期刊文献+

退变性腰椎侧凸患者腰椎前凸矫正程度与疗效的关系 被引量:15

The relationship between lumbar lordosis reconstruction and clinical outcomes in degenerative lumbar scoliosis
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的:评价退变性腰椎侧凸(degenerative lumbar scoliosis,DLS)患者行长节段固定矫形术的疗效,探讨合适的腰椎前凸矫正程度。方法:回顾性分析55例行长节段矫形固定术(至少4个椎体)的DLS患者的临床和影像学资料,随访时间至少2年。采用腰痛和下肢痛VAS评分、ODI评价患者的健康相关生活质量。在全脊柱正侧位X线片上测量脊柱骨盆矢状位参数。根据末次随访时骨盆入射角(pelvic incidence,PI)与腰椎前凸角(1umbarlordosis,LL)之差(PI—LL)是否在±9°范围内分为PI—LL在±9°范围内(PI—LL+组)和不在±9°范围内组(PI—LL-组),使用独立样本£检验比较两组影像参数和生活质量;用散点图和拟合曲线探索合适的LL范围,用独立样本t检验比较该范围内(A组)、外(B组)患者的评分差异;并分组比较不同矢状位平衡(SVA)范围的ODI差异。结果:55例DLS患者年龄为40~75岁(63.2±6.9岁),术前Cobb角为10.2°~52.3°(25.1°±11,5°),PI为23.4°~72.7°(47.5°±11.2°)。术前LL为-19.7°~50.1°(27.6°±15.2°),末次随访时为6.6°~64°(34.5°±11.9°),差异有显著性(P〈0.01);术前和末次随访时SVA无显著性差异(46.1±47.7mmvs49.6±36.9mm,P〉0.05)。末次随访时PI—LL+患者15例,PI-LL-患者40例,PI—LL+患者末次随访时腰痛VAS评分较PI—LL-患者高(4.6±2.5vs.2.9±2.1,P=0.015),下肢痛VAS评分和ODI无显著性差异(P〉0.05)。散点图及拟合曲线显示腰痛VAS评分和ODI在PI—LL为15°~28°时较低.在15°-28°的19例患者与不在15°~28°的36例患者比较.术后腰痛VAS评分更低(P〈0.05),下肢痛VAS评分和ODI无显著性差异(P〉0.05)。29例SVA〈50mm患者的ODI与17例50≤SVA〈80mm患者无最著性差异(P〉0.05),9例SVA≥80mm患者的ODI高于50≤SVA〈80mm的患者(P〈0.01)。结论:L=PI+9°可能并不适合作为国人DLS患者的矫形目标,按照PI—LL=15°~28°的对应关系矫正腰椎前凸可获得较好的疗效;对于老年DLS患者而言,SVA=80mm作为矢状位失衡的评价标准可能更加准确. Objectives: To assess the health-related quality of life after long-segment corrective surgery for degenerative lumbar scoliosis (DLS), and to explore the ideal lumbar lordosis reconstruction. Methods: The study included 55 patients with DLS who underwent long-segment fixation(at least 4 vertebrae), with at least 2 years follow-up. Pre- and post-operative symptoms were assessed by using the visual analog scale(VAS) for low back pain and leg pain; Oswestry disability index(ODI) was used to quantify disability. The sagittal parameters of spine were measured on the anteroposterior and lateral radiographs. Patients were categorized based on whether the postoperative goal of pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) within + 9° was achieved(group PI-LL+) or not(group PI-LL-). Parameters and clinical outcomes were compared by using independent t-test. Scatter diagrams and fitting curves were used to determine the optimal LL range, an independent t-test was used to compare the symptom scores between patients in(group A) and out(group B) in this range. The difference of ODI between different SVA groups were also analyzed. Results: The 55 DLS patients (40-75, 63.2±6.9 years) showed an average Cobb angle of 25.1°±11.5°(10.2°-52.3°), the preoperative PI was 47.5°±11.2°(23.4°-72.7°). The LL at the final follow-up was lower than the preoperative LL (34.5°±11.9° vs 27.6°±15.2°), while there was no difference between the preoperative SVA and the postoperative value. Group PI-LL+(15 patients) showed worse VAS score for low back pain(4.6±2.5 vs 2.9±2.1, P=0.015) than group PI- LL-(40 patients), while there was no difference in VAS score for leg pain or ODI between the two groups(P〉 0.05). Scatter diagrams and fitting curves showed that the VAS score for low back pain and the ODI were lower in the PI-LL range of 15°-28°. Patients in group A(19 cases) had better VAS score for low back pain and ODI than group B (36 cases) at the final follow-up (P〈0.05), while there was no difference in VAS(leg pain) or ODI (P〉0.05). There was no difference in ODI among the 29 patients with SVA〈50mm and the 17 patients with 50mm≤SVA〈80mm (P〉0.05), and the other 9 patients with SVA≥80mm had higher ODI than patients with 50mm≤SVA〈80mm(P〈0.01). Conclusions: The goal of LL=PI±9° may be not suitable for Chinese DLS corrective surgery. A surgical plan based on LL=PI-20°(PI-LL=15°-28°) is related to better outcomes. For elderly DLS patients, it is more accurate to use SVA=80mm as the threshold of sagittal imbalance rather than SVA=50mm.
出处 《中国脊柱脊髓杂志》 CAS CSCD 北大核心 2016年第10期912-918,共7页 Chinese Journal of Spine and Spinal Cord
基金 首都临床特色应用研究专项基金资料助(编号:Z151100004015101)
关键词 退变性腰椎侧凸 手术计划 临床疗效 矢状位失平衡 Degenerative lumbar scoliosis Surgical planning Clinical outcomes Sagittal imbalance
  • 相关文献

