Spondylolisthesis

脊椎滑脱
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    我们比较了单纯减压和减压与融合手术治疗腰椎管狭窄症,有或没有退行性腰椎滑脱(DS)。目的是评估两组之间的五年结局是否不同。同一试验的两年结果显示没有差异。
    瑞典椎管狭窄研究是一项多中心随机对照试验,招募于2006年9月至2012年2月。共247例一或两级中央型腰椎管狭窄症患者,通过DS的存在进行分层,随机分为单独减压或融合减压。五年Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)是主要结果。次要结果是EuroQol五维问卷(EQ-5D),背部和腿部疼痛的视觉模拟量表,和患者报告的满意度,疼痛减轻,增加步行距离。记录再手术率。
    213名(95%)合格患者(平均年龄67岁;155名女性(67%))完成了5年随访。五年后,无论治疗如何,ODI都是相似的,单独减压的平均值为25(SD18),融合减压的平均值为28(SD22)(p=0.226)。单独减压的平均EQ-5D高于融合(0.69(SD0.28)对0.59(SD0.34);p=0.027)。在no-DS子集中,与单纯减压术(80%)相比,融合术后腿部疼痛减轻的患者较少(58%)(相对危险度(RR)0.71(95%置信区间(CI)0.53~0.97).随后的脊柱手术频率为24%的减压融合和22%的单独减压(RR1.1(95%CI0.69至1.8))。
    在椎管狭窄手术中增加融合减压术,有或没有脊椎前移,没有改善五年ODI,这与我们的两年报告一致。在两年内没有差异的三个次要结果有利于在五年内单独减压。我们的结果支持单独减压作为椎管狭窄手术的首选方法。
    UNASSIGNED: We compared decompression alone to decompression with fusion surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis, with or without degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS). The aim was to evaluate if five-year outcomes differed between the groups. The two-year results from the same trial revealed no differences.
    UNASSIGNED: The Swedish Spinal Stenosis Study was a multicentre randomized controlled trial with recruitment from September 2006 to February 2012. A total of 247 patients with one- or two-level central lumbar spinal stenosis, stratified by the presence of DS, were randomized to decompression alone or decompression with fusion. The five-year Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were the EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D), visual analogue scales for back and leg pain, and patient-reported satisfaction, decreased pain, and increased walking distance. The reoperation rate was recorded.
    UNASSIGNED: Five-year follow-up was completed by 213 (95%) of the eligible patients (mean age 67 years; 155 female (67%)). After five years, ODI was similar irrespective of treatment, with a mean of 25 (SD 18) for decompression alone and 28 (SD 22) for decompression with fusion (p = 0.226). Mean EQ-5D was higher for decompression alone than for fusion (0.69 (SD 0.28) vs 0.59 (SD 0.34); p = 0.027). In the no-DS subset, fewer patients reported decreased leg pain after fusion (58%) than with decompression alone (80%) (relative risk (RR) 0.71 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 0.97). The frequency of subsequent spinal surgery was 24% for decompression with fusion and 22% for decompression alone (RR 1.1 (95% CI 0.69 to 1.8)).
    UNASSIGNED: Adding fusion to decompression in spinal stenosis surgery, with or without spondylolisthesis, does not improve the five-year ODI, which is consistent with our two-year report. Three secondary outcomes that did not differ at two years favoured decompression alone at five years. Our results support decompression alone as the preferred method for operating on spinal stenosis.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    后路腰椎椎间融合术(PLIF)因提供明确的减压和固定而被广泛用于治疗退行性腰椎滑脱。虽然它有几个优点,它有一些缺点和风险,如椎旁肌肉损伤,术中潜在出血,术后疼痛,硬件故障,沉降,和医疗合并症。腰椎减压双侧椎板切除术加棘突间固定术(DLISF)创伤小,可用于部分PLIF患者,但这还没有报道。比较DLISF与PLIF治疗低度腰椎滑脱的疗效和安全性。我们回顾性分析了81例I级腰椎滑脱患者的病历,接受PLIF或DLISF治疗并随访超过1年。手术结果,视觉模拟量表,放射学结果,包括Cobb角和身体平移的差异,并对术后并发症进行评估。41名患者接受了PLIF,40例接受DLISF。PLIF和DLISF组手术时间分别为271.0±57.2和150.6±29.3分钟,分别。PLIF组的估计失血量明显高于DLISF组(290.7±232.6vs122.2±82.7mL,P<.001)。身体平移在两组之间没有显着差异。与基线数据相比,1年随访期间总体疼痛改善。DLISF组的内科并发症明显较低,而PLIF组的围手术期并发症和硬件问题较高.DLISF的结果,侵入性较小,与低级别腰椎滑脱患者的PLIF结局相当.作为一种打捞技术,与PLIF相比,DLISF可能是一个不错的选择。
    Posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) is widely used to treat degenerative spondylolisthesis because it provides definitive decompression and fixation. Although it has several advantages, it has some disadvantages and risks, such as paraspinal muscle injury, potential intraoperative bleeding, postoperative pain, hardware failure, subsidence, and medical comorbidity. Lumbar decompressive bilateral laminectomy with interspinous fixation (DLISF) is less invasive and can be used on some patients with PLIF, but this has not been reported. To compare the efficacy and safety of DLISF in the treatment of low-grade lumbar spondylolisthesis with that of PLIF. We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of 81 patients with grade I spondylolisthesis, who had undergone PLIF or DLISF and were followed up for more than 1 year. Surgical outcomes, visual analog scale, radiologic outcomes, including Cobb angle and difference in body translation, and postoperative complications were assessed. Forty-one patients underwent PLIF, whereas 40 underwent DLISF. The operative times were 271.0 ± 57.2 and 150.6 ± 29.3 minutes for the PLIF and DLISF groups, respectively. The estimated blood loss was significantly higher in the PLIF group versus the DLISF group (290.7 ± 232.6 vs 122.2 ± 82.7 mL, P < .001). Body translation did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. Overall pain improved during the 1-year follow-up when compared with baseline data. Medical complications were significantly lower in the DLISF group, whereas perioperative complications and hardware issues were higher in the PLIF group. The outcomes of DLISF, which is less invasive, were comparable to PLIF outcomes in patients with low-grade spondylolisthesis. As a salvage technique, DLISF may be a good option when compared with PLIF.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:患者教育不足与疾病相关的发病率增加和获得护理的机会减少有关。然而,教育水平之间的关联,术前疾病严重程度,腰椎滑脱患者的术后结局还有待探讨.
    方法:质量结果数据库(QOD)的脊椎滑脱数据集-SpineCORe研究小组前瞻性收集的12个最高注册地点的数据,5年随访81%-被利用并分层教育水平。患者分为三类(高中或以下,graduate,或研究生)。基线和随访时记录的患者报告结局指标(PROM)包括Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)评分,EQ-5D,质量调整寿命年,背部和腿部疼痛的数字评定量表(NRS)评分。用PROM测量疾病严重程度。术后,患者还完成了北美脊柱协会的评估,以衡量他们对手术的满意度.多因素回归分析用于比较受教育程度与疾病严重程度和术后结局。
    结果:共有608名患者接受了分析,260人(42.8%)处于高中或以下教育水平。在单变量分析中,在受教育程度较低的患者中,基线疾病严重程度更差.在多元回归分析中,与毕业生相比,具有研究生教育水平的患者的ODI得分显着降低(β=-3.75,95%CI-7.31至-0.2,p=0.039),而其他PROM在基线时没有显著差异。术后五年,patientsfromvariouseducationalbackgrowsexhibitedsimilarratesofminimalclinicalimportantdifferencesinPROM.Nevertheless,受教育程度最低的患者ODI评分较高(27.1,p<0.01),较低的EQ-5D得分(0.701,p<0.01),和更高的NRS腿痛(3.0,p<0.01)和背痛(4.0,p<0.01)分数相比,那些有研究生或研究生教育水平。术后满意度的几率在5年的队列之间也是相当的(参考,研究生水平;高中或以下,OR0.87,95%CI0.46-1.64,p=0.659;研究生,OR1.6,95%CI0.7-3.65,p=0.262)。
    结论:腰椎滑脱患者较低的患者教育水平与较高的基线疾病严重程度相关。无论教育背景如何,手术都表现出类似的益处;然而,受教育程度较低的个体报告总体结局较低.这强调需要提高健康素养,以减轻报告结果的差距。
    OBJECTIVE: Deficiency in patient education has been correlated with increased disease-related morbidity and decreased access to care. However, the associations between educational level, preoperative disease severity, and postoperative outcomes in patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis have yet to be explored.
