OBJECTIVETo evaluate the clinical and radiological efficacy of paraspinal muscle approach with winglike working channel in the treatment of thoracic and lumbar spine fracture.

METHODSFrom October 2010 to August 2012, a total of 51 patients with thoracic and lumbar spine fractures without neurological symptoms were enrolled in the study, including 32 males and 19 females. All patients were divided into two groups: 26 patients were treated through posterior paraspinal muscle approach with winglike working channel, and 25 patients were treated through traditional posterior approach. In all patients, the interval between injury and operation was less than two weeks; the vertebral canal blocked area was less than 1/3 in sagittal diameter; the compression of the fractured vertebra height was less than 2/3. And the patients with pathological fracture and severe osteoporosis were excluded. The perioperative index including operative blood loss, draining loss, operative time, postoperative bed time were recorded. The clinical results were evaluated by visual analogue scale (VAS) for back pain preoperatively, at 3 days, 3 months, the last follow-up postoperatively and modified Macnab criteria at the last follow-up. The radiological results were evaluated by sagittal Cobb angle and the anterior height of the fractured vertebra. The data of two groups were compared statistically with paired and independent t test, χ² test, Mann-Whitney U test and Wilcoxon test.

RESULTSAll patients were followed up with average of 16.6 months. In the two groups, the operative blood loss was respectively (91.5 ± 36.6) ml and (209.2 ± 38.3) ml (t=-11.216, P=0.000), draining loss was (13.7±4.4) ml and (162.3 ± 56.6) ml (t=-13.352, P=0.000), postoperative bed time was (87.3 ± 11.5) hours and (118.4 ± 20.4) hours (t=-6.727, P=0.000), VAS for back pain at 3 days postoperatively was 5.5 ± 1.0 and 6.4 ± 0.8 (t=-3.304, P=0.002), also VAS at the last follow-up was 1.0 (1.0) and 2.0 (1.0) (U=191.0, P=0.008). Data above showed significant differences between the two groups.No significant differences were found in operative time, (109.0 ± 29.7) min vs. (119.2 ± 26.8) min (t=-1.283, P=0.206), and modified Macnab criteria (χ²=0.513, P=0.774) between the two groups. The anterior height of the fractured vertebra preoperatively, at 1 week and the last follow-up postoperatively of the two groups were respectively (57.2 ± 11.8)% and (55.2 ± 10.9)% (t=0.685, P=0.496), (95.2 ± 8.3)% and (95.3 ± 5.8%) (t=-0.068, P=0.946), (92.9 ± 6.7)% and (92.1 ± 5.6)% (t=0.505, P=0.615). The sagittal Cobb angles preoperatively, at 1 week and the last follow-up postoperatively of the two groups were respectively 21.0° (12.5°) and 23.0° (12.0°) (U=316.0, P=0.544), 3.0° (5.5°) and 4.0° (4.5°) (U=342.5, P=0.893), 4.0° (5.5°) and 6.0° (6.0°) (U=328.5, P=0.701). There were no significant differences of these radiological results between the two groups in the same time point.

CONCLUSIONThe paraspinal muscle approach with winglike working channel in the treatment of thoracic and lumbar spine fracture is an efficient surgical option which can acquire satisfactory clinical and radiological results.