单侧与双侧入路经皮椎体成形术治疗骨质疏松压缩性骨折的比较研究Comparative study of unipedicular versus bipedicular percutaneous vertebroplasty for the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures
黄胜;许靖;项禹诚;苏汝堃;黄帅;郭培义;孙青;
摘要(Abstract):
[目的]比较单侧与双侧椎弓根入路经皮椎体成形术(percutaneous vertebroplasty,PVP)治疗骨质疏松压缩性骨折(osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture,OVCF)的临床疗效。[方法]2007年9月~2011年7月,46例骨质疏松胸腰椎单节椎体压缩性骨折患者被随机分为两组,其中单侧组22例,双侧组24例。对两组患者的临床资料进行前瞻性分析,比较两组患者的临床疗效。[结果]所有患者均获得1年以上随访,两组患者术前临床资料差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两组术后椎体高度及后凸Cobb角均较术前改善(P<0.01),而两组椎体高度恢复率、椎体后凸Cobb角恢复率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两组患者术后24 h、术后1周、术后1年时,VAS、ODI评分较术前均有改善(P<0.01),而两组间差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。手术时间、X线暴露时间、骨水泥灌注量及骨水泥渗漏发生率,单侧组少于双侧组,两组差异有统计学意义(P<0.01),但两组间邻近椎体骨折发生率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。[结论]单侧与双侧椎弓根入路经皮椎体成形术治疗骨质疏松椎体压缩性骨折均能获得良好的临床疗效,但单侧椎弓根入路具有手术时间短、X线暴露时间短、骨水泥渗漏发生率低的优点。
关键词(KeyWords): 椎体成形术;骨质疏松症;压缩性骨折
基金项目(Foundation):
作者(Author): 黄胜;许靖;项禹诚;苏汝堃;黄帅;郭培义;孙青;
Email:
DOI:
参考文献(References):
- [1]Song BK,Eun JP,Oh YM.Clinical and radiological comparison of uni-pedicular versus bipedicular balloon kyphoplasty for the treatment ofvertebral compression fractures[J].Osteoporos Int,2009,10:1717-1723.
- [2]Anselmetti GC,Manca A,Hirsch J,et al.Percutaneous vertebroplasty inosteoporotic patients:an institutional experience of 1,634 patients withlong-term follow-up[J].J Vasc Interv Radiol,2011,12:1714-1720.
- [3]Liebschner MA,Rosenberg WS,Keaveny TM.Effects of bone cementvolume and distribution on vertebral stiffness after vertebroplasty[J].Spine(Phila Pa 1976),2001,14:1547-1554.
- [4]李健,吴溢峰,杨波,等.双侧双平面与单侧经椎弓根椎体成形术疗效比较[J].中国矫形外科杂志,2011,2:91-95.
- [5]Tohmeh AG,Mathis JM,Fenton DC,et al.Biomechanical efficacy ofunipedicular versus bipedicular vertebroplasty for the management ofosteoporotic compression fractures[J].Spine(Phila Pa 1976),1999,17:1772-1776.
- [6]Chen LH,Lai PL,Chen WJ.Unipedicle percutaneous vertebroplasty forspinal intraosseous vacuum cleft[J].Clin Orthop,2005,435:148-153.
- [7]Lee KA,Hong SJ,Lee S,et al.Analysis of adjacent fracture after percu-taneous vertebroplasty:does intradiscal cement leakage really increasethe risk of adjacent vertebral fracture[J].Skeletal Radiol,2011,12:1537-1542.
- [8]DePalma MJ,Ketchum JM,Frankel BM,et al.Percutaneous vertebro-plasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures in the nonagenari-ans:a prospective study evaluating pain reduction and new symptomaticfracture rate[J].Spine(Phila Pa 1976),2011,4:277-282.
- [9]Ploeg WT,Veldhuizen AG,The B,et al.Percutaneous vertebroplasty asa treatment for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures:a systematicreview[J].Eur Spine J,2006,12:1749-1758.
- [10]Movrin I,Vengust R,Komadina R.Adjacent vertebral fractures afterpercutaneous vertebral augmentation of osteoporotic vertebral compres-sion fracture:a comparison of balloon kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty[J].Arch Orthop Trauma Surg,2010,9:1157-1166.
- [11]Rho YJ,Choe WJ,Chun YI.Risk factors predicting the new symptomat-ic vertebral compression fractures after percutaneous vertebroplasty orkyphoplasty[J].Eur Spine J,2012,5:905-911.
- [12]Molloy S,Riley LH 3rd,Belkoff SM.Effect of cement volume and place-ment on mechanical-property restoration resulting from vertebroplasty[J].AJNR Am J Neuroradiol,2005,2:401-404.
- [13]Jin YJ,Yoon SH,Park KW,et al.The volumetric analysis of cement invertebroplasty:relationship with clinical outcome and complications[J].Spine(Phila Pa 1976),2011,12:761-772.
- [14]Luo J,Daines L,Charalambous A,et al.Vertebroplasty:only small ce-ment volumes are required to normalize stress distributions on the verte-bral bodies[J].Spine(Phila Pa 1976),2009,26:2865-2873.
- [15]Al-Ali F,Barrow T,Luke K.Vertebroplasty:what is important and whatis not[J].AJNR Am J Neuroradiol,2009,10:1835-1839.
- [16]Ryu KS,Park CK,Kim MC,et al.Dose-dependent epidural leakage ofpolymethylmethacrylate after percutaneous vertebroplasty in patientswith osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures[J].J Neurosurg(Spine 1),2002,1:56-61.