两种椎间融合器治疗腰椎滑脱症的早期疗效分析  

Comparison of two types of cage for the treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis

作　　者：江华[1,2] 潘政军[1,2] 王双利[1,2] 黄彰[1,2] 潘良春[1,2] 谢杰[1,2] 刘伟[1,2] 王晓陆[1,2] 殷浩[1,2] 

机构地区：[1]安徽医科大学第三附属医院 [2]合肥市第一人民医院骨科,安徽合肥230061

出　　处：《临床骨科杂志》2010年第3期289-291,共3页Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics

摘　　要：目的探讨经椎间孔入路两种融合器腰椎体间融合术(TLIF)的适应证及疗效。方法 24例腰椎滑脱症患者,膨胀型融合器加钉棒内固定15例(A组),入路型融合器加钉棒内固定9例(B组),均行椎间植骨。比较二者的手术时间、失血量、并发症以及手术前后的JOA评分和融合率。结果 24例均获随访,时间4～30(16.6±3.2)个月,两组疗效、JOA评分及融合率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。A组手术时间、失血量及并发症明显多于B组(P<0.01),但椎间隙撑开效果好于B组。结论两组方法均可达到理想的治疗效果,但应根据滑脱类型、程度及患者的临床表现选择适应证。Objective To compare the effect and indication of two types of cage with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion（TLIF）technique for the treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis.Methods Twenty four patients of lumbar spondylolisthesis were treated with swelling cage and pedicle screw fixation（group A,15 cases）or approach cage and pedicle screw fixation（group B,9 cases）.An observational study of operative duration,amount of bleeding during operation,complications,JOA score,rate of bone graft fusion was carried out.Results All cases were followed up for 4~30 months and the average follow-up time was 16.6 months.No significant difference in effect,JOA score and the rate of bone graft fusion was found between group A and group B（P0.05）after operation.The operative duration,bleeding amount and complication of group A were more than that of group B（P0.01）.Conclusions Ideal effect can be achieved by both techniques.The techniques used should conform to the type and extent of spondylolisthesis and clinical findings.

关 键 词：TLIF 腰椎滑脱 椎体间融合 内固定 并发症 

分 类 号：R681.5[医药卫生—骨科学] R687.3[医药卫生—外科学]