经伤椎单节段固定术与跨伤椎短节段固定术治疗胸腰椎骨折的效果比较

Abstract
Figure/Table
References (25)
Related Citation (4)

Download: PDF (604 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract Objective To compare the effect of monosegmental transvertebral fixation and short segment fixation for thoracolumbar fracture. Methods From April 2017 to April 2019, 60 consecutive patients with thoracolumbar fracture treated by operation in Beijing Luhe Hospital, Capital Medical University were selected as the research objects, and they were divided into experimental group and control group according to the random number table method, with 30 patients in each group. Experimental group accepted the injured vertebral single segmental fixation, the control group accepted across vertebral short segmental fixation, respectively in postoperative three days to begin for at least 12 months of follow-up, patients with follow-up indicators including visual analogue scale (VAS) score, Oswestry disability index scores (ODI), injury spinal vertebral compression rate, sagittal Cobb Angle, the surgery postoperative clinical curative effect and correct degree of the two operations were compared. Results At the end of follow-up, there were 28 cases in the experimental group and 25 cases in the control group. At the last follow-up, the vertebral compression rate and the sagittal Cobb angle of the two groups were significantly lower than those before operation (P ＜ 0.05), and the experimental group was significantly lower than the control group (P ＜ 0.05). Compared with before operation, the VAS scores and ODI scores in the last follow-up of both groups were reduced (P ＜ 0.05), and there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups (P ＞ 0.05). The operation time of the experimental group was significantly shorter than that of the control group (P ＜ 0.05), and there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of intraoperative blood loss and average length of stay (P ＞ 0.05). There were no serious complications such as wound infection, delayed nerve function damage in both groups. In the experimental group, there was no screw or titanium rod bending fracture, and screw loosening occurred in two cases. In the control group, screw fracture occurred in one case and screw loosening occurred in three cases. Conclusion Satisfactory vertebral height, sagittal Cobb angle and function are achieved by both monosegmental transvertebral and short segment fixation in treating A1 and A3.1 thoracolumbar fractures. Monosegmental transvertebral fixation is superior to short segment fixation in A1 and A3.1 thoracolumbar fractures in correction of deformity, maintenance and operating time.

Key words： Thoracic and lumbar vertebrae fracture Injured vertebra Monosegmental fixation Short segment fixation

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	CUI Libin1* YUAN Xin1* LU Shibao2 CHEN Xueming1 ZHANG Yanjun1

Cite this article:

CUI Libin1* YUAN Xin1* LU Shibao2 CHEN Xueming1 ZHANG Yanjun1. Comparison of the effect of single-segment fixation with trans-injured vertebrae and short-segment fixation with trans-injured vertebrae[J]. 中国医药导报, 2020, 17(21): 92-95,99.

URL:

http://www.yiyaodaobao.com.cn/EN/ OR http://www.yiyaodaobao.com.cn/EN/Y2020/V17/I21/92

