期刊文献+

老年腰椎间盘突出症患者单纯椎间植骨融合与金属椎间融合器植入的远期疗效比较 被引量:2

Comparison of the Long-term Efficacy of Simple Interbody Fusion vs .Metal Interbody Fusion in Elderly Patients with Lumbar Intervertebral Disc Protrusion
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的 比较金属椎间融合器(Cage)植入术与椎间植骨融合术在老年腰椎间盘突出症患者术后椎间稳定性的临床效果。方法 28例腰椎间盘突出老年患者在椎间盘摘除后,15例19个椎间隙采用Cage植入(A组);13例17个椎间隙采用单纯椎间植骨融合术(B组)。随访比较术后1周、6个月、24个月各患者X线片及C T片,测量施术节段椎间高度变化,评估两种方法的椎间稳定性。结果 术后6个月A组在维持椎间隙高度方面强于B组;术后24个月A组较B组椎间隙高度低;B组2年后融合率(88.24%)大于A组(84.21%);其差异均有统计学意义( P <0.05)。结论 术后6个月之内Cage植入术对腰椎稳定性效果优于单纯椎间植骨融合术;但其的远期效果较差。 Objective] To compare clinical efficacy of metal interbody fusion and bone graft(Cage) vs .interbody fu‐sion and bone graft for postoperative intervertebral stability of elderly lumbar intervertebral disc protrusion .[Methods]A total of 28 elderly patients with lumbar intervertebral disc protrusion were chosen .After discectomy ,15 patients (19 discs) underwent Cage implementation(group A) ,while 13 patients(17 discs) underwent simple interbody fusion and bone graft(group B) .X‐ray film and CT slice result of patients 1 week ,6 and 24 months after operation were followed up and compared .The change of segmental intervertebral height was measured .The intervertebral stability between two methods was compared .[Results]The maintenance of intervertebral height in group A at 6 months after operation was better than that in group B ,but intervertebral height in group A at 24 months after operation was lower than that in group B .The fusion rate of group B after 2 years(88 .24% ) was higher than that in group A(84 .21% ) ,and there was signifi‐cant difference( P〈0 .05) .[Conclusion] The lumbar stability of Cage implantation within 6 months after operation is better than simple interbody fusion and bone graft ,but long‐term efficacy is poorer .
出处 《医学临床研究》 CAS 2014年第11期2157-2159,共3页 Journal of Clinical Research
关键词 脊柱融合术/仪器和设备 腰椎 椎间盘移位/外科学 骨移植 Spinal Fusion/IS Lumbar Vertebrae Intervertebral Disk Displacement/SU Bone Trans-plantation
  • 相关文献

参考文献6

  • 1Weinstein N, Spratt KF, Spengler D, et al . Spinal pedicle fixation., reliability and validity of roentgenogram-based as- sessment and surgical factors on successful screw placement [J]. Spine, 1988,13(9): 1012-1018.
  • 2Zheng Zhao-jian,Lin Lian-bing,Huang Guo-qi.Clinical Observation on Acupoint Sticking Therapy for Lumbar Intervertebral Disc Hernination[J].Journal of Acupuncture and Tuina Science,2013,11(4):252-257. 被引量:7
  • 3Bagby G. The Bagby and Kuslich(BAK)method of iumbar in interbody" fusion [J]. Spine, 1999,24(17):1857.
  • 4Kuslich SD. Four-year follow-up results of lumbar spine arth- rodesis using the Bagby and Kuslich lumbar fusion cage[J]. Spine, 2000,25 (20) : 2656-2662.
  • 5Zdeblick TA, Phillips FM. Interbody cage devices[J]. Spine, 2003,28 ( 15 Suppl) .. S2-7.
  • 6王建华,尹庆水,吴增晖.椎间融合器植入与单纯椎间植骨融合术的比较[J].临床骨科杂志,2006,9(6):484-486. 被引量:13

二级参考文献8

  • 1Bagby G.The Bagby and Kuslich method of lumbar interbody fusion[J].Spine,1999,24 (17):1857-1859.
  • 2Kuslich S D,Danielson G,Dowdle J D,et al.Four year follow up results of lumbar spine arthrodesis using the bagby and kuslich lumbar fusion cage[J].Spine,2000,25 (20):2656-2662.
  • 3Zdeblick T A,Phillips F M.Interbody cage devices[J].Spine,2003,28(15 Suppl):S2 -7.
  • 4Hasegawa K,Abe M,Washio T,et al.An experimental study on the interface strength between titanium mesh cage and vertebra inreference to vertebral bone mineral denstity[J].Spine,2001,26(8):957 -963.
  • 5Smit T H,Muller R,van Dijk M,et al.Changes in bone architecture during spinal fusion:three years follow-up and the role of cage stiffness[J].Spine,2003,28(16):1802 -1808.
  • 6黄皖生.腹针牵引推拿并用治疗腰椎间盘突出症疗效观察[J].上海针灸杂志,2008,27(6):23-24. 被引量:9
  • 7郑兆俭,夏盈盈,陈挺雪,程黎晖.穴位贴敷治疗腰椎间盘突出症疗效观察[J].上海针灸杂志,2011,30(4):246-247. 被引量:18
  • 8陶善平,罗永宝,汤小雨,周丽艳,宋银花,段希栋,丁金磊.针刺配合中药离子导入治疗腰椎间盘突出症疗效观察[J].上海针灸杂志,2012,31(9):664-666. 被引量:8

共引文献18

同被引文献29

引证文献2

二级引证文献1

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