参考文献26

  • 1Schwab FJ, Blonde1 B, Bess S, et al. Radiographical spino- pelvic parameters and disability in the setting of adult spinal deformity: a prospective muhicenter analysis[J]. Spine, 2013, 38(13): E803-812.
  • 2Tsai TH, Huang TY, Lieu AS, et al. Functional outcome analysis: instrumented posterior lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar scoliosis[J]. Acta Nenrochir, 2011, 153(3): 547-555.
  • 3Silva FE, Lenke LG. Adult degenerative scoliosis: evaluation and management[J]. Neurosurg Focus, 2010, 28(3): El.
  • 4Jimbo S, Kobayashi T, Aono K, et al. Epidemiology of degen- erative lumbar scoliosis: a community-.based cohort study [J]. Spine, 2012, 37(20): 1763-1770.
  • 5Schwab FJ, Smith VA, Biserni M, et al. Adult scoliosis: a quantitative radiographic and clinical analysis[J]. Spine, 2002, 27(4): 387-392.
  • 6Schwab F, Patel A, Ungar B, et al. Adult spinal deformity- postoperative standing imbalance: how much can you tolerate? an overview of key parameters in assessing alignment and planning corrective surgery[J]. Spine, 2010, 35(25): 2224- 2231.
  • 7Aoki Y, Nakajima A, Takahashi H, et M. Influence of pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch on surgical outcomes of short-segment transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion[J]. BMC Musculoskelet Disord, 2015, 16(1): 213.
  • 8Berjano P, Langella F, Ismael M-F, et al. Successful correc- tion of sagittal imbalance can be calculated on the basis of pelvic incidence and age[J]. Eur Spine J, 2014, 23(Suppl 6): 587-596.
  • 9朱锋,鲍虹达,邱勇,闫鹏,何守玉,周恒才,刘臻,朱泽章.术后骨盆投射角和腰椎前凸角匹配程度与退变性脊柱侧凸术后远期临床疗效的关系[J].中华外科杂志,2015,53(2):110-115. 被引量:17
  • 10Rothenfluh D, Mueller D, Rothenfluh E, et al. Pelvic inci- dence-lumbar lordosis mismatch predisposes to adjacent seg- ment disease after lumbar spinal fusion [J]. Eur Spine J, 2014, 24(6): 1251-1258.

二级参考文献31

  • 1Jimbo S, Kobayashi T, Aono K, et al. Epidemiology of degenerative lumbar scoliosis : a community based cohort study [ J ]. Spine ( Phila Pa 1976) ,2012,37 (20) : 1763-1770.
  • 2Birknes JK, White AP, Albert TJ, et al. Adult degenerative scoliosis : a review [J]. Neurosurgery ,2008,63 ( 3 Suppl) :94-103.
  • 3Terran J1, Schwab F, Shaffrey CI, et al. The SRS-Schwab adultspinal deformity classification:assessment and clinical correlations based on a prospective operative and non-operative cohort [ J ]. Neurosurgery,2012,73 (4) :559-568.
  • 4Schwab F, Ungar B, Blondel B, et al. Scoliosis Research Society- Schwab adult spinal deformity classification: a validation study [J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976),2012,37(12) :1077-1082.
  • 5Schwab F, Patel A, Ungar B, et al. Adult spinal deformity- postoperative standing imbalance :how much can you tolerate? An overview of key parameters in assessing alignment and planning corrective surgery [ J ]. Spine ( Phila Pa 1976 ) , 2010,35 ( 25 ) : 2224 -2231.
  • 6Schwab FJ,Patel A,Shaffrey CI,et al. Sagittal realignment failures following pedicle subtraction osteotomy surgery: are we doing enough? [ J]. J Neurosurg Spine,2012,16(6) :539-546.
  • 7Barrey C, Roussouly P, Pert'in G, et al. Sagittal balance disorders i severe degenerative spine. Can we identify the compensatory mechanisms? [ J]. Eur Spine J,2011,20 Suppl 5:626-633.
  • 8Chalat-Valayer E, Mac-Thiong JM, Paquet J, et al. Sagittal spino- pelvic alignment in chronic low back pain[ Jl. Eur Spine J,2011, 20 Suppl 5:634-640.
  • 9Smith JS, Klineberg E, Schwab F, et al. Change in classification grade by the SRS-Sehwab Adult Spinal Deformity Classification predicts impact on health-related quality of life measures: prospective analysis of operative and nonoperative treatment [ J ]-Spine ( Phila Pa 1976 ) ,2013,38 ( 19 ) : 1663-1671.
  • 10Schwab FJ, Blondel B, Bess S, et al. Radiographical spinopelvic parameters and disability in the setting of adult spinal deformity:a prospective muhicenter analysis [ J ]. Spine ( Phila Pa 1976 ), 2013,38 ( 13 ) : E803-E812.

共引文献53

同被引文献88

引证文献15

二级引证文献50

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