張 權(quán),毛克亞,王 博,顧挺帥,劉建恒,史 騰,蘇祥正,熊 森,張雅賓,韓振川
解放軍總醫(yī)院 骨科,北京 100853
臨床研究論著
微創(chuàng)與開(kāi)放經(jīng)椎間孔椎間融合術(shù)治療肥胖患者腰椎間盤(pán)突出癥的療效比較
張 權(quán),毛克亞,王 博,顧挺帥,劉建恒,史 騰,蘇祥正,熊 森,張雅賓,韓振川
解放軍總醫(yī)院 骨科,北京 100853
目的 研究腰椎微創(chuàng)(minimally invasive,MIS)經(jīng)椎間孔椎體間融合術(shù)(transforaminal lumber interbody fusion,TLIF)與開(kāi)放經(jīng)椎間孔椎體間融合術(shù)(Open-TILF)治療肥胖(體質(zhì)量指數(shù)>30 kg/m2)腰椎間盤(pán)突出癥患者的臨床療效。方法 回顧性分析2011年1月- 2013年12月我院收治的肥胖腰椎間盤(pán)突出癥患者79例,體質(zhì)量指數(shù)均>30 kg/m2,分別行MISTLIF與Open-TILF治療,其中MIS-TLIF組46例,Open-TILF組33例,應(yīng)用日本矯形協(xié)會(huì)評(píng)分標(biāo)準(zhǔn)、視覺(jué)模擬評(píng)分,腰椎功能障礙指數(shù)法評(píng)分比較兩組術(shù)后臨床療效及平均手術(shù)時(shí)間、術(shù)中出血量、切口長(zhǎng)度、下地活動(dòng)時(shí)間、平均住院時(shí)間、并發(fā)癥等。結(jié)果 兩組患者術(shù)前一般資料無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(P>0.05),術(shù)后即刻X線(xiàn)片示內(nèi)固定位置良好。Open組術(shù)中出血量(420±86) ml,切口長(zhǎng)度(80±40) mm,術(shù)后下地活動(dòng)時(shí)間(4.2±2.21) d;平均住院時(shí)間(9.3±3.40) d,并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率平均9.09%。MIS-TLIF組手術(shù)中出血量(110.83±50.51) ml,切口長(zhǎng)度(2.5±0.18) cm,術(shù)后下床時(shí)間(24.37±8.50) h,平均住院時(shí)間(5.0±2.52) d,術(shù)后并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率6.52%,均明顯少于Open-TILF組(P<0.05)。術(shù)后3 d、1個(gè)月、3個(gè)月、6個(gè)月應(yīng)用日本矯形協(xié)會(huì)評(píng)分標(biāo)準(zhǔn)、視覺(jué)模擬評(píng)分、腰椎功能障礙指數(shù)法評(píng)分MIS-TLIF組均優(yōu)于Open-TILF (P<0.05);MIS-TLIF組術(shù)后并發(fā)癥明顯少于Open-TILF組(P<0.05)?;颊呔@隨訪(fǎng),時(shí)間>6個(gè)月,X線(xiàn)檢查未見(jiàn)椎弓根螺釘內(nèi)固定系統(tǒng)的松動(dòng)、斷裂或移位。結(jié)論 肥胖患者應(yīng)用微創(chuàng)經(jīng)椎間孔椎體間融合術(shù)與傳統(tǒng)開(kāi)放經(jīng)椎間孔椎體間融合術(shù)均能達(dá)到良好的療效,但MIS-TLIF組手術(shù)時(shí)間更短,創(chuàng)傷更小,出血量更少、短期腰痛發(fā)生率更低,并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率更低,術(shù)后恢復(fù)更快。
微創(chuàng)手術(shù);椎間孔椎體間融合術(shù);肥胖;腰椎間盤(pán)突出癥
網(wǎng)絡(luò)出版時(shí)間:2015-03-31 10:07 網(wǎng)絡(luò)出版地址:http://www.cnki.net/kcms/detail/11.3275.R.20150331.1007.002.html
