摘要
目的探讨微创椎弓根螺钉内固定手术与传统手术治疗胸腰椎骨折的临床效果。方法将96例患者随机分为微创组(n=44)和传统手术组(n=52)。微创组在透视下小创口经肌间隙行椎弓根螺钉内固定手术,传统手术组行传统开放式切开椎弓根螺钉内固定手术。对两组的围手术期情况、矫形影像学效果、患者疼痛程度(VAS评分)及术后随访期间生活质量(Oswestry功能障碍指数评分)进行评估。结果微创组术中出血量、引流量、住院时间显著少于传统手术组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。术后1周、3个月、6个月的疼痛程度比较,微创组均显著低于传统手术组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。微创组矫形效果与传统手术组相比差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。Oswestry评分显示两组患者术前均为重度功能障碍,术后均有明显改善,表现为轻度功能障碍,但微创组与传统手术组之间相比差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论两种手术方式均能改善胸腰椎骨折患者的伤椎形态及生活质量,但与传统手术相比,微创手术椎弓根螺钉内固定治疗胸腰椎骨折出血量少,疼痛程度低,住院时间短,临床综合治疗效果更好。
Objective To study efficacy of minimally invasive percutaneous surgery with screw internal fixation treating thoracolumbar fractures pedicle. Methods 96 patients with a thoracolumbar and lumbar fracture were divided into two groups randomly. Patient of minimally invasive group accepted minimally invasive percutaneous pedicle screw fixation and patient of traditional surgery group were treated with traditional open pedicle screw internal fixation surgery. Then the perioperative index,clinic efficacy,and imaging results were compared. Results The intraoperative blood loss,postoperative drainage,the length of stay of minimally invasive group were lower than that of traditional surgery group significantly（ P〈0. 05）. The imaging effects and Oswestry disability index were better after surgery,but there was no significant difference between minimally invasive group and traditional surgery group（ P〉0. 05）. Conclusion Minimally invasive operation in the treatment of thoracolumbar fractures has small incision,less blood loss,quick recovery,less postoperative pain. The comprehensive curative effect is superior to the traditional open surgery.
出处
《临床和实验医学杂志》
2015年第15期1286-1289,共4页
Journal of Clinical and Experimental Medicine
关键词
胸腰椎骨折
微创手术
传统手术
螺钉内固定
Thoracolumbar fractures
Minimally invasive
Traditional surgery
Screw internal fixation