    METHODS: The spondylolisthesis dataset of the Quality Outcomes Database (QOD)-a cohort with prospectively collected data by the SpineCORe study team of the 12 highest enrolling sites with an 81% follow-up at 5 years -was utilized and stratified for educational level. Patients were classified into three categories (high school or less, graduate, or postgraduate). Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) documented at baseline and follow-up included Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score, EQ-5D in quality-adjusted life years, and numeric rating scale (NRS) scores for back and leg pain. Disease severity was measured with PROMs. Postoperatively, patients also completed the North American Spine Society assessment to measure their satisfaction with surgery. Multivariable regression analysis was used to compare education level with disease severity and postoperative outcomes.
    RESULTS: A total of 608 patients underwent analysis, with 260 individuals (42.8%) at an educational level of high school or less. On univariate analysis, baseline disease severity was worse among patients with lower levels of education. On multivariable regression analysis, patients with postgraduate level of education had significantly lower ODI scores (β = -3.75, 95% CI -7.31 to -0.2, p = 0.039) compared to graduates, while the other PROMs were not associated with significant differences at baseline. Five years postoperatively, patients from various educational backgrounds exhibited similar rates of minimal clinically important differences in PROMs. Nevertheless, patients with the lowest educational level had higher ODI scores (27.1, p < 0.01), lower EQ-5D scores (0.701, p < 0.01), and higher NRS leg pain (3.0, p < 0.01) and back pain (4.0, p < 0.01) scores compared to those with graduate or postgraduate levels of education. The odds for postoperative satisfaction were also comparable between cohorts at 5 years (reference, graduate level; high school or less, OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.46-1.64, p = 0.659; postgraduate, OR 1.6, 95% CI 0.7-3.65, p = 0.262).
    CONCLUSIONS: Lower patient education level was associated with a greater baseline disease severity in patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis. Surgery demonstrated similar benefits irrespective of educational background; however, individuals with lower educational level reported lower outcomes overall. This emphasizes the need for enhanced health literacy to mitigate disparities for reported outcomes.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:腰椎管狭窄(LSS)和腰椎滑脱(SPL)的特征是退行性脊柱病变,并且具有相当大的相似性。然而,对于这些疾病是否建议运动或限制运动,意见不一。很少有研究客观地比较了日常体力活动对LSS和SPL的影响,因为不可能在种族和实践上限制活动。我们调查了由于社交距离(SoD)而限制体力活动对LSS和SPL的影响,重点关注大流行期间医疗负担变化的方面。
    方法:我们纳入了2017年首次诊断为LSS和SPL的患者,并在实施SoD政策前后随访了两年。作为控制,我们对2015年首次访视并随访4年无SoD的患者进行了分析.通用数据模型用于分析每个患者的诊断代码和治疗。通过回归时间不连续性来分析医院就诊和医疗费用,以控制对因变量的时间影响。
    结果:在33,484名患者中,包括2,615个LSS和446个SPL。在LSS中观察到住院次数显着减少(差异,-3.94次/月·100例;p=0.023)和SPL(差异,-3.44次/月·100例患者;p=0.026)SoD后组。在对照组的数据中未观察到这种降低。关于医疗费用,LSS组显示中位数共付额在统计学上显着降低(差异,-$45/月·患者;p<0.001)SoD后,而在SPL组中未观察到显着变化(差异,-19美元/月·患者;p=0.160)。
    结论:在SoD期间限制体力活动降低了LSS患者的医疗负担,相反,对SPL患者无显著影响.在身体不活动的情况下,LSS患者可能会低估他们的症状,同时保持适当的活动水平可能对SPL患者有益。
    BACKGROUND: Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) and spondylolisthesis (SPL) are characterized as degenerative spinal pathologies and share considerable similarities. However, opinions vary on whether to recommend exercise or restrict it for these diseases. Few studies have objectively compared the effects of daily physical activity on LSS and SPL because it is impossible to restrict activities ethnically and practically. We investigated the effect of restricting physical activity due to social distancing (SoD) on LSS and SPL, focusing on the aspect of healthcare burden changes during the pandemic period.
    METHODS: We included first-visit patients diagnosed exclusively with LSS and SPL in 2017 and followed them up for two years before and after the implementation of the SoD policy. As controls, patients who first visited in 2015 and were followed for four years without SoD were analyzed. The common data model was employed to analyze each patient\'s diagnostic codes and treatments. Hospital visits and medical costs were analyzed by regression discontinuity in time to control for temporal effects on dependent variables.