隨著肥胖人群的日益增多,與肥胖相關(guān)的問(wèn)題也日益成為關(guān)注的焦點(diǎn)[1]。腰椎間盤(pán)突出癥(lumbar disc herniation,LDH)是骨科常見(jiàn)病,屬慢性損傷性疾病,以腰腿部疼痛為最常見(jiàn)癥狀,多發(fā)生于成年患者;其機(jī)制為髓核突出,從而壓迫神經(jīng)根,引起相關(guān)神經(jīng)功能的障礙[2]。目前認(rèn)為,椎間盤(pán)突出癥的常見(jiàn)病因是長(zhǎng)期勞損引起椎間盤(pán)的退變,肥胖患者體質(zhì)量超標(biāo),增加了椎間盤(pán)的負(fù)荷,從而加速了椎間盤(pán)的退變,成為其重要誘發(fā)因素[3-4];同時(shí)肥胖也是圍術(shù)期并發(fā)癥高發(fā)的危險(xiǎn)因素[5]。自2002年Foley報(bào)道微創(chuàng)(minimally invasive,MIS)經(jīng)椎間孔椎體間融合術(shù)(transforaminal lumber interbody fusion,TILF)以來(lái),MIS-TILF術(shù)式在治療腰椎疾病中取得滿(mǎn)意的效果[6]。然而MIS-TILF術(shù)式應(yīng)用于肥胖人群的研究較少,本研究比較體質(zhì)量指數(shù)>30 kg/m2的單節(jié)段肥胖患者在微創(chuàng)經(jīng)椎間孔椎體間融合術(shù)(MIS-TLIF)和傳統(tǒng)開(kāi)放經(jīng)椎間孔椎體間融合術(shù)(Open-TILF)的臨床效果,為肥胖患者應(yīng)用此類(lèi)手術(shù)提供臨床經(jīng)驗(yàn)。
1 一般資料 回顧性分析2011年1月- 2013年12月于我院行微創(chuàng)手術(shù)治療椎間盤(pán)突出癥伴肥胖的患者79例。所有患者體質(zhì)量指數(shù)均>30 kg/m2,男39例,女40例,年齡20 ~ 79歲,平均40.8歲,單側(cè)癥狀41例,雙側(cè)26例,單純腰部癥狀12例,MIS-TLIF組46例,Open-TILF組33例(表1)。手術(shù)均由同一組醫(yī)生完成。納入標(biāo)準(zhǔn):1)單節(jié)段腰椎間盤(pán)退行性改變伴有嚴(yán)重腰痛和下肢癥狀;2)經(jīng)保守治療6個(gè)月以上無(wú)效;3)影像學(xué)表現(xiàn)為單節(jié)段腰椎間盤(pán)突出并與癥狀體征表現(xiàn)一致;4)體質(zhì)量指數(shù)>30 kg/m2;5)患者知情同意。排除標(biāo)準(zhǔn):1)多節(jié)段腰椎間盤(pán)退變;2)腰椎滑脫和峽部裂;3)腰椎手術(shù)、骨折、腫瘤、感染等病史患者。
2 手術(shù)方法 1)MIS-TLIF組:按照毛克亞等[7]的手術(shù)方法,患者取全麻俯臥體位,后正中線(xiàn)旁開(kāi)2.5 ~3.5 cm處插入兩枚定位長(zhǎng)針頭,C形臂透視確定手術(shù)責(zé)任間隙和切口位置,正位像上位于椎弓根中心連線(xiàn),側(cè)位像上位于椎弓根延長(zhǎng)線(xiàn),根據(jù)定位針的位置依次切開(kāi)皮膚、皮下組織及肌筋膜。鈍性分離多裂肌,將定位管插入上位椎體的峽部,沿定位管逐級(jí)置入擴(kuò)張?zhí)坠?,置入X-tube(中諾恒康)工作套管,撐開(kāi)鉗縱向撐開(kāi)套管后清理套管局部殘留軟組織,顯露椎板外緣及上下突關(guān)節(jié)。在人字嵴處尖椎定位,開(kāi)路器預(yù)制釘?shù)?,透視明確椎弓根螺釘置入位置,球探查四壁良好,釘?shù)拦ソz后骨蠟封堵備用。使用磨鉆及椎板咬鉗切除患側(cè)上位椎體下關(guān)節(jié)突和下位椎體上關(guān)節(jié)突及部分椎板,將局部切除的自體骨留置備用,咬除黃韌帶,椎管靜脈叢止血,顯露內(nèi)側(cè)的硬膜囊,可清楚顯露患側(cè)上位神經(jīng)根、下為神經(jīng)根、椎間盤(pán)和硬膜囊。保護(hù)經(jīng)椎間孔發(fā)出神經(jīng)根,從外側(cè)顯露纖維環(huán),尖刀切開(kāi)后,使用鉸刀切除椎間盤(pán)后用刮匙處理軟骨終板。預(yù)留自體骨質(zhì)使用咬骨鉗咬至合適大小填充1枚合適高度的椎間融合器(PEEK),先將剩余的自體骨植入椎間隙,然后將椎間融合器置入椎間隙。最后置入2枚短尾萬(wàn)向椎弓根螺釘并鈦棒固定。對(duì)側(cè)同上,雙側(cè)鈦棒加壓固定后C形臂機(jī)透視確定內(nèi)固定位置良好,術(shù)畢。
