中国现代医生
中國現代醫生
중국현대의생
CHINA MODERN DOCTOR
2014年
26期
145-147
,共3页
腰椎后外侧融合术%腰椎后路椎体间融合术%腰椎椎间盘突出症
腰椎後外側融閤術%腰椎後路椎體間融閤術%腰椎椎間盤突齣癥
요추후외측융합술%요추후로추체간융합술%요추추간반돌출증
Posterolateral lumbar fusion%Posterior lumbar interbody fusion%Lumbar intervertebral disc protrusion
目的:观察腰椎后外侧融合术(PLF)与腰椎后路椎体间融合术(PLIF)治疗腰椎椎间盘突出症的临床疗效。方法按照手术方式将105例腰椎间盘突出症患者进行分组,PLF组52例行PLF术治疗,PLIF组53例行PLIF术治疗,对比术后手术效果。结果两组在手术时间、术中出血量和住院时间方面比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);PLIF组术后总有效率94.34%高于PLF组80.77%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);两组均能够提高椎间高度和增加节段角度,但PLIF组提高椎间高度和增加节段角度幅度明显高于PLF组,差异有高度统计学意义(P<0.01);PLIF组手术并发症发生率7.55%与PLF组15.38%比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 PLIF术治疗椎间盘突出较大或节段不稳的腰椎间盘突出症患者效果确切,能够快速恢复腰椎前柱支撑功能和重建腰椎生理曲度,符合腰椎生物力学原理,在促进患者腰椎功能早期恢复和提高生存质量方面具有重要意义。
目的:觀察腰椎後外側融閤術(PLF)與腰椎後路椎體間融閤術(PLIF)治療腰椎椎間盤突齣癥的臨床療效。方法按照手術方式將105例腰椎間盤突齣癥患者進行分組,PLF組52例行PLF術治療,PLIF組53例行PLIF術治療,對比術後手術效果。結果兩組在手術時間、術中齣血量和住院時間方麵比較,差異無統計學意義(P>0.05);PLIF組術後總有效率94.34%高于PLF組80.77%,差異有統計學意義(P<0.05);兩組均能夠提高椎間高度和增加節段角度,但PLIF組提高椎間高度和增加節段角度幅度明顯高于PLF組,差異有高度統計學意義(P<0.01);PLIF組手術併髮癥髮生率7.55%與PLF組15.38%比較,差異無統計學意義(P>0.05)。結論 PLIF術治療椎間盤突齣較大或節段不穩的腰椎間盤突齣癥患者效果確切,能夠快速恢複腰椎前柱支撐功能和重建腰椎生理麯度,符閤腰椎生物力學原理,在促進患者腰椎功能早期恢複和提高生存質量方麵具有重要意義。
목적:관찰요추후외측융합술(PLF)여요추후로추체간융합술(PLIF)치료요추추간반돌출증적림상료효。방법안조수술방식장105례요추간반돌출증환자진행분조,PLF조52례행PLF술치료,PLIF조53례행PLIF술치료,대비술후수술효과。결과량조재수술시간、술중출혈량화주원시간방면비교,차이무통계학의의(P>0.05);PLIF조술후총유효솔94.34%고우PLF조80.77%,차이유통계학의의(P<0.05);량조균능구제고추간고도화증가절단각도,단PLIF조제고추간고도화증가절단각도폭도명현고우PLF조,차이유고도통계학의의(P<0.01);PLIF조수술병발증발생솔7.55%여PLF조15.38%비교,차이무통계학의의(P>0.05)。결론 PLIF술치료추간반돌출교대혹절단불은적요추간반돌출증환자효과학절,능구쾌속회복요추전주지탱공능화중건요추생리곡도,부합요추생물역학원리,재촉진환자요추공능조기회복화제고생존질량방면구유중요의의。
Objective To observe the clinical efficacy of posterolateral lumbar fusion (PLF) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in treatment of lumbar intervertebral disc protrusion. Methods A total of 105 patients with lumbar inter-vertebral disc protrusion were divided into two groups according to the surgical procedures. 52 cases in the PLF group were treated by PLF and 53 cases in the PLIF group were treated by PLIF. The surgical effects were compared. Results The two groups had no difference in operation duration, intraoperative blood loss and hospital stay, and there was no significant difference (P>0.05). The total effective rate was 94.34% in PLIF group, higher than 80.77% in PLF group, and there was sifference between two groups (P<0.05). Both groups had increase of intervertebral height and segmental angle, but PLIF group had significantly greater increase of intervertebral height and segmental angle, and there was significant difference between two groups ( P<0 . 01 ) . The surgical complication rate was 7 . 55% in PLIF group and 15.38% in PLF group, and there was significant difference(P>0.05). Conclusion PLIF has significant effects for treat-ment of lumbar intervertebral disc protrusion with greater protrusion or segmental instability. PLIF can promote fast re-covery of the supporting function of the anterior lumbar column and reconstruction of lumbar physiological curvature, which is consistent with lumbar biomechanical principles. PLIF has significant meaning in promoting early recovery of lumbar functions and improving life quality.