    RESULTS: Among 33,484 patients, 2,615 with LSS and 446 with SPL were included. A significant decrease in hospital visits was observed in the LSS (difference, -3.94 times/month·100 patients; p = 0.023) and SPL (difference, -3.44 times/month·100 patients; p = 0.026) groups after SoD. This decrease was not observed in the data from the control group. Concerning medical costs, the LSS group showed a statistically significant reduction in median copayment (difference, -$45/month·patient; p < 0.001) after SoD, whereas a significant change was not observed in the SPL group (difference, -$19/month·patient; p = 0.160).
    CONCLUSIONS: Restricted physical activity during the SoD period decreased the healthcare burden for patients with LSS or, conversely, it did not significantly affect patients with SPL. Under circumstances of physical inactivity, patients with LSS may underrate their symptoms, while maintaining an appropriate activity level may be beneficial for patients with SPL.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    UNASSIGNED: To compare the effectiveness of unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (UBE-TLIF) and endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Endo-TLIF) in the treatment of single-segment degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis with lumbar spondylolisthesis.
    UNASSIGNED: Between November 2019 and May 2023, a total of 81 patients with single-segment degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis with lumbar spondylolisthesis who met the selection criteria were enrolled. They were randomly divided into UBE-TLIF group (39 cases) and Endo-TLIF group (42 cases). There was no significant difference in baseline data between the two groups ( P>0.05), including gender, age, body mass index, surgical segment, and preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for low back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and serum markers including creatine kinase (CK) and C reactive protein (CRP). Total blood loss (TBL), intraoperative blood loss, hidden blood loss (HBL), postoperative drainage volume, and operation time were recorded and compared between the two groups. Serum markers (CK, CRP) levels were compared between the two groups at 1 day before operation and 1, 3, and 5 days after operation. Furthermore, the VAS scores for low back and leg pain, and ODI at 1 day before operation and 1 day, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after operation, and intervertebral fusion rate at 12 months after operation were compared between the two groups.
    UNASSIGNED: All surgeries were completed successfully without occurrence of incision infection, vascular or nerve injury, epidural hematoma, dural tear, or postoperative paraplegia. The operation time in UBE-TLIF group was significantly shorter than that in Endo-TLIF group, but the intraoperative blood loss, TBL, and HBL in UBE-TLIF group were significantly more than those in Endo-TLIF group ( P<0.05). There was no significant difference in postoperative drainage volume between the two groups ( P>0.05). The levels of CK at 1 day and 3 days after operation and CRP at 1, 3, and 5 days after operation in UBE-TLIF group were slightly higher than those in the Endo-TLIF group ( P<0.05), while there was no significant difference in the levels of CK and CPR between the two groups at other time points ( P>0.05). All patients were followed up 12 months. VAS score of low back and leg pain and ODI at each time point after operation significantly improved when compared with those before operation in the two groups ( P<0.05); there was no significant difference in VAS score of low back and leg pain and ODI between the two groups at each time point after operation ( P>0.05). There was no significant difference in the intervertebral fusion rate between the two groups at 12 months after operation ( P>0.05).
    UNASSIGNED: UBE-TLIF and Endo-TLIF are both effective methods for treating degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis with lumbar spondylolisthesis. However, compared to Endo-TLIF, UBE-TLIF requires further improvement in minimally invasive techniques to reduce tissue trauma and blood loss.
    UNASSIGNED: 比较单侧双通道脊柱内镜下经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术(unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion,UBE-TLIF)与单通道脊柱内镜下经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术(endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion,Endo-TLIF)对单节段退行性腰椎管狭窄症伴腰椎滑脱的治疗效果。.
    UNASSIGNED: 纳入2019年11月—2023年5月收治且符合选择标准的81例单节段退行性腰椎管狭窄症伴腰椎滑脱患者,随机分为UBE-TLIF组(39例)和Endo-TLIF组(42例)。两组患者性别、年龄、身体质量指数、手术节段及术前腰、腿痛疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)、Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)、血清学指标肌酸激酶(creatine kinase,CK)和C反应蛋白(C reactive protein,CRP)水平等基线资料比较差异均无统计学意义( P>0.05)。记录并比较两组患者总失血量(total blood loss,TBL)、术中失血量、隐性失血量(hidden blood loss,HBL)、术后引流量、手术时间;比较两组术前1 d及术后1、3、5 d血清学指标CK、CRP水平,术前1 d及术后1 d、3个月、6个月、12个月腰、腿痛VAS评分、ODI及术后12个月椎间融合率。.
