Minimally invasiveversus open posterior lumbar interbody fusion for single-segment degenerative lumbar disease：the rate of interbody fusion
10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2015.39.016
- VernacularTitle:微创与开放后路腰椎间融合修复单节段腰椎退变性疾病：椎间融合率比较
- Author:
Ximin GUO
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Lumbar Vertebrae;
Surgical Procedures,Operative;
Spinal Fusion;
Surgical Procedures,Minimaly Invasive;
Internal Fixators
- From:
Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research
2015;(39):6321-6326
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND:With the aging population, the incidence of lumbar degenerative disease was apparently increased, but how to treatment of degenerative lumbar disease remains controversial.
OBJECTIVE:To compare clinical and radiographic results of minimaly invasive posterior lumbar interbody fusion and open posterior lumbar interbody fusion for single-segment degenerative lumbar disease.
METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 97 patients with single-segment degenerative lumbar disease, who were treated in the Huishan District People’s Hospital of Wuxi City from July 2006 to July 2012. These patients were divided into minimal group (minimaly invasive posterior lumbar interbody fusion;n=51) and open group (open posterior lumbar interbody fusion;n=46). These data were compared between the two groups, including operative time, blood loss (intraoperative blood volume+postoperative drainage volume), total blood transfusion, postoperative back pain (visual analogue scale), length of hospital stay, bed time, perioperative complications, clinical function (Oswestry disability index), and radiographic results.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION:Al of 97 patients were folowed up. The duration of folow-up was 28-78 months and 27-76 months in minimal group and open group, respectively. There was no significant difference between the minimal group and open group in term of folowed-up time (P=0.981). Operative time, blood loss, total blood transfusion, bed time, length of hospital stay and visual analogue scale score during final folow-up were significantly lower in the minimal group than in the open group (P < 0.05). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in Oswestry disability index during final folow-up, the rate of screw malposition, the rate of Cage shift, loss value of intervertebral height and the rate of interbody fusion (P > 0.05). These results indicate that for the single-segment degenerative lumbar disease, the use of minimaly invasive posterior lumbar interbody fusion or open posterior lumbar interbody fusion can obtain satisfactory clinical function, but the minimaly invasive posterior lumbar interbody fusion has the advantages of a less trauma, shorter length of hospital stay and bed stay, and lighter back pain.
