首页|单侧双通道内镜与双侧椎旁肌间入路腰椎间融合比较

单侧双通道内镜与双侧椎旁肌间入路腰椎间融合比较

Unilateral biportal endoscope versus bilateral paravertebral intermuscular approaches for lumbar interbody fusion

扫码查看
[目的]比较单侧双通道内镜(unilateral biportal endoscopic,UBE)下与开放经双侧椎旁肌入路椎间盘切除椎间融合治疗中老年腰椎间盘突出症的临床疗效.[方法]2019年1月—2021年12月本院脊柱外科收治的67例腰椎间盘突出症患者纳入本研究,按照随机数字表法分为两组,UBE组采用UBE下手术,而肌间组采用开放双侧椎旁肌入路,比较两组围手术期、随访及影像结果.[结果]UBE 组在切 口长度[(5.4±0.5)cm vs(7.4±0.9)cm,P<0.001]、术中失血量[(128.7±10.4)mlvs(209.6±15.4)ml,P<0.001]、下地行走时间[(3.2±0.6)d vs(5.8±1.5)d,P<0.001]及住院时间[(9.6±1.3)d vs(11.4±1.5)d,P<0.001]显著小于肌间组,但前者的手术时间[(153.2±12.7)min vs(135.5±10.6)min,P<0.001]、术中透视次数[(5.8±1.4)次 vs(4.5±0.8)次,P<0.001]显著大于后者,UBE组硬膜撕裂发生率(20.6%vs3.0%,P=0.026)显著高于肌间组.随随访时间[(15.2±1.0)个月]推移,两组患者VAS、ODI 评分均显著减少(P<0.05).术后 1 个月 UBE 组的腰痛 VAS 评分[(2.7±0.6)vs(3.0±0.5),P=0.029]、ODI 评分[(30.5±4.6)vs(33.6±5.2),P=0.012]均显著优于肌间组,术后3个月UBE组的ODI评分[(21.5±3.7)vs(24.1±4.7),P=0.014]显著优于肌间组.影像方面,两组患者术后硬膜囊面积、腰椎椎间隙高度、腰椎前凸Cobb角均显著增加(P<0.05),Lenke分级显著改善(P<0.05),相应时间点,两组间上述影像指标的差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05).[结论]UBE椎间盘切除融合术治疗中老年腰椎间盘突出症能够缩短住院时间、减少出血量,有利于患者康复.
[Objective]To compare the clinical efficacy of unilateral biportal endoscopy(UBE)and open bilateral paravertebral inter-muscular(IM)approaches for discectomy and lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation in middle-aged and elderly.[Methods]From January 2019 to December 2021,67 patients who were undergoing surgical treatments for lumbar disc herniation in our hos-pital were included in this study,and were divided into two groups according to random number table method.The patients in the UBE group had operation conducted under UBE,while those in the IM group got discectomy and interbody fusion through the open bilateral paraverte-bral intermuscular approaches.The perioperative period,follow-up and imaging documents of the two groups were compared.[Results]The UBE group proved significantly less than the IM group in terms of incision length[(5.4±0.5)cm vs(7.4±0.9)cm,P<0.001],intraoperative blood loss[(128.7±10.4)ml vs(209.6±15.4)ml,P<0.001],time to regain walking[(3.2±0.6)days vs(5.8±1.5)days,P<0.001]and hospitaliza-tion time[(9.6±1.3)days vs(11.4±1.5)days,P<0.001],but the former was significantly greater than the latter in terms of operative time[(153.2±12.7)min vs(135.5±10.6)min,P<0.001]and the number of intraoperative fluoroscopy[(5.8±1.4)times vs(4.5±0.8)times,P<0.001].In addition,the incidence of dural tear in UBE group was significantly higher than that in the IM group(20.6%vs 3.0%,P=0.026).With time of follow-up lasted for(15.2±1.0)months,the VAS and ODI scores in both groups were significantly reduced(P<0.05).The UBE group was significantly superior to the IM group regrading VAS score[(2.7±0.6)vs(3.0±0.5),P=0.029]and ODI score[(30.5±4.6)vs(33.6±5.2),P=0.012]a month after surgery,as well as ODI score 3 months after operation[(21.5±3.7)vs(24.1±4.7),P=0.014].With respect of imaging,the dural sac area,lumbar intervertebral space height,and lumbar lordotic angle significantly increased postoperatively compared with those pre-operatively(P<0.05),while Lenke grade for fusion significantly improved over time in both groups(P<0.05).However,there were no statisti-cally significant differences in the above image indicators between the two groups at any corresponding time points(P>0.05).[Conclusion]The UBE discectomy and fusion for lumbar disc herniation in the middle-aged and elderly can shorten hospital stay and reduce blood loss,which is conducive to the recovery of patients.

lumbar disc herniationlumbar interbody fusionunilateral biportal endoscopyparavertebral intermuscular approachmiddle-aged and elderly

裴少保、杜怡斌、尹宗生

展开 >

安徽医科大学第一附属医院骨科,安徽合肥 230061

合肥市第一人民医院南区骨科,安徽合肥 230061

腰椎间盘突出症 腰椎椎体间融合术 单侧双通道内镜 椎旁肌间入路 中老年人

2024

中国矫形外科杂志
中国残疾人康复协会 中国人民解放军第八十八医院

中国矫形外科杂志

CSTPCD北大核心
影响因子:1.521
ISSN:1005-8478
年,卷(期):2024.32(5)
  • 24