    UNASSIGNED: 所有手术均顺利完成,无切口感染、血管神经损伤、硬膜外血肿、硬脑膜撕裂和术后截瘫等情况发生。UBE-TLIF组手术时间少于Endo-TLIF组,但术中失血量、TBL、HBL均多于Endo-TLIF组,差异均有统计学意义( P<0.05);两组术后引流量比较差异无统计学意义( P>0.05)。UBE-TLIF组术后1、3 d CK水平及术后1、3、5 d CRP水平均高于Endo-TLIF组( P<0.05);其余时间点两组CK和CPR水平比较差异无统计学意义( P>0.05)。两组患者均获随访12个月。两组术后各时间点腰、腿痛VAS评分及ODI均较术前显著改善( P<0.05);术后各时间点两组间腰、腿痛VAS评分及ODI比较差异均无统计学意义( P>0.05)。术后12个月两组椎间融合率比较差异亦无统计学意义( P>0.05)。.
    UNASSIGNED: UBE-TLIF与Endo-TLIF均为治疗退行性腰椎管狭窄症伴腰椎滑脱的有效方法,但与Endo-TLIF相比,UBE-TLIF需在微创技术上进一步改进,以减少组织创伤与失血量。.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:减压加腰椎关节置换与减压加器械腰椎融合术治疗腰椎管狭窄和I级退行性腰椎滑脱患者的疗效比较尚不清楚。
    方法:在本随机分组中,控制,食品和药物管理局研究性器械豁免试验,我们将单级腰椎管狭窄和I级退行性腰椎滑脱的患者分为减压+腰椎关节置换术(关节成形术组)或减压+融合术(融合术组).主要结果是预定的复合临床成功评分。次要结果包括Oswestry残疾指数(ODI),视觉模拟量表(VAS)背部和腿部疼痛,苏黎世申报问卷(ZCQ),简表(SF)-12,射线照相参数,手术变量,和并发症。
    结果:总共321名成年患者以2:1的方式随机分组,219例患者被分配接受关节突关节成形术,102例患者被分配接受融合术。其中,关节成形术组113例(51.6%)和融合组47例(46.1%)患者术后随访24个月或被认为早期临床失败被纳入主要结果分析。关节成形术组获得复合临床成功的患者比例高于融合组(73.5%对25.5%;p<0.001)。相当于47.9%的组间差异(95%置信区间,33.0%至62.8%)。在大多数患者报告的结局指标(包括ODI,VAS背痛,和所有ZCQ分量评分)在术后24个月。两组在手术变量或并发症方面没有显着差异,除了融合组有症状的相邻节段变性的发生率更高。
    结论:在腰椎管狭窄和I级退行性腰椎滑脱患者中,腰椎小关节置换术与术后24个月的融合相比,复合临床成功率更高。
    方法:治疗级别I.有关证据级别的完整描述,请参阅作者说明。
    BACKGROUND: The comparative effectiveness of decompression plus lumbar facet arthroplasty versus decompression plus instrumented lumbar spinal fusion in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and grade-I degenerative spondylolisthesis is unknown.
    METHODS: In this randomized, controlled, Food and Drug Administration Investigational Device Exemption trial, we assigned patients who had single-level lumbar spinal stenosis and grade-I degenerative spondylolisthesis to undergo decompression plus lumbar facet arthroplasty (arthroplasty group) or decompression plus fusion (fusion group). The primary outcome was a predetermined composite clinical success score. Secondary outcomes included the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS) back and leg pain, Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ), Short Form (SF)-12, radiographic parameters, surgical variables, and complications.
    RESULTS: A total of 321 adult patients were randomized in a 2:1 fashion, with 219 patients assigned to undergo facet arthroplasty and 102 patients assigned to undergo fusion. Of these, 113 patients (51.6%) in the arthroplasty group and 47 (46.1%) in the fusion group who had either reached 24 months of postoperative follow-up or were deemed early clinical failures were included in the primary outcome analysis. The arthroplasty group had a higher proportion of patients who achieved composite clinical success than did the fusion group (73.5% versus 25.5%; p < 0.001), equating to a between-group difference of 47.9% (95% confidence interval, 33.0% to 62.8%). The arthroplasty group outperformed the fusion group in most patient-reported outcome measures (including the ODI, VAS back pain, and all ZCQ component scores) at 24 months postoperatively. There were no significant differences between groups in surgical variables or complications, except that the fusion group had a higher rate of developing symptomatic adjacent segment degeneration.
    CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and grade-I degenerative spondylolisthesis, lumbar facet arthroplasty was associated with a higher rate of composite clinical success than fusion was at 24 months postoperatively.
    METHODS: Therapeutic Level I . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:经椎间孔硬膜外类固醇注射(TFESI)通常用于治疗腰骶部神经根病。尽管具有抗炎特性,尚未研究添加3%高渗盐水。
    目的:比较添加0.9%NaCl(N组)与添加NaCl的效果TFESI中3%NaCl(H组)用于腰骶神经根病。
    方法:这项回顾性研究比较了使用利多卡因进行的TFESI,曲安奈德和0.9%NaCl。主要结果是3个月时口头评定量表(VRS;0-100)疼痛减轻≥30%的患者比例。次要结局指标包括在1个月和6个月时疼痛改善至少30%的患者比例,并且在随访时Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)从基线开始≥15%。
    结果:在3个月时,H组的疼痛结局比N组更成功(59.09%vs.41.51%;P=0.002),但在1个月时没有(67.53%与64.78%;P=0.61)或6个月(27.13%vs21.55%:P=0.31)。对于功能结果,在3个月时,H组的应答者比例高于N组(70.31%vs.53.46%;P=0.002)。女性,年龄≤60岁和疼痛持续时间≤6个月与3个月终点时的优越结局相关.尽管椎间盘突出的患者在TFESI的治疗中总体效果更好,有利于H组的唯一差异是腰椎滑脱患者.
    结论:3%高渗盐水作为TFESI的辅助成分是生理盐水的可行替代品,随机研究需要将其有效性与类固醇作为可能的替代方案进行比较。
    背景:泰国临床试验注册IDTCTR20231110006。
    BACKGROUND: Transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESI) are commonly employed to treat lumbosacral radiculopathy. Despite anti-inflammatory properties, the addition of 3% hypertonic saline has not been studied.
    OBJECTIVE: Compare the effectiveness of adding 0.9% NaCl (N-group) vs. 3% NaCl (H-group) in TFESI performed for lumbosacral radiculopathy.
    METHODS: This retrospective study compared TFESI performed with lidocaine, triamcinolone and 0.9% NaCl vs. lidocaine, triamcinolone and 3% NaCl. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who experienced a ≥ 30% reduction in pain on a verbal rating scale (VRS; 0-100) at 3 months. Secondary outcome measures included the proportion of patients who improved by at least 30% for pain at 1 and 6 months, and who experienced ≥15% from baseline on the Oswestry disability index (ODI) at follow-up.
    RESULTS: The H-group experienced more successful pain outcomes than the N-group at 3 months (59.09% vs. 41.51%; P = .002) but not at 1 month (67.53% vs. 64.78%; P = .61) or 6 months (27.13% vs 21.55%: P = .31). For functional outcome, there was a higher proportion of responders in the H-group than the N-group at 3 months (70.31% vs. 53.46%; P = .002). Female, age ≤ 60 years, and duration of pain ≤ 6 months were associated with superior outcomes at the 3-month endpoint. Although those with a herniated disc experienced better outcomes in general with TFESI, the only difference favoring the H-group was for spondylolisthesis patients.
    CONCLUSIONS: 3% hypertonic saline is a viable alternative to normal saline as an adjunct for TFESI, with randomized studies needed to compare its effectiveness to steroids as a possible alternative.
