期刊文献+

Quadrant通道下微创治疗军人腰椎峡部不连并滑脱的疗效观察 被引量:3

原文传递
导出
摘要 [目的]探讨采用经皮椎弓根螺钉内固定+Quadrant通道下椎间融合治疗军人腰椎峡部不连并椎体滑脱的临床效果。[方法]2008年7月~2013年12月,采用经皮椎弓根螺钉内固定+Quadrant通道下椎间融合术治疗12例军人腰椎峡部不连并椎体滑脱患者。患者均为男性;年龄20~44岁,平均(28.83±7.65)岁。病程12~120个月,平均(29.17±28.67)个月。腰椎峡部不连并椎体滑脱部位:L_44例,L_58例。[结果]本组手术时间90~135 min,平均(110.42±13.30)min;术中出血量50~200 ml,平均(131.67±40.17)ml;住院时间9~13 d,平均(10.42±1.32)d。手术切口均I期愈合。术后即刻X线片示椎弓根螺钉位置良好。患者均获随访,随访时间9~20个月,平均14.32个月。末次随访患者VAS及ODI评分与术前比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。至末次随访采用Nakai分级评定标准,优12例。按Coe的标准,随访至术后6个月时均已达到骨性融合,至末次随访术后X线片检查未见椎弓根螺钉内固定系统松动、断裂或移位。[结论]经皮椎弓根螺钉内固定+Quadrant通道下椎间融合治疗军人腰椎峡部不连是一种安全、有效、微创的手术方法。
出处 《中国矫形外科杂志》 CAS CSCD 北大核心 2018年第3期275-278,共4页 Orthopedic Journal of China
  • 相关文献

参考文献1

二级参考文献14

  • 1Karikari IO, Isaacs RE. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar in- terbody fusion : a review of techniques and outcomes [ J ] . Spine, 2010,35 (26S) :294 - 301.
  • 2Adogwa O, Parker SL , Bydon A, et al. Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fu- sion :2 - year assessment of narcotic use , return to work , disability , and quality of life [ J ]. J Spinal Disord Tech, 2011,24 ( 8 ) : 479 - 484.
  • 3Lawton CD, Smith ZA, Barnawi A, et al. The surgical technique of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion [ J ]. J Neu- rosurg Sci ,2011,55 (3) :259 - 264.
  • 4Chang KL, Jeong YP, Zhang HY. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interhody fusion using a single interbody cage and a tubular retraction system: technical tips, and perioperative, radiologic and clinical outcomes [ J ]. J Kor Neurosurg Soc ,2010,48 ( 3 ) :219 - 224.
  • 5Gejo R , Kawaguchi Y, Kondoh T, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging and histologic evidence of postoperative back muscle injury in rats [ J ]. Spine,2000,25 ( 8 ) :941 - 946.
  • 6Peng CWB, Yue WM, Poh SY, et al. Clinical and radiological out- comes of minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar inter- body fusion[ J]. Spine ,2009,34( 13 ) :1385 - 1389.
  • 7Rouben D, Casnellie M, Ferguson M. Long - term durability of mini- mal invasive posterior transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion : a clin- ical and radiographic follow - up [ J ]. J Spinal Disord Teeh, 2011, 24 (5) :288 - 296.
  • 8Bagan B, Patel N, Deutsch H, et al. Perioperative complieations of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) : comparison of MIS and open in- terbody fusion techniques [ J ]. Surg Teeh Int,2007,17:281 - 286.
  • 9Bindal RK, Glaze S, Ognoskie M, et al. Surgeon and patient radiation exposure in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fu- sion: Clinical article[J]. J Neurosurg Spine,2008,9(6) :570 -573.
  • 10Parker SL, Adogwa O, Witham TF, et al. Post - operative infection af- ter minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) : literature review and cost analysis [ J ]. Minimally ln- vasive Neurosurg,2011,54(01 ) :33 -37.

共引文献18

同被引文献17

引证文献3

二级引证文献10

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