期刊文献+

Wiltse入路与传统后正中入路治疗无神经表现的腰椎骨折

Wiltse Approach and Posterior Midline Approach for the Treatment of Vertebral Fractures without Neurological Symptom
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的:探讨Wiltse入路与传统后正中入路治疗无神经表现的腰椎骨折的临床疗效。方法:选择2013年8月~2015年8月符合标准的腰椎骨折患者68例,随机分为观察组和对照组各34例,观察组采用Wiltse入路,对照组采用传统后正中入路,行钉棒撑开复位内固定,观察手术效果。68例患者均获得随访,平均随访18个月。结果:观察组患者手术时间、术中出血量、术后引流量及术后(1周)视觉模拟评分(VAS评分)与对照组比较差异均有统计学意义(P〈0.05),两组术后椎体高度矫正率及Cobb’s角矫正率差异无统计学意义(P〉0.05)。结论:在腰椎手术中,相比传统后正中入路,Wiltse入路治疗无神经表现的腰椎骨折更安全有效,有创伤小、出血少及术后恢复快等优点。 Objective: To evaluate the clinical efficacy o f Wiltse approach and posterior midline approach for the treatment of vertebral fractures without neurological symptom. Methods: From August 2013 to August 2015, 68 cases were divided into observation group (34 cases) and control group (34 cases), the observation group were treated with Wiltse approach, the control group were treated with posterior midline approach. All patients were received nail fixation rod distraction and the operation efficacy was observed. 68 Patients were followed up for a mean of 18 months. Results: There were no significant difference in postoperative Cobb angle correction rate and vertebral collapse rate (P〉0.05) between groups; While in the operating time, blood loss, postoperative drainage and VAS score one week after operation in the observation group were better than those in the control group (P〈0.05). Conclusion: The Wiltse approach is better than the posterior midline approach for lumbar spine operation, which develops less injury and less bleeding and faster postoperative recovery, etc.
作者 李桓宇
机构地区 湖北中医药大学
出处 《实用中西医结合临床》 2016年第2期14-16,共3页 Practical Clinical Journal of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine
关键词 腰椎骨折 无神经表现 Wiltse入路 后正中入路 Vertebral fractures No neurological symptom Wiltse approach Posterior midline approach
  • 相关文献

参考文献7

二级参考文献63

  • 1高梁斌,李佛保,李健,张亮,王兴海,石瑾,刘畅,洪辉文.胸腰段脊柱手术与脊髓血供损伤的相关性研究[J].中国临床解剖学杂志,2005,23(3):237-241. 被引量:15
  • 2宁志杰.客观地评价腰椎间盘突出症的现代手术治疗[J].中国矫形外科杂志,2005,13(19):1445-1446. 被引量:8
  • 3张仲华,李士杰,方跃鸣,金正跃,金侃,胡俊,胡华刚.旁正中入路椎弓根螺钉治疗胸腰段椎体骨折[J].中国骨伤,2007,20(3):198-199. 被引量:5
  • 4J.Inamasu,B.H.Guiot.Vascular injury and complication in neurosurgical spine surgery[J].Acta Neurochir,2006,148(4):375-387.
  • 5Fan S,Hu Z,Zhao F,et al.Multifidus muscle changes and clinical effects of one-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion:minimally invasive procedure versus conventional open approach[J].Eur Spine J,2010,19(2):316-324.
  • 6Stevens KJ,Spenciner DB,Griffiths KL,et al.Comparison of minimally invasive and conventional open posterolateral lumbar fusion using magnetic resonance imaging and retraction pressure studies[J].J Spinal Disord Tech,2006,19(2):77-86.
  • 7Park Y,Ha JW.Comparison of one-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion performed with a minimally invasive approach or a traditional open approach[J].Spine,2007,32(5):537-543.
  • 8Kim KT,Lee SH,Suk KS,et al.The quantitative analysis of tissue injury markers after mini-open lumbar fusion[J].Spine (phil Pa 1976),2006,31(6):712-716.
  • 9Afzal S,Akbar S,Dhar SA,et al.Short segment pedicle screw instrumentation and augmentation vertebroplasty in lumbar burst fractures:an experience[J].Eur Spine J,2008,17(3):336-341.
  • 10Defino HL,Canto FR.Low thoracic and lumbar burst fractures:radiographic and functional outcomes[J].Eur Spine J,2007,16(11):1934-1943.

共引文献93

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