    BACKGROUND: Thai Clinical Trials Registry ID TCTR 20231110006.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:退行性腰椎滑脱症(DLS)的手术治疗可靠地改善了患者报告的生活质量;然而,患者群体异质性,除了其他因素,确保在选择理想的手术治疗持续平衡。外科医生对融合或减压的偏好会影响手术治疗决策。同时,在介绍时,患者报告的结局指标(PROM)在女性和男性之间存在很大差异。这项研究的目的是根据患者报告的性别,确定减压和融合率与单纯减压率是否存在差异。并确定是否广泛接受的融合适应症证明任何观察到的差异是合理的,或者外科医生的偏好是否起作用。
    方法:本研究是对加拿大脊柱预后研究网络(CSORN)DLS研究的患者进行的回顾性队列分析,一项多中心的加拿大前瞻性研究,研究DLS的手术管理和结果。减压和融合率,患者特征,术前PROM,在倾向评分匹配之前和之后,比较了男性和女性之间的放射学指标。
    结果:在不匹配的队列中,女性患者比男性患者更有可能接受减压和融合治疗.女性更有可能有公认的融合适应症,包括后凸盘角度,较高的脊椎滑脱等级和滑脱百分比,和患者报告的背痛。与融合决定相关的其他影像学发现,包括小平面积液,多方面的分心,或刻面角度,在女性中并不普遍。在人口统计和影像学特征的倾向得分匹配后,男性和女性患者的比例相似,接受减压,融合和单纯减压。
    结论:尽管尚不清楚谁应该或不应该进行融合,除了DLS的手术减压,女性患者的融合率高于男性患者。在匹配表明融合的基线射线照相因素后,这项分析表明,融合的决定没有性别差异的偏见。相反,接受融合的女性比例较高主要是由融合的影像学和临床适应症解释的,表明这种情况的具体临床和解剖学特征确实在性别之间有所不同。
    OBJECTIVE: Surgical treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) reliably improves patient-reported quality of life; however, patient population heterogeneity, in addition to other factors, ensures ongoing equipoise in choosing the ideal surgical treatment. Surgeon preference for fusion or decompression alone influences surgical treatment decision-making. Meanwhile, at presentation, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) differ considerably between females and males. The aims of this study were to determine whether there exists a difference in the rates of decompression and fusion versus decompression alone based on patient-reported sex, and to determine if widely accepted indications for fusion justify any observed differences or if surgeon preference plays a role.
    METHODS: This study is a retrospective cohort analysis of patients enrolled in the Canadian Spine Outcomes Research Network (CSORN) DLS study, a multicentered Canadian prospective study, investigating the surgical management and outcome of DLS. Decompression and fusion rates, patient characteristics, preoperative PROMs, and radiographic measures were compared between males and females before and after propensity score matching.
    RESULTS: In the unmatched cohort, female patients were more likely to undergo decompression and fusion than male patients. Females were more likely to have the recognized indications for fusion, including kyphotic disc angle, higher spondylolisthesis grade and slip percentage, and patient-reported back pain. Other radiographic findings associated with the decision to fuse, including facet effusion, facet distraction, or facet angle, were not more prevalent in females. After propensity score matching for demographic and radiographic characteristics, similar proportions of male and female patients underwent decompression and fusion and decompression alone.
    CONCLUSIONS: Although it remains unclear who should or should not undergo fusion, in addition to surgical decompression of DLS, female patients undergo fusion at a higher rate than their male counterparts. After matching baseline radiographic factors indicating fusion, this analysis showed that the decision to fuse was not biased by sex differences. Rather, the higher proportion of females undergoing fusion is largely explained by the radiographic and clinical indications for fusion, suggesting that specific clinical and anatomical features of this condition are indeed different between sexes.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:选择腰椎退变性腰椎滑脱症(LDS)患者进行手术是很困难的。已经制定了适当的使用标准(AUC)来阐明LDS手术的适应症,但尚未在对照研究中进行评估。
    方法:这种前瞻性,控制,多中心研究涉及908名患者(561名手术和347名非手术对照;69.5±9.7岁;69%为女性),按正常临床实践治疗。随后使用AUC确定其用于手术的适当性。他们在基线和12个月随访时完成了核心结果指标(COMI)。校正混杂因素的多元回归评估了适当指定和接受治疗对12个月COMI和MCIC成就的影响(≥2.2点降低)。
    结果:按照惯例,将适当(A)组和不确定(U)组与不适当(I)组进行比较.对于调整后的12个月COMI,A/U组手术相对于非手术治疗的获益并不显著大于I组(p=0.189).有,然而,对于基线COMI较高的患者,手术治疗效果更大(p=0.035)。群体调整后实现MCIC的概率为:83%(A/U,接受手术),71%(I,接受手术),50%(A/U,接受非手术护理),和32%(I,接受非手术护理)。
    结论:接受手术的A/U患者获得MCIC的机会最高,但AUC无法确定哪些患者的手术治疗效果优于非手术治疗.识别预测手术治疗效果更大的其他特征,除了基线COMI之外,需要改进决策。
    BACKGROUND: Selecting patients with lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (LDS) for surgery is difficult. Appropriate use criteria (AUC) have been developed to clarify the indications for LDS surgery but have not been evaluated in controlled studies.