2)Open-TILF組:患者取全麻俯臥體位,常規(guī)消毒,鋪無(wú)菌巾。取以腰棘突間為中心縱行皮膚切口,切開(kāi)皮膚、皮下組織、深筋膜,沿棘突剝離兩側(cè)軟組織,顯露后方椎板。分離至小關(guān)節(jié)突與橫突交界處,用尖錐、開(kāi)路器經(jīng)椎弓根探查螺釘路徑,球探探查孔道底和四壁均完整無(wú)缺損,經(jīng)攻絲后擰入椎弓根釘,透視下見(jiàn)定位準(zhǔn)確,螺釘位置良好。剪裁和預(yù)彎合適長(zhǎng)度及弧度鈦棒臨時(shí)固定。用骨刀和椎板咬鉗切除左側(cè)下關(guān)節(jié)突和部分椎板(骨質(zhì)留用自體植骨),切除肥厚的黃韌帶,切除增生骨質(zhì)。術(shù)中暴露探查神經(jīng)根和硬膜囊,進(jìn)一步顯露硬膜囊和神經(jīng)根,用棉片保護(hù)神經(jīng)根,局部徹底止血,經(jīng)椎間隙徹底切除已退變的椎間盤(pán)及纖維環(huán)等軟組織。用不同型號(hào)的鉸刀和骨匙徹底清除椎間盤(pán)和終板上下軟骨,確認(rèn)神經(jīng)根減壓充分,沖洗傷口,對(duì)側(cè)操作同上,于椎間植入適量自體骨粒并夯實(shí),置入合適型號(hào)Cage進(jìn)行椎間融合。電視透視檢查下見(jiàn)椎弓根螺釘系統(tǒng)及椎間Cage位置合適,固定可靠。徹底止血,0.9%氯化鈉注射液沖洗術(shù)腔,清點(diǎn)紗布器械無(wú)誤。放置引流后逐層縫合切口,縫合皮膚,術(shù)畢[8]。3 術(shù)前、術(shù)后處理 術(shù)前1 d常規(guī)預(yù)防性應(yīng)用抗生素,Open-TILF組放置引流管,MIS-TLIF組術(shù)后不放置引流管[9],常規(guī)應(yīng)用抗生素,術(shù)后1 ~ 5 d佩戴腰圍下地活動(dòng)。
表1 79例肥胖腰椎間盤(pán)突出癥患者一般情況比較Tab. 1 Comparison of general data of 79 obese patients with lumbar disc herniation (n, %)
4 觀(guān)察指標(biāo) 手術(shù)前后應(yīng)用日本矯形協(xié)會(huì)(Japanese Orthopaedic Association,JOA)評(píng)分標(biāo)準(zhǔn)、視覺(jué)模擬評(píng)分(visual anlogue scale,VAS),腰椎功能障礙指數(shù)(oswestry dability index,ODI)評(píng)價(jià)療效,并對(duì)術(shù)中出血量、切口長(zhǎng)度、下地活動(dòng)時(shí)間、住院時(shí)間、并發(fā)癥等方面進(jìn)行分析。
5 隨訪(fǎng) 術(shù)后3 d,本組資料隨訪(fǎng)率99%。術(shù)后3個(gè)月、6個(gè)月定期隨訪(fǎng),本組資料隨訪(fǎng)率97%。
6 統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)方法 采用SPSS19.0統(tǒng)計(jì)軟件(SPSS公司,美國(guó))進(jìn)行統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)分析,計(jì)量數(shù)據(jù)采用±s表示。定量資料采用t檢驗(yàn),定性資料采用χ2檢驗(yàn),多組之間采用秩和檢驗(yàn),P<0.05為差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。
1 兩組一般資料比較 兩組患者在年齡、性別、手術(shù)部位、保守治療時(shí)間上均無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(P>0.05)。所有患者均順利完成手術(shù),術(shù)后對(duì)患者行腰椎正側(cè)位X線(xiàn)觀(guān)察內(nèi)固定位置良好。
