Comparison of the clinical efficacy between simple vertebral canal decompression and decompression plus laminoplasty.
10.11817/j.issn.1672-7347.2015.05.013
- Author:
Zhiyue LI
1
;
Zepeng ZHANG
;
Shijie CHEN
;
Jicai LI
;
Siyu XIANG
;
Qun ZHAO
Author Information
1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Th ird Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha 410013, China.
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- MeSH:
Decompression, Surgical;
Humans;
Intervertebral Disc Displacement;
surgery;
Laminectomy;
Laminoplasty;
Reconstructive Surgical Procedures;
Retrospective Studies;
Spinal Canal;
surgery;
Spinal Fusion;
Spinal Stenosis;
surgery;
Titanium;
Treatment Outcome
- From:
Journal of Central South University(Medical Sciences)
2015;40(5):533-538
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE:To observe the clinical efficacy of the simple expansion of the spinal canal decompression, decompression plus hydroxyapatite/polyamide artificial lamina reconstruction, and decompression plus titanium mesh reconstruction in the treatment of spinal canal stenosi.
METHODS:A total of 39 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (with or without disc herniation, spondylolisthesis less than I degree), who received therapy of surgery from January, 2011 to January, 2012, were retrospectively analyzed. All patients were divided into 3 groups: a laminectomy surgery alone group (group A, n=15), a decompression plus hydroxyapatite/polyamide artificial lamina reconstruction group (group B, n=14), and a laminectomy decompression plus reconstruction with titanium mesh group (group C, n=10). Intraoperative situation, the postoperative excellent rate and JOA score were analyzed.
RESULTS:The duration and blood loss in surgery in group A was much less than that in the group B and C (P<0.05), but there was no statistical significance between the group B and C. The postoperative excellent rate in three groups were similar in 3 months (P>0.05). Twelve months after the surgery, the group B and C showed advantage over the group A (P<0.05). JOA scores in 3 and 12 months after the surgery were all greater than that before the surgery (P<0.05). There was no difference in excellent rates in 3 groups in 3 months after the operation (P>0.05); the group B and C showed advantage over the group A in 12 months after the operation (P<0.05). No serious complications were related to the surgery in the 3 groups. Imaging changes were not significant difference.
CONCLUSION:The decompression plus hydroxyapatite/polyamide artificial lamina reconstruction and the decompression plus titanium mesh reconstruction show advantages in long-term effect over the simple vertebral canal decompression.
