期刊文献+

经侧方入路腰椎融合术(LLIF)的研究进展 被引量:10

A literature review of lateral lumbar interbody fusion technique
原文传递
导出
摘要 腰椎融合方法较多,经侧方入路腰椎融合术(lateral lumbar interbody fusion,LLIF)是近年发展起来的融合方法,与经后方入路(posterior lumbar interbody fusion,PLIF)、椎间孔入路(transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion,TLIF)以及前方入路(anterior lumbar interbody fusion,ALIF)是临床上比较常用的腰椎融合方法。LLIF是一种微创手术,与其他手术方式相比,术中出血少,创伤小,康复时间短,并发症少,既可避免前方大血管损伤的风险,也可减少后方肌肉、关节突等组织的破坏,但LLIF是否优于其他手术方法尚无统一定论,需要大量的临床试验研究。 Many surgical approaches, such as posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) as well as anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) , are commonly applied in traditional lumbar vertebral fusion surgery. As a new developed technique, lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) is a minimally invasive surgery technique, and has been developed quickly in recent years. It has advantages of less blood loss, less invasion, lower complications rate and less rehabilitation time period. Meanwhile, this technique can not only reduce the risk of vascular injury, but also avoid damage of back structure, such as muscles and bones. By now, however, there is no conclusive evidence to prove that LLIF is better than other surgical approaches and a variety of clinical research trials is still needed to look for the answers.
出处 《中国矫形外科杂志》 CAS CSCD 北大核心 2016年第15期1399-1402,共4页 Orthopedic Journal of China
关键词 腰椎 融合 LLIF 进展 lumbar, fusion, lateral lumbar interbody fusion, Progress
  • 相关文献

参考文献27

  • 1Smith WD, Christian G, Serrano S, et al. A comparison of periopera- tive charges and outcome between open and mini - open approaches for anterior lumbar discectomy and fusion [ J ]. J Clin Neurosci ,2012,19(5):673 -680.
  • 2Ozgur BM, Aryan HE, Pimenta L, et al. Extreme lateral interbody fu- sion (XLIF) : a novel surgical technique for anterior lumbar inter- body fusion [ J ]. Spine J,2006,6 (4) :435 - 443.
  • 3Alimi M, Hofstetter CP, Cong GT, et al. Radiological and clinical out- comes following extreme lateral interbody fusion [ J ]. J Neurosurg Spine ,2014,20 (6) :623 - 635.
  • 4Sembrano JN, Yson SC, Horazdovsky RD, et al. Radiographic compar- ison of lateral lumbar interbody fusion versus traditional fusion ap- proaches: analysis of sagittal contour change [ J ]. Int J Spine Surg, 2015,9(1) :16.
  • 5Knight RQ, Schwaegler P, Hanscom D, et al. Direct lateral lumbar in- terbody fusion for degenerative conditions : early complication profile [J]. J Spinal Disord Tech,2009,22(1 ) :34 -37.
  • 6Hrabalek L, Adamus M, Gryga A,et al. A comparison of complication rate between anterior and lateral approaches to the lumbar spine[ J]. Biomed Pap Med Fac Univ Palacky Olomouc Czech Repub, 2014, 158( 1 ) :127 - 132.
  • 7Direct lateral interbody fusion in patients requiring surgery for spinal instability:a review of the comparative clinical and cost - effective- ness, and guidelines. CADTH rapid response reports [ R ] . Ottawa ( 0N)2015.
  • 8Arnold PM, Anderson KK, McGuire RA. The lateral transpsoas ap- proaeb to the lumbar and thoracie spine: a review [ J ]. Surg Neurol Int ,2012,3 ( Suppl 3 ) : 198 - 215.
  • 9Lee YS, Kim YB, Park SW, et al. Comparison of transforaminal lum- bar interbody fusion with direct lumbar interbody fusion: clinical and radiologieal results [ J ]. J Kor Neurosurg Soe, 2014,56 ( 6 ) : 469 - 474.
  • 10Lee CS,Chung SS,Pae YR,et al. Mini -open approach for direct lat- eral lumbar interbody fusion [ J ]. Asian Spine J, 2014,8 ( 4 ) : 491 - 497.

同被引文献56

引证文献10

二级引证文献18

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