Pedicle screw fixation with different approaches in treatment of thoracolumbar burst fracture：biocompatibility
10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2016.09.003
- VernacularTitle:比较不同方式置入椎弓根钉内固定修复胸腰椎爆裂骨折的生物相容性
- Author:
Yu HOU
;
Hongjian BU
;
Fan YANG
;
Linjie WANG
;
Shike WU
;
Panxiang LI
;
Zhixing LIANG
;
Bo SUN
;
Zhikun SHEN
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- From:Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research
2016;20(9):1234-1241
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: During the repair of thoracolumbar fracture, pedicle screw fixation is a commonly used treatment method. In the process of fixation, the different approaches can be used. OBJECTIVE: To compare effect and biocompatibility of pedicle screw by percutaneous approach, posterior median approach, and intervertebral space approach for thoracolumbar fracture. METHODS: 118 cases of thoracolumbar fracture were included after pedicle screw fixation. Al patients were divided into three groups according to the approach: posterior median approach group (38 cases), intervertebral space approach group (40 cases) and percutaneous approach group (40 cases). After 12 months of folow-up, perioperative conditions, pain score, vertebral height of anterior border, kyphosis correction effect, adverse events and biological compatibility were compared among three groups. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION:(1) Operation time, intraoperative bleeding and time in bed after surgery were shorter or less in the percutaneous approach and intervertebral space approach groups than in the posterior median approach group. Postoperative drainage was better in percutaneous approach and intervertebral space approach groups than in the posterior median approach group (alP < 0.05). Except drainage in the percutaneous approach and intervertebral space approach groups, no significant difference in other indicators was found. (2) Patients received imaging examination at different time points. The percentage of anterior vertebral height and kyphosis were significantly improved immediately after treatment and in final folow-up (alP < 0.05). No significant difference was detected before treatment, immediately after treatment and in final folow-up. (3) Visual Analogue score was identical before treatment. Visual analogue score was lower in the percutaneous approach and intervertebral space approach groups than in the posterior median approach group at 24 hours and 3 days after treatment and in final folow-up (alP < 0.05). No significant difference was detectable at 24 hours and 3 days after treatment and in final folow-up between the percutaneous approach and intervertebral space approach groups. (4) No rejection or wound non-healing was seen at 12 months after treatment. Some patients suffered from mild low back pain, which was improved by active symptomatic treatment. (5) These findings suggest that intervertebral space approach percutaneous approach obtained satisfactory outcomes compared with posterior median approach for treatment of thoracolumbar spine fractures, and good biocompatibility was found.
