期刊文献+

显微椎管减压术与传统椎管减压术治疗腰椎管狭窄症的比较性研究 被引量:5

Comparison of Micro-decompression and Traditional Spinal Canal Decompression for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的比较显微镜下减压与传统开放手术减压治疗腰椎狭窄症的临床疗效。方法2008年12月~2010年12月手术治疗腰椎狭窄症患者90例,其中48例行显微镜下椎管减压术治疗(A组),42例采用传统开窗减压术(B组)。比较两组手术时间、术中出血量、平均下地时间、平均住院时间及术后症状缓解等方面的指标。采用日本骨科协会JOA评分、Oswestry功能障碍指数问卷表(ODI)和视觉模拟评分(VAS)对两组术前和术后1周、3个月、6个月、12个月、18个月治疗效果进行评定。结果两组均顺利完成手术,伤口一期愈合,无神经损伤、感染等并发症,B组2例硬膜破裂,术中修补。A组手术时间较B组长,但术中出血量、术后下地活动时间及住院时间均显著少于B组(P<0.01)。两组术后3月至18月腰腿痛VAS评分及ODI、JOA评分均较术前显著改善(P<0.01),但组间比较无统计学差异(P>0.05)。结论显微减压术治疗腰椎管狭窄症具有创伤小、出血少、恢复快的优点,是一种有效的微创治疗腰椎管狭窄症的方法,较传统椎管减压术有明显优势。 Objective To compare the clinical effects of micro-decompression and traditional spinal canal decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis.Methods A total of 90 cases suffered lumbar spinal stenosis admitted from December 2008 to December 2010 were analyzed retrospectively.All cases were treated by surgical intervention,including 48 of micro-decompression(regard as group A) and 42 of traditional spinal canal decompression(regard as group B).The operative time,intraoperative blood loss,recover time of bedside exercise,hospitalization time and postoperative symptomatic relief were compared between two groups.The outcomes were assessed in two groups before the operation,1 week,3-,6-,and 18 months after the operation according Japanese Orthopaedic Association(JOA),Oswestry Disability Index(ODI) and Visual Analog Scores(VAS).Results All cases were accomplished surgery and achieved primary wound healing without nerve injury or infection.Rupture of dura mater was found and repaired during operation in 2 cases of group B.Compared to group B,the operative duration was longer,the intra-oeprative blood loss,recovery time of activity and hospital stay time was less in group A(P0.01).The VAS of lumbago,ODI and JOA was obviously improved at the time point of 3,6,12 and 18 months after operation than those at the time point of pre-operation respectively in both two groups(P0.01),but there was no statistic difference in VAS,ODI and JOA between two groups at the time points of 3,6,12 and 18 months after operation(P0.05).Conclusion The surgery of micro-decompression is an effective treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis with advantages of small trauma,less blood loss and quick recovery,and it is superior to traditional spinal canal decompression.
出处 《中国现代手术学杂志》 2013年第1期36-40,共5页 Chinese Journal of Modern Operative Surgery
关键词 腰椎 椎管狭窄症 减压术 外科 显微外科手术 lumbar vertebrae spinal stenosis decompression surgical microsurgery
  • 相关文献

参考文献13

  • 1Barz T, Melloh M, Staub LP, et al. Nerve root sedimentation sign: evaluation of a new radiological sign in lumbar spinal stenosis[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2010, 35(8):892-897.
  • 2Deyo RA, Mirza SK, Martin BI, et al. Trends, major medical complications, and charges associated with surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis in older adults[ J ]. JAMA, 2010, 303 (13) : 1259-1265.
  • 3Simotas AC. Nonoperative treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2001, (384) :153-161.
  • 4Kim KT, Lee SH, Suk KS, et al. The quantitative analysis of tissue injury markers after mini-open lumbar fusion[J]. Spine ( Phila Pa 1976), 2006, 31 (6) :712-716.
  • 5Fukui M, Chiba K, Kawakami M, et al. Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire. Part 2. Verification of its reliability: The Subcommittee on Low Back Pain and Cervical Myelopathy Evaluation of the Clinical Outcome Committee of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association[J]. J Orthop Sci, 2007, 12(6) :526-532.
  • 6Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB. The Oswestry Disability Index [ J ]. Spine ( Phila Pa 1976), 2000, 25 ( 22 ) :2940-2952.
  • 7Huskisson EC. Measurement of pain [J]. Lancet, 1974, 2 (7889) :1127-1131.
  • 8Sengupta DK, Herkowitz HN. Degenerative spondylolisthesis: review of current trends and controversies [ J ]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2005, 30(6 Suppl) :S71-S81.
  • 9McCulloch JA. Microdecompression and uninstrumented singlelevel fusion for spinal canal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 1998, 23(20) :2243-2252.
  • 10Kim DY, Lee SH, Chung SK, et al. Comparison of multifldus muscle atrophy and trunk extension muscle strength: percutaneous versus open pedicle screw fixation [ J ]. Spine ( Phila Pa 1976 ), 2005, 30( 1 ) : 123-129.

二级参考文献14

  • 1左金良,谭军,张鲁惠,黄波,高浩源,秦川,朱登嵩,李云凯,赵文成.腰椎后路手术对硬膜囊容量和脊柱稳定性的影响[J].中国矫形外科杂志,2004,12(15):1152-1154. 被引量:21
  • 2田慧中,王以进,李永年.后部结构切除对腰椎稳定性影响的实验研究[J].中华骨科杂志,1994,14(9):557-560. 被引量:158
  • 3Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB. The Oswestry disability index[J]. Spine, 2000,25 (22) : 2940-2953.
  • 4Wilste LL. History of Spinal Disorders. In:Frymoyer JW,ed. Adult Spine[M].New York:Ravenpress,1991.33-35.
  • 5Johnsson KE,Wilner S,Johnsson K.Postoperative instability after decompreasion for lumbar spinal stenosis [J].Spine, 1986, 11 (2) : 107-110.
  • 6Iida Y,Kataoka O,Sho T,et al.Postoperative lumbar spinal occurring or progressing secondary to laminectomy:spine instability[J].Spine, 1990,15( 11 ) : 1186-1189.
  • 7党耕町主译.脊柱外科技术[M].北京:人民卫生出版社,2004.214-219.
  • 8Adachi K,Futami T,Ebihara A,et al.Spinal canal enlargement procedure by restorative laminoplasty for the treatment of lumbar canal stenosis[J].Spinal J,2003,3(6):471-478.
  • 9Kalbarczyk A, Lukes A, Seiler RW. Surgical treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis in the elderly [J].Acta Neurochir (Wien), 1998,140(7 ) :637-641.
  • 10Mackay DC, Wheelright EF. Unilateral fenestration in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis [J].Br J Neurosurg, 1998, 12(6) :556-558.

共引文献25

同被引文献50

引证文献5

二级引证文献6

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部