[1] Ghobrial GM，Maulucci CM，Maltenfort M，et al. Operative and nonoperative adverse events in the management of traumatic fractures of the thoracolumbar spine：a systematic review [J]. Neurosurgical Focus，2014，37（1）：E8.
[2] Farrokhi MR，Razmkon A，Maghami Z，et al. Inclusion of the fracture level in short segment fixation of thoracolumbar fractures [J]. Eur spine J，2010，19（10）：1651-1656.
[3] Mahar A，Kim C，Wedemeyer M，et al. Short-segment fixation of lumbar burst fractures using pedicle fixation at the level of the fracture [J]. Spine（Phila Pa 1976），2007， 32（14）：1503-1507.
[4] 俞阳，范海泉，陈铭，等.经伤椎和跨伤椎椎弓根钉棒系统内固定治疗胸腰椎骨折[J].脊柱外科杂志，2012，10（4）：228-231.
[5] 张骞，李保健，尚博，等.跨伤椎固定与经伤椎固定治疗胸腰段脊柱骨折的疗效对比[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志，2013，28（9）：811-813.
[6] Magerl F，Aebi M，Gertzbein SD，et al. A comprehensive classification of thoracic and lumbar injuries [J]. Eur Spine J，1994，3（4）：184-201.
[7] McCormack T，Karaikovic E，Gaines RW. The load sharing classification of spine fractures [J]. Spine （Phila Pa 1976），1994，19（15）：1741-1744.
[8] Woodforde JM，Merskey H. Some relationships between subjective measures of pain [J]. J Psychosom Res，1972， 16（3）：173-178.
[9] Fairbank JC，Couper J，Davies J B，et al. The Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire [J]. Physiotherapy，1980， 66（8）：271-273.
[10] 贾其余，王林，俞宇，等.经伤椎与跨伤椎后路短节段内固定治疗胸腰椎爆裂骨折的对比研究[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志，2014，29（9）：869-871.
[11] 王宇，孔超，鲁世保，等.经伤椎单节段与跨伤椎短节段固定治疗胸腰椎骨折的临床疗效对比[J].脊柱外科杂志，2013，11（3）：141-145.
[12] 魏富鑫，刘少喻，赵卫东，等.单节段与双节段椎弓根螺钉固定胸腰椎单椎体骨折的生物力学比较[J].中国脊柱脊髓杂志，2007，17（1）：46-50.
[13] 胡海刚，谭伦，林旭，等.经伤椎椎弓根植骨置钉后路复位内固定术治疗胸腰椎骨折[J].中国脊柱脊髓杂志，2011， 21（8）：663-668.
[14] 吕夫新，黄勇，张强，等.胸腰椎骨折伤椎椎弓根内固定生物力学研究与临床应用[J].脊柱外科杂志，2008，6（4）：229-233.
[15] 魏传付，李念虎，张文焕，等.经皮经伤椎与跨伤椎椎弓根置钉内固定治疗单节段胸腰椎骨折临床效果比较[J].山东医药，2019，59（19）：67-70.
[16] 黄东博.经伤椎单侧固定与跨伤椎固定治疗胸腰段脊柱骨折的疗效对照分析[J].中国伤残医学，2019，27（9）：23-24.
[17] 郑进昌，庄林波.经伤椎与跨伤椎后路复位内固定术疗效比较[J].中国中西医结合外科杂志，2017，23（5）：546-548.
[18] 胡辉，王璇.跨伤椎钉棒固定术与经伤椎钉棒固定术治疗胸腰椎骨折的临床效果评估[J].解放军预防医学杂志，2019，37（4）：86-87.
[19] 严小明，连福明.跨伤椎固定和经伤椎固定治疗胸腰段脊柱骨折的效果观察[J].白求恩医学杂志，2019，17（2）：129-131.
[20] 吴端荣.跨伤椎固定与经伤椎固定治疗胸腰段脊柱骨折的临床效果[J].医学食疗与健康，2020，18（2）：72，75.
[21] 林天.跨伤椎固定与经伤椎固定治疗在胸腰椎骨折治疗中的临床价值[J].中国伤残医学，2020，28（3）：21-22.
[22] 黎俊豪，蔡维山.胸腰段脊柱骨折采用跨伤椎固定和经伤椎固定治疗的效果比较[J].吉林医学，2016，37（12）：2930-2931.
[23] Benson DR，Burkus JK，Montesano PX，et al. Unstable thoracolumbar and lumbar burst fractures treated with the AO fixateur interne [J]. J Spinal Disord，1992，5（3）：335-343.
[24] Tezer M，Erturer RE，Ozturk C，et al. Conservative treatment of fractures of the thoracolumbar spine [J]. Int Orthop，2005，29（2）：78-82.
[25] Wawro W，Konrad L. Die monosegmentale montage des fixateurinterne bei der behandlung von thorakolumbalen wirbelfrakturen [J]. Unfallchirurg，1994，97（3）：114-120.