Mehdi Sasani MD , Ahmet Levent Aydin MD , Tunc Oktenoglu MD , Murat Cosar MD , Yaprak Ataker MD , Tuncay Kaner MD , Ali Fahir Ozer MD
{"title":"后路动力经椎弓根稳定系统与假椎间盘核装置联合应用治疗腰椎间盘退行性疾病伴椎间盘突出","authors":"Mehdi Sasani MD , Ahmet Levent Aydin MD , Tunc Oktenoglu MD , Murat Cosar MD , Yaprak Ataker MD , Tuncay Kaner MD , Ali Fahir Ozer MD","doi":"10.1016/S1935-9810(08)70029-X","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Prosthetic replacement of spinal discs is emerging as a treatment option for degenerative disc disease. Posterior dynamic transpedicular stabilization (PDTS) and prosthetic disc nucleus (PDN) devices have been used sporadically in spinal surgery.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This was a prospective study of 13 patients averaging 40.9 years of age with degenerative disc disease who underwent posterior placement of a PDN with a PDTS. The Oswestry low-back pain disability questionnaire and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain were used to assess patient outcomes at the 3rd, 6th, and 12th postoperative months.</p><p>Lumbar range of motion was evaluated using a bubble inclinometer preoperatively and at 12 months postoperatively. Radiological parameters including lumbar lordosis angle (LL), segmental lordosis angle (α), disc height at the operated level (DHo), and disc height of the adjacent level (DHu) were evaluated. A typical midline posterior approach for complete discectomy was followed by the simultaneous placement of the PDN with PDTS.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Both the Oswestry and VAS scores showed significant improvement postoperatively (<em>P</em> <!--><<!--> <!-->.05). There were no significant differences in LL, α, DHo, and DHu parameters. We observed complications in 3 patients including 2 patients who had the PDN device embedded into the adjacent corpus; 1 had massive endplate degeneration, and the other experienced interbody space infection. In 1 patient, the PDN device migrated to one side in the vertebral space.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The use of a PDN in combination with posterior dynamic instrumentation can help to restore the physiologic motion of the anterior and posterior column and could help to establish posterior dynamic instrumentation as an important treatment of degenerative disc disease. Theoretically this concept is superior, but practically we need more advanced technology to replace disc material. Because this study examined the combination of the PDN and stabilization instrumention, the results cannot be compared with those reported in the literature for either PDN alone or dynamic screws alone.</p></div><div><h3>Level of Evidence</h3><p>Prospective cohort study with good follow-up (level 1b).</p></div>","PeriodicalId":88695,"journal":{"name":"SAS journal","volume":"2 3","pages":"Pages 130-136"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S1935-9810(08)70029-X","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Combined Use of a Posterior Dynamic Transpedicular Stabilization System and a Prosthetic Disc Nucleus Device in Treating Lumbar Degenerative Disc Disease With Disc Herniations\",\"authors\":\"Mehdi Sasani MD , Ahmet Levent Aydin MD , Tunc Oktenoglu MD , Murat Cosar MD , Yaprak Ataker MD , Tuncay Kaner MD , Ali Fahir Ozer MD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/S1935-9810(08)70029-X\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Prosthetic replacement of spinal discs is emerging as a treatment option for degenerative disc disease. Posterior dynamic transpedicular stabilization (PDTS) and prosthetic disc nucleus (PDN) devices have been used sporadically in spinal surgery.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This was a prospective study of 13 patients averaging 40.9 years of age with degenerative disc disease who underwent posterior placement of a PDN with a PDTS. The Oswestry low-back pain disability questionnaire and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain were used to assess patient outcomes at the 3rd, 6th, and 12th postoperative months.</p><p>Lumbar range of motion was evaluated using a bubble inclinometer preoperatively and at 12 months postoperatively. Radiological parameters including lumbar lordosis angle (LL), segmental lordosis angle (α), disc height at the operated level (DHo), and disc height of the adjacent level (DHu) were evaluated. A typical midline posterior approach for complete discectomy was followed by the simultaneous placement of the PDN with PDTS.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Both the Oswestry and VAS scores showed significant improvement postoperatively (<em>P</em> <!--><<!--> <!-->.05). There were no significant differences in LL, α, DHo, and DHu parameters. We observed complications in 3 patients including 2 patients who had the PDN device embedded into the adjacent corpus; 1 had massive endplate degeneration, and the other experienced interbody space infection. In 1 patient, the PDN device migrated to one side in the vertebral space.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The use of a PDN in combination with posterior dynamic instrumentation can help to restore the physiologic motion of the anterior and posterior column and could help to establish posterior dynamic instrumentation as an important treatment of degenerative disc disease. Theoretically this concept is superior, but practically we need more advanced technology to replace disc material. Because this study examined the combination of the PDN and stabilization instrumention, the results cannot be compared with those reported in the literature for either PDN alone or dynamic screws alone.</p></div><div><h3>Level of Evidence</h3><p>Prospective cohort study with good follow-up (level 1b).</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":88695,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"SAS journal\",\"volume\":\"2 3\",\"pages\":\"Pages 130-136\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S1935-9810(08)70029-X\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"SAS journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S193598100870029X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SAS journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S193598100870029X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Combined Use of a Posterior Dynamic Transpedicular Stabilization System and a Prosthetic Disc Nucleus Device in Treating Lumbar Degenerative Disc Disease With Disc Herniations
Background
Prosthetic replacement of spinal discs is emerging as a treatment option for degenerative disc disease. Posterior dynamic transpedicular stabilization (PDTS) and prosthetic disc nucleus (PDN) devices have been used sporadically in spinal surgery.
Methods
This was a prospective study of 13 patients averaging 40.9 years of age with degenerative disc disease who underwent posterior placement of a PDN with a PDTS. The Oswestry low-back pain disability questionnaire and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain were used to assess patient outcomes at the 3rd, 6th, and 12th postoperative months.
Lumbar range of motion was evaluated using a bubble inclinometer preoperatively and at 12 months postoperatively. Radiological parameters including lumbar lordosis angle (LL), segmental lordosis angle (α), disc height at the operated level (DHo), and disc height of the adjacent level (DHu) were evaluated. A typical midline posterior approach for complete discectomy was followed by the simultaneous placement of the PDN with PDTS.
Results
Both the Oswestry and VAS scores showed significant improvement postoperatively (P < .05). There were no significant differences in LL, α, DHo, and DHu parameters. We observed complications in 3 patients including 2 patients who had the PDN device embedded into the adjacent corpus; 1 had massive endplate degeneration, and the other experienced interbody space infection. In 1 patient, the PDN device migrated to one side in the vertebral space.
Conclusion
The use of a PDN in combination with posterior dynamic instrumentation can help to restore the physiologic motion of the anterior and posterior column and could help to establish posterior dynamic instrumentation as an important treatment of degenerative disc disease. Theoretically this concept is superior, but practically we need more advanced technology to replace disc material. Because this study examined the combination of the PDN and stabilization instrumention, the results cannot be compared with those reported in the literature for either PDN alone or dynamic screws alone.
Level of Evidence
Prospective cohort study with good follow-up (level 1b).
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
