Comparison of Single or Double Titanium Mesh Cage for Anterior Reconstruction After Total En Bloc Spondylectomy for Thoracic and Lumbar Spinal Tumors.

IF 3.8 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Neurospine Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-30 DOI:10.14245/ns.2448052.026
Ao Leng, Qi Wang, Jiacheng Li, Yu Long, Song Shi, Lingzhi Meng, Mingming Guo, Hailong Yu, Liangbi Xiang
{"title":"Comparison of Single or Double Titanium Mesh Cage for Anterior Reconstruction After Total En Bloc Spondylectomy for Thoracic and Lumbar Spinal Tumors.","authors":"Ao Leng, Qi Wang, Jiacheng Li, Yu Long, Song Shi, Lingzhi Meng, Mingming Guo, Hailong Yu, Liangbi Xiang","doi":"10.14245/ns.2448052.026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the clinical efficacy of anterior column reconstruction using single or double titanium mesh cage (TMC) after total en bloc spondylectomy (TES) of thoracic and lumbar spinal tumors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective cohort study was performed involving 39 patients with thoracic or lumbar spinal tumors. All patients underwent TES, followed by anterior reconstruction and screw-rod instrumentation via a posterior-only procedure. Twenty-two patients in group A were treated with a single TMC to reconstruct the anterior column, whereas 17 patients in group B were reconstructed with double TMCs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The overall follow-up is 20.5 ± 4.6 months. There is no significant difference between the 2 groups regarding age, sex, body mass index, tumor location, operative time, and intraoperative blood loss. The time for TMC placement was significantly shortened in the double TMCs group (5.2 ± 1.3 minutes vs. 15.6 ± 3.3 minutes, p = 0.004). Additionally, postoperative neural complications were significantly reduced with double TMCs (5/22 vs. 0/17, p = 0.046). The kyphotic Cobb angle and mean intervertebral height were significantly corrected in both groups (p ≤ 0.001), without obvious loss of correction at the last follow-up in either group. The bone fusion rates for single TMC and double TMCs were 77.3% and 76.5%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Using 2 smaller TMCs instead of a single large one eases the placement of TMC by shortening the time and avoiding nerve impingement. Anterior column reconstruction with double TMC is a clinically feasible, and safe alternative following TES for thoracic and lumbar tumors.</p>","PeriodicalId":19269,"journal":{"name":"Neurospine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11224740/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurospine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14245/ns.2448052.026","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare the clinical efficacy of anterior column reconstruction using single or double titanium mesh cage (TMC) after total en bloc spondylectomy (TES) of thoracic and lumbar spinal tumors.

Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed involving 39 patients with thoracic or lumbar spinal tumors. All patients underwent TES, followed by anterior reconstruction and screw-rod instrumentation via a posterior-only procedure. Twenty-two patients in group A were treated with a single TMC to reconstruct the anterior column, whereas 17 patients in group B were reconstructed with double TMCs.

Results: The overall follow-up is 20.5 ± 4.6 months. There is no significant difference between the 2 groups regarding age, sex, body mass index, tumor location, operative time, and intraoperative blood loss. The time for TMC placement was significantly shortened in the double TMCs group (5.2 ± 1.3 minutes vs. 15.6 ± 3.3 minutes, p = 0.004). Additionally, postoperative neural complications were significantly reduced with double TMCs (5/22 vs. 0/17, p = 0.046). The kyphotic Cobb angle and mean intervertebral height were significantly corrected in both groups (p ≤ 0.001), without obvious loss of correction at the last follow-up in either group. The bone fusion rates for single TMC and double TMCs were 77.3% and 76.5%, respectively.

Conclusion: Using 2 smaller TMCs instead of a single large one eases the placement of TMC by shortening the time and avoiding nerve impingement. Anterior column reconstruction with double TMC is a clinically feasible, and safe alternative following TES for thoracic and lumbar tumors.

胸椎和腰椎肿瘤全椎体切除术后用于前路重建的单钛网笼与双钛网笼的比较
目的比较胸椎和腰椎肿瘤全脊椎切除术(TES)后使用单层或双层钛网笼(TMC)重建前柱的临床疗效:我们对39名胸椎或腰椎肿瘤患者进行了回顾性队列研究。所有患者均接受了TES手术,随后通过仅后路手术进行了前路重建和螺钉连杆器械安装。A 组的 22 名患者采用单 TMC 重建前柱,而 B 组的 17 名患者则采用双 TMC 重建:总体随访时间为 20.5 ± 4.6 个月。两组患者在年龄、性别、体重指数、肿瘤位置、手术时间和术中失血量方面无明显差异。双 TMC 组放置 TMC 的时间明显缩短(5.2 ± 1.3 分钟 vs. 15.6 ± 3.3 分钟,P = 0.004)。此外,双 TMC 术后神经并发症明显减少(5/22 对 0/17,p = 0.046)。两组患者的椎体后凸Cobb角和平均椎间高度均得到明显矫正(P≤0.001),且两组患者在最后一次随访时矫正效果均无明显减弱。单TMC和双TMC的骨融合率分别为77.3%和76.5%:结论:使用两个较小的 TMC 代替单个较大的 TMC 可缩短 TMC 安放时间,避免神经撞击,从而简化了 TMC 安放过程。使用双 TMC 重建前柱是治疗胸椎和腰椎肿瘤 TES 后的一种临床可行且安全的替代方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Neurospine
Neurospine Multiple-
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
18.80%
发文量
93
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信