2 兩組圍術(shù)期指標(biāo)比較 Open組術(shù)中出血量為(420±86) ml,切口長(zhǎng)度為(80±40) mm,術(shù)后下地活動(dòng)時(shí)間為(4.2±2.21) d,平均住院時(shí)間為(9.3± 3.40) d,并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率平均為9.09%。MIS-TLIF組手術(shù)中出血量為(110.83±50.51) ml,切口長(zhǎng)度為(2.5±0.18) cm,術(shù)后下床時(shí)間為(24.37±8.50) h,平均住院時(shí)間為(5.0±2.52) d,術(shù)后并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率平均為6.52%,均明顯少于Open-TILF組(P<0.05)。見(jiàn)表2。
3 兩組JOA、VAS、ODI評(píng)分比較 MIS-TLIF組腰痛和腿痛VAS評(píng)分較Open-TILF組明顯降低(P<0.05)(表3)。術(shù)后3 d、1個(gè)月、3個(gè)月、6個(gè)月MIS-TLIF組與Open-TILF組ODI評(píng)分均較術(shù)前明顯降低(P<0.05);術(shù)后3 d、1個(gè)月、3個(gè)月、6個(gè)月MIS-TLIF組JOA評(píng)分優(yōu)于Open-TILF組(P<0.05)。見(jiàn)表4。
4 并發(fā)癥方面比較 并發(fā)癥6例,其中MIS-TLIF組3例(6.52%);Open-TILF組3例(9.09%)。2例(2.53%)術(shù)中硬脊膜撕裂,摘除硬脊膜粘連髓核時(shí)發(fā)生,以纖維蛋白膠修補(bǔ)和明膠海綿覆蓋,術(shù)后無(wú)腦脊液滲漏。4例(5.06%)術(shù)后切口延期愈合,術(shù)后切口有少量滲液,液體為淡黃色油性,證實(shí)為脂肪液化,未發(fā)生感染,經(jīng)換藥和抗生素治療后愈合。入選患者均未出現(xiàn)癥狀復(fù)發(fā)、加重、再次手術(shù)的情況。
表2 肥胖腰椎間盤(pán)突出癥患者微創(chuàng)與開(kāi)放圍術(shù)期指標(biāo)Tab.2 Minimally invasive surgery and open perioperative period indexes of obese patients with lumbar disc herniation
表3 肥胖腰椎間盤(pán)突出癥患者VAS疼痛評(píng)分術(shù)前、術(shù)后比較Tab. 3 Comparison of VAS score for lumbocrural pain of obese lumbar disc herniation patients before and after operation
表4 肥胖腰椎間盤(pán)突出癥患者ODI、JOA疼痛評(píng)分術(shù)前、術(shù)后比較Tab. 4 Comparison of ODI score and JOA score for lumbocrural pain of obese lumbar disc herniation patients before and after operation
我國(guó)超重和肥胖患病的形勢(shì)十分嚴(yán)峻,粗略估計(jì),我國(guó)肥胖人群占總?cè)丝跀?shù)30%以上,數(shù)量相當(dāng)龐大。我國(guó)成年人超重肥胖總患病率已基本接近歐美國(guó)家同期患病率水平[10-14]。
肥胖腰椎間盤(pán)突出癥患者行開(kāi)放經(jīng)椎間孔椎體間融合術(shù)時(shí),由于患者皮下脂肪較厚,造成手術(shù)操作位置深,從而加大了手術(shù)操作難度,因此只能通過(guò)延長(zhǎng)手術(shù)切口來(lái)充分顯露手術(shù)操作區(qū)域,在操作中脊柱椎旁肌肉剝離較多同時(shí)對(duì)脊柱椎體解剖結(jié)構(gòu)亦造成破壞,改變了脊柱力學(xué)結(jié)構(gòu),增加了鄰近節(jié)段退變發(fā)生概率,這樣勢(shì)必會(huì)造成肌肉等軟組織較大損傷、出血量增加、手術(shù)時(shí)間延長(zhǎng)、術(shù)后恢復(fù)延期等。近些年微創(chuàng)治療取得了長(zhǎng)足進(jìn)展[15]。Park和Foley[16]運(yùn)用微創(chuàng)經(jīng)椎間孔椎體間融合術(shù)以來(lái),其廣泛地應(yīng)用在各種腰椎病變并取得了良好的效果[17]。