Two kinds of posterior intervertebral fusion for lumbar spondylolisthesis:fusion rate and height of intervertebral loss
10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2015.35.011
- VernacularTitle:后路两种椎间融合方式修复腰椎滑脱：植骨融合率及椎间隙丢失高度的比较
- Author:
Chengwen HE
;
Ruijun BAI
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Spondylolysis;
Ilium;
Spinal Fusion;
Blood Loss,Surgical
- From:
Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research
2015;(35):5630-5635
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND:The major aim of repair of lumbar spondylolisthesis is to restore and reconstruct the stability of spine sequence, and to relieve compression of herniated disc on nerve root. Pedicle screw system and bone graft fusion become the preferred way to treat spondylolisthesis of most scholars. Most scholars are prone to posterior interbody fusion or posterolateral interbody fusion.
OBJECTIVE:To compare the clinical curative effects of posterior autologous iliac bone graft fusion and posterior Cage intervertebral bone graft fusion in patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis by observing fusion rate and height of intervertebral loss.
METHODS:A total of 61 patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis in Xuancheng Central Hospital from July 2008 to December 2013 were enrol ed in this study. According to the different types of interbody fusion, 37 cases in autologous ilium group received posterior autologous iliac bone graft fusion. 24 cases in the Cage interbody fusion cage group underwent posterior Cage interbody fusion cage fusion. Operation time, blood loss, spondylolisthesis reduction, graft fusion and Japanese Orthopaedic Association score were compared between
the two groups. The significance of different fusion manners on prognosis was explored in patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION:No significant difference in blood loss was detected between the two groups (P>0.05). However, the operation time was significantly longer in the autologous ilium group than in the Cage interbody fusion cage group (P<0.05). The reduction rate, bone graft fusion rate and improvement rate of clinical curative effects were good in both groups, and no significant difference was detectable in above indexes between the two groups (P>0.05). Significant difference in the height of intervertebral loss was detectable between the two groups in final fol ow-up (P<0.05). The height of intervertebral loss was better in the Cage interbody fusion cage group than in the autologous ilium group. These findings indicate that two kinds of bone graft fusion manners for lumbar spondylolisthesis obtained good reduction and clinical curative effects, but the height of intervertebral loss was smal in the Cage interbody fusion cage fusion during long-period fol ow-up, and the clinical effect was good.
