgery can provide stability similar to the pedicle screw fixation combined with TLIF or ALIF surgery. Also, the posterior instrumentations (Coflex-F and pedicle screw fixation) combined with TLIF surgery had lower stability than when combined with ALIF surgery.