腰椎椎旁肌肉的多裂肌、最長(zhǎng)肌和髂腰肌是軀干肌中對(duì)于穩(wěn)定脊柱具有重要作用的肌群。在X-tube輔助完成MIS-TLIF手術(shù)經(jīng)過(guò)多裂肌和最長(zhǎng)肌之間的自然肌間隙或多裂肌肌束間隙,減少了入路的肌肉損傷,保留了棘突、棘間韌帶、椎板等結(jié)構(gòu),減小對(duì)脊柱穩(wěn)定性的破壞[18]。術(shù)中出血量減少、切口長(zhǎng)度較少、提早術(shù)后下地活動(dòng)時(shí)間和術(shù)后平均住院時(shí)間縮短,減少鄰近椎體發(fā)生退變的概率。本研究結(jié)果顯示,MIS-TLIF組較Open-TILF組術(shù)中出血量少、切口長(zhǎng)度小、術(shù)后下地活動(dòng)時(shí)間提早和平均住院時(shí)間短;患者術(shù)后3 d、1個(gè)月、3個(gè)月、6個(gè)月MISTLIF組和Open-TILF組VAS評(píng)分、JOA評(píng)分及ODI均有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(P<0.05)。在手術(shù)并發(fā)癥方面,Patel等認(rèn)為體質(zhì)量指數(shù)是圍術(shù)期并發(fā)癥的獨(dú)立因素[19-20]。有研究發(fā)現(xiàn),肥胖患者行脊柱手術(shù)時(shí)并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率更高,特別是切口并發(fā)癥。文獻(xiàn)報(bào)道,體質(zhì)量指數(shù)>30 kg/m2的肥胖患者脊柱術(shù)后切口愈合困難,切口感染率最高達(dá)33%[21-23]。本研究中,術(shù)后并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率為7.59%,其中4例患者也出現(xiàn)切口愈合困難。
微創(chuàng)經(jīng)椎間孔椎體間融合術(shù)在X-tube通道和光源輔助下完成直視下的減壓、椎間融合及內(nèi)固定置入,術(shù)中使用套管撐開(kāi)保護(hù)周?chē)∪?,術(shù)野清晰,操作方便,節(jié)省手術(shù)時(shí)間,減少出血量,術(shù)后下地活動(dòng)早,住院時(shí)間大大縮短。醫(yī)生在掌握單節(jié)段開(kāi)放手術(shù)的基礎(chǔ)上只需熟練掌握特殊器械的使用即可,學(xué)習(xí)曲線(xiàn)縮短、平緩,適合于推廣學(xué)習(xí)。尤其應(yīng)用于肥胖患者時(shí),可有效彌補(bǔ)腰椎開(kāi)放手術(shù)中由于肥胖患者皮下脂肪厚、術(shù)野暴露困難造成的手術(shù)操作難度大、往往只能通過(guò)延長(zhǎng)手術(shù)切口來(lái)充分顯露術(shù)野區(qū)域、肌肉損傷較大、出血量增加、手術(shù)時(shí)間延長(zhǎng)、術(shù)后恢復(fù)延期等不足。但本研究有一定的局限性:1)本研究病例數(shù)較少,未對(duì)體質(zhì)量指數(shù)進(jìn)行繼續(xù)分組;2)本研究還需長(zhǎng)期回訪(fǎng)進(jìn)行療效分析,對(duì)肥胖患者手術(shù)的遠(yuǎn)期效果及內(nèi)固定的失敗風(fēng)險(xiǎn)有待進(jìn)一步研究;3)本研究病例選擇具有一定的局限,對(duì)于多節(jié)段腰椎管狹窄癥、腰椎滑脫等患者有待進(jìn)一步研究。肥胖患者應(yīng)用微創(chuàng)經(jīng)椎間孔椎體間融合術(shù)與傳統(tǒng)開(kāi)放經(jīng)椎間孔椎體間融合術(shù)均能達(dá)到良好的療效,但MIS-TLIF組手術(shù)時(shí)間更短,創(chuàng)傷更小,出血量更少,短期腰痛發(fā)生率更低,并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率更低,術(shù)后恢復(fù)更快,安全有效,值得臨床廣泛應(yīng)用。
1 Ogden CL, Carroll MD, Curtin LR, et al. Prevalence of overweight and obesity in the United States, 1999-2004[J]. JAMA, 2006,295(13):1549-1555.
