摘要
目的 探讨单侧球囊椎体后凸成形术在老年椎体压缩性骨折治疗中的应用。方法将77例老年椎体压缩性骨折患者采用随机数表法分为经皮椎体成形术组(PVP组)、单侧球囊椎体后凸成形术组(单侧PKP组)以及双侧球囊椎体后凸成形术组(双侧PKP组)。对患者术前及术后VAS评分、椎体高度、椎体后凸角、骨水泥渗漏发生率以及手术时间等指标进行观察与比较。结果与术前相比,所有患者术后6d,6周VAS评分均显著降低,其中PVP组由术前的(8.47±1.42)分降低至术后6d的(2.15±0.83)分(t=5.24,P〈0.05)及术后6周的(2.89±0.82)分(t=4.82,P〈0.05);单侧PKP组由术前的(8.52±1.20)分降低至术后6d的(2.11±0.78)分(t=5.93,P〈0.05)及术后6周的(2.04±0.75)分(t=2.05,P〈0.05);双侧PKP组则由术前的(8.44±1.24)分降低至术后6d的(2.14±0.82)分(t=6.29,P〈0.05)及术后6周的(2.02±0.71)分(t=3.14,P〈0.05);但6周时PVP组VAS评分显著高于单侧/双侧PKP组(t单侧PKP=5.19,t双侧PKP=6.82,均P〈0.05);所有患者术后椎体前缘、后缘高度以及后凸角均较术前显著恢复,其中PVP组椎体前缘高度由术前(18.19±1.32)mm恢复至术后(20.17±1.66)mm(t=7.53,P〈0.05),椎体后缘高度由术前(23.62±0.71)mm恢复至术后(24.07±0.60)mm(t=6.18,P〈0.05),后凸角由术前(10.26±1.60)“恢复至术后(5.40±0.92)。(t=4.92,P〈0.05);单侧PKP组椎体前缘高度由术前(19.17±1.12)mm恢复至术后(21.60±1.02)mm(t=5.51,P〈0.05),椎体后缘高度由术前(22.31±0.92)mm恢复至术后(24.98±0.30)mnl(t=6.25,P〈0.05),后凸角由术前(10.55±1.48)。.恢复至术后(5.28±0.43)。(t=5.44,P〈0.05);双侧PKP组椎体前缘高度由术前(18.63±1.24)mm恢复至术后(20.46±1.11)mm(t=4.28,P〈0.05),椎体后缘高度由术前(24.61±0.40)mm恢复至术后(25.09±0.43)mm(t=9.62,P〈0.05),后凸角由术前(10.72±1.52)。恢复至术后(5.32±0.48)。(t=8.36,P〈0.05),三组之间差异无统计学意义(P〉0.05);双侧PKP组手术时间为(57.54±12.75)min,显著长于单侧PKP组的(40,39±11.40)min(t=7.10,P〈0.05)及PVP组的(38.18±15.31)rain(t=5.42,P〈0.05);PVP组骨水泥渗漏发生率为64.00%,显著高于单侧PKP组的19。23%(x2=10.59,P〈0.05)及双侧PKP组的23.08%(x2=8.66,P〈0.05)。结论单侧PKP是治疗老年人椎体压缩性骨折的理想方式。
Objective To explore the clinical application of PKP in treatment of VCF in elderly patients. Methods 77 elderly patients with VCF were divided randomly into PVP group unilateral PKP group and bilateral PKP group by method of random number table. Preoperative and postoperative VAS scores, vertebral height, Cobb's angles, operative duration and incidence of bone cement leakage were observed and compared before and after opera- tions in different groups. Results VAS score after 6 days and 6 weeks after operation decreased significantly in all patients. In PVP group, VAS improved form (8.47 ± 1.42) to (2.15 ± 0.83 ) at 6 days after treatment ( t = 5.24) and to (2.89 ±O. 82) at 6 weeks after treatment(t =4.82) ;In unilateral PKP group,VAS improved form (8.52 ± 1.20) to (2.11 ±0.78) at 6 days after treatment(t =5.93) and to (2.04 ±0.75) at 6 weeks after treatment (t = 2.05 ) ; In bilateral PKP group, VAS improved form ± 8.44 ± 1.24) to (2.14 ± 0.82) at 6 days after treatment ( t = 6.29 ) and to ( 2.02 ± 0.71 ) at 6 weeks after treatment ( t = 3.14), ( all P 〈 0.05 ) ; VAS seore after 6 weeks in PVP group was significantly higher than that in other two groups ( tunilateral PKP = 5. 19, tbilateral PKP = 6.82, P 〈 0.05 ) ;vertebral height and Cobb's angle were improved significantly after operations in all patients, In PVP group, vertebral leading edge height improved from ( 18.19 ± 1.32 ) mm to ( 20.17 ± 1.66 ) mm ( t = 7.53 ), vertebral back edge height improved from ( 23.62 ± 0.71 ) mm to ( 24.07 ± 0.60 ) mm ( t = 6.18 ) , Cobb' s angle improved from ( 10.26 ± 1.60) degrees to (5.40 ± 0.92) degrees ( t = 4.92 ) ( all P 〈 0.05 ) ; In unilateral PKP group, vertebral leading edge height improved from ( 19.17 ± 1.12) mm to (21.60 ± 1.02 ) mm ( t = 5.51 ), vertebral back edge height improved from (22.31 s0.92)ram to(2d. 98 s0.30) mm(t =6.25) ,Cobb's angle improved from ( 10.55 ± 1.48) degrees to(5.28 ± 0.43 )degrees( t = 5.44)( all P 〈 0.05 ) ;In bilateral PKP group, vertebral leading edge height im- proved from (18.63 ± 1.24)mm to (20.46 ± 1. 11 )mm(t =4.28),vertebral back edge height improved from (24. 61 ± 0.40)mm to (25.09 ± 0.43 )mm ( t = 9.62), Cobb's angle improved from ( 10.72 ± 1.52 ) degrees to (55.32 ± 0.48 ) degrees ( t = 8.36) ( all P 〈 0.05 ). Operative duration was significantly longer in bilateral PKP group which was (57.54 ± 12.75 ) min than that in PVP group which was (40.39 ± 1 l. 40 ) min ( t = 7.10 ), or unilateral group which was (38.18 ± 15.31 ) min (t = 5.42, all P 〈 0.05 ) ;incidence of bone cement leakage was significantly higher in PVP group(64.00% ) than in bilateral( 19.23%, X2 = 10.59)/unilateral groups(23.08%, X2 = 8.66)( all P 〈 0.05). Conclusion Unilateral PKP is a proper method in treatment of VCF in elderly patients.
出处
《中国基层医药》
CAS
2014年第16期2446-2449,共4页
Chinese Journal of Primary Medicine and Pharmacy