    METHODS: This prospective, controlled, multicentre study involved 908 patients (561 surgical and 347 non-surgical controls; 69.5 ± 9.7y; 69% female), treated as per normal clinical practice. Their appropriateness for surgery was afterwards determined using the AUC. They completed the Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) at baseline and 12 months\' follow-up. Multiple regression adjusting for confounders evaluated the influence of appropriateness designation and treatment received on the 12-month COMI and achievement of MCIC (≥ 2.2-point-reduction).
    RESULTS: As per convention, appropriate (A) and uncertain (U) groups were combined for comparison with the inappropriate (I) group. For the adjusted 12-month COMI, the benefit of surgery relative to non-surgical care was not significantly greater for the A/U than the I group (p = 0.189). There was, however, a greater treatment effect of surgery for those with higher baseline COMI (p = 0.035). The groups\' adjusted probabilities of achieving MCIC were: 83% (A/U, receiving surgery), 71% (I, receiving surgery), 50% (A/U, receiving non-surgical care), and 32% (I, receiving non-surgical care).
    CONCLUSIONS: A/U patients receiving surgery had the highest chances of achieving MCIC, but the AUC were not able to identify which patients had a greater treatment effect of surgery relative to non-surgical care. The identification of other characteristics that predict a greater treatment effect of surgery, in addition to baseline COMI, is required to improve decision-making.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:经皮椎间孔镜下减压术(PTED)是治疗腰椎管狭窄症(LSS)伴退行性腰椎滑脱症(DLS)的理想微创减压技术。DLS形成的滑脱椎体(PRSVB)下方的后上区域是加重患者LSS的重要因素。因此,腹侧减压期间去除PRSVB的必要性仍有待讨论。本研究旨在描述PTED结合PRSVB去除的过程并评估临床结果。
    方法:从2019年1月至2021年7月,在我们机构的44例连续患者中诊断出带有DLS的LSS,他们接受了PTED联合PRSVB的去除。所有患者均随访至少12个月。使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)评估临床结果,Oswestry残疾指数(ODI),并修改了MacNab标准。
    结果:患者的平均年龄为69.5±7.1岁。术前平均ODI评分,下后卫的VAS得分,腿部VAS评分分别为68.3±10.8,5.8±1.0,7.7±1.1,分别提高到18.8±5.0、1.4±0.8和1.6±0.7,术后12个月。根据改良的MacNab标准,呈现“良好”和“优秀”评级的患者比例为93.2%。术前腰椎滑脱率(16.0%±3.3%)和随访结束时(15.8%±3.3%)差异无统计学意义(p>0.05)。一个病人有硬脑膜撕裂,一名患者术后感觉异常。
    结论:在PTED过程中增加PRSVB的去除可能是减轻LSS和DLS患者临床症状的有益外科手术。然而,需要长期随访以研究临床效果.
    BACKGROUND: Percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic decompression (PTED) is an ideal minimally invasive decompression technique for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS). The posterosuperior region underneath the slipping vertebral body (PRSVB) formed by DLS is an important factor exacerbating LSS in patients. Therefore, the necessity of removing the PRSVB during ventral decompression remains to be discussed. This study aimed to describe the procedure of PTED combined with the removal of the PRSVB and to evaluate the clinical outcomes.
    METHODS: LSS with DLS was diagnosed in 44 consecutive patients at our institution from January 2019 to July 2021, and they underwent PTED combined with the removal of the PRSVB. All patients were followed up for at least 12 months. The clinical outcomes were evaluated using the visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and modified MacNab criteria.
    RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 69.5 ± 7.1 years. The mean preoperative ODI score, VAS score of the low back, and VAS score of the leg were 68.3 ± 10.8, 5.8 ± 1.0, and 7.7 ± 1.1, respectively, which improved to 18.8 ± 5.0, 1.4 ± 0.8, and 1.6 ± 0.7, respectively, at 12 months postoperatively. The proportion of patients presenting \"good\" and \"excellent\" ratings according to the modified MacNab criteria was 93.2%. The percent slippage in spondylolisthesis preoperatively (16.0% ± 3.3%) and at the end of follow-up (15.8% ± 3.3%) did not differ significantly (p>0.05). One patient had a dural tear, and one patient had postoperative dysesthesia.
    CONCLUSIONS: Increasing the removal of PRSVB during the PTED process may be a beneficial surgical procedure for alleviating clinical symptoms in patients with LSS and DLS. However, long-term follow-up is needed to study clinical effects.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号