2 胡有谷.腰椎間盤(pán)突出癥[M]. 4版.北京:人民衛(wèi)生出版社,2011: 12.
3 顧廣飛,張海龍,賀石生,等.體重指數(shù)對(duì)微創(chuàng)手術(shù)治療單節(jié)段腰椎管狹窄癥并腰椎不穩(wěn)療效的影響[J]. 中國(guó)脊柱脊髓雜志,2012,22(4):313-317.
4 Wu Y. Overweight and obesity in China[J]. BMJ, 2006, 333(7564):362-363.
5 Patel N, Bagan B, Vadera S, et al. Obesity and spine surgery:relation to perioperative complications[J]. J Neurosurg Spine,2007, 6(4):291-297.
6 Park P, Foley KT. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with reduction of spondylolisthesis: technique and outcomes after a minimum of 2 years' follow-up[J]. Neurosurg Focus, 2008, 25(2):E16.
7 毛克亞,王巖,肖嵩華,等.單側(cè)微創(chuàng)經(jīng)椎間孔腰椎體間融合術(shù)采用椎弓根螺釘結(jié)合經(jīng)椎板關(guān)節(jié)突螺釘混合內(nèi)固定可行性研究[J].中華外科雜志,2011,49(12):1067-1070.
8 毛克亞,王巖,肖嵩華,等.微創(chuàng)手術(shù)治療單節(jié)段腰椎管狹窄癥的療效評(píng)價(jià)[J].中國(guó)脊柱脊髓雜志,2011,21(2):113-117.
9 徐教,毛克亞,王巖,等.單節(jié)段微創(chuàng)經(jīng)椎間孔腰椎體間融合術(shù)后放置引流管必要性的研究[J].中國(guó)矯形外科雜志,2013,21(15):1491-1496.
10 陳春明,國(guó)際生命科學(xué)學(xué)會(huì)中國(guó)辦事處中國(guó)肥胖問(wèn)題工作組聯(lián)合數(shù)據(jù)匯總分析協(xié)作組.中國(guó)成人體質(zhì)指數(shù)分類(lèi)的推薦意見(jiàn)簡(jiǎn)介[J].中華預(yù)防醫(yī)學(xué)雜志,2001,35(5):349-350.
11 Macdonald SM, Reeder BA, Chen Y, et al. Obesity in Canada: a descriptive analysis. Canadian Heart Health Surveys Research Group[J]. CMAJ, 1997, 157(S1):S3-S9.
12 中國(guó)肥胖問(wèn)題工作組數(shù)據(jù)匯總分析協(xié)作組.我國(guó)成人體重指數(shù)和腰圍對(duì)相關(guān)疾病危險(xiǎn)因素異常的預(yù)測(cè)價(jià)值:適宜體重指數(shù)和腰圍切點(diǎn)的研究[J].中華流行病學(xué)雜志,2002,23(1):10-15.
13 馬冠生,李艷平,武陽(yáng)豐,等.1992至2002年間中國(guó)居民超重率和肥胖率的變化[J].中華預(yù)防醫(yī)學(xué)雜志,2005(5):17-21.
14 王文絹,王克安,李天麟,等.中國(guó)成年人肥胖的流行特點(diǎn)研究:超重和肥胖的現(xiàn)患率調(diào)查[J].中華流行病學(xué)雜志,2001,22(2):129-132.
15 Bayramo?lu M, Akman MN, Kilin? S, et al. Isokinetic measurement of trunk muscle strength in women with chronic low-back pain[J]. Am J Phys Med Rehabil, 2001, 80(9):650-655.
16 Park P, Foley KT. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with reduction of spondylolisthesis: technique and outcomes after a minimum of 2 years' follow-up[J]. Neurosurg Focus, 2008, 25(2):E16.
17 Fanuele JC, Abdu WA, Hanscom B, et al. Association between obesity and functional status in patients with spine disease[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2002, 27(3):306-312.
18 Turner JA, Ersek M, Herron L, et al. Patient outcomes after lumbar spinal fusions[J]. JAMA, 1992, 268(7):907-911.
19 Telfeian AE, Reiter GT, Durham SR, et al. Spine surgery in morbidly obese patients[J]. J Neurosurg, 2002, 97(S1):20-24.
20 Olsen MA, Mayfield J, Lauryssen C, et al. Risk factors for surgical site infection in spinal surgery[J]. J Neurosurg, 2003, 98(S2):149-155.
21 Lau D, Khan A, Terman SW, et al. Comparison of perioperative outcomes following open versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in obese patients[J]. Neurosurg Focus,2013, 35(2): 08-35.
22 Aitlir AR, Aslam HA, Carlo AM. Do visual analogue scale(VAS)derived standard gamble(SG)utilities agree with Health Utilities Index utilities A comparison of patient an d community preferences for health status in rheumatoid arthritis patients[J]. Health Qual Life Outcomes, 2006, 25: 1186-1189.
23 Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB. The Oswestry Disability Index[J]. Spine(Phila Pa 1976), 2000, 25(22):2940-2952.
The rapeutic effect comparison of minimally invasive surgery and open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in treatment of obese patients with lumbar intervertebral disc
ZHANG Quan, MAO Keya, WANG Bo, GU Tingshuai, LIU Jianheng, SHI Teng, SU Xiangzheng XIONG Sen, ZHANG Yabin,HAN Zhenchuan
Department of Orthopaedics, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing 100853, China
Corresponding author: MAO Keya. Email: maokeya@sina.com
Objective To study the clinical curative effect of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Open-TILF) on obesity patients (BMI>30 kg/m2) with lumbar disc herniation. Methods Clinical data about 79 obese patients (BMI>30 kg/m2) with lumbar disc herniation admitted to our hospital from January 2011 to December 2013 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients had undergone MIS-TLIF and Open-TILF treatment and they were divided into MIS-TLIF group (n=46) and Open-TILF group (n=33). The JOA, VAS and ODI score were applied to evaluate the clinical curative effect,average operation time, intraoperative bleeding volume, length of incision, ambulation time, average hospitalization and complications of patients in two groups. Results No significant differences were found in general data of patients in two groups before operation (P>0.05). Immediate postoperative X-ray films showed good position of internal fixator. In Open-TILF group, the amount of hemorrhage was (420±86) ml, incision length was (80±40) mm, postoperative ambulation time was (4.2±2.21) d, the average days in hospital were(9.3±3.40) d, and the average complication rate was 8%. While in MIS-TLIF group, the amount of hemorrhage was (110.83±50.51) ml,incision length was (2.5±0.18) cm, postoperative ambulation time was (24.37±8.50) h, the average hospitalization time was (5.0±2.52)d, and complication rate was 6.15%, all of which were significantly less than Open-TILF group (P<0.05). The JOA, VAS, ODI scores of MIS-TLIF group were higher than that of Open-TILF group in 3 days, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months after operation (P<0.05), while the complication rate of MIS-TLIF group was significantly lower than Open-TILF group (P<0.05). All patients were followed up for more than 6 months. X-ray examination showed no loosening, fracture or shift of pedicle screw internal fixation system. Conclusion Obese patients can achieve good efficacy with MIS-TLIF or Open-TILF treatment, but MIS-TLIF treatment shows shorter operation time,less trauma and bleeding volume, lower incidence of short-term pain, lower complication rate and faster postoperative recovery.
minimally invasive surgery; transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion; obesity; lumbar disc herniation
R 445.4
A
2095-5227(2015)07-0643-05
10.3969/j.issn.2095-5227.2015.07.001
2015-02-13
國(guó)家自然科學(xué)基金項(xiàng)目(51372276)
Supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (51372276)
張權(quán),男,在讀碩士,醫(yī)師。研究方向:脊柱外科。Email:zhangquan301@sina.com
毛克亞,男,博士,主任醫(yī)師,碩士研究生導(dǎo)師。Email:maokeya@sina.com