经椎螺钉固定创伤性胸腰椎骨折的开放与经皮技术比较

Jawad Jan Arif, Subhan Shahid, Tanveer Afzal, Muhammad Abubakar, Ali Irfan
{"title":"经椎螺钉固定创伤性胸腰椎骨折的开放与经皮技术比较","authors":"Jawad Jan Arif, Subhan Shahid, Tanveer Afzal, Muhammad Abubakar, Ali Irfan","doi":"10.53350/pjmhs2023176240","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To determine meantime to return to work of patients with traumatic thoracolumbar spine fracture managed with open versus percutaneous trans-pedicular screw fixation. Materials and methods: A randomized controlled trial conducted in a joint venture of orthopedic and neurosurgeons in a private hospital of Lahore. Study was completed in six months duration from July to December 2022. 80 patients having traumatic thoracolumbar spine fractures presenting to the study hospital and falling in inclusion criteria were enrolled into this study. Two groups made containing equal number of patients in each (n=40). One group underwent open transpedicular screw fixation and other group underwent percutaneous trans-pedicular screw fixation. Monthly follow up was done and the time taken return to work (TTRW) was noted. Results: Mean age of the patients was 34.62 years. There were 40(50%) male and 40(50%) female patients in the study group (n=80). Mean time taken return to work after the surgery was 3.1±0.61 months in group-A (percutaneous screw fixation) versus 5.2±0.84 months in group-B (open screw fixation). The difference in two groups regarding TTRW was significant (p<0.005). Male and female patients showed significant difference in TTRW within group-A (p=0.021) while no significance difference found in TTRW among male and female patients within group-B (p=0.18). Duration of the procedure had significant impact on TTRW (p=0.001). Practical Implication: Percutaneous technique has been proved to be safer, quicker and minimal invasive method that should replace open technique. It is recommended to conduct comparative randomized controlled trials on larger study groups to obtain more data regarding outcomes of percutaneous versus open technique. This study helps us to understand comparatively safety, efficacy and feasibility of both techniques so that better treatment option may be used in such patients for better outcomes. Conclusion: We concluded that time taken return to work was shorter in the patients treated by percutaneous technique of transpedicular screw fixation versus those patients treated by open technique. Percutaneous technique has shorter duration of the procedure, less morbidity, early recovery and more effective. Keywords: Transpedicular screw fixation, Thoracolumbar spine fracture, Spinal cord injury, Time taken return to work","PeriodicalId":19842,"journal":{"name":"Pakistan Journal of Medical and Health Sciences","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Transpedicular Screw Fixation of Traumatic Thoracolumbar Spine Fracture Open Versus Percutaneous Technique\",\"authors\":\"Jawad Jan Arif, Subhan Shahid, Tanveer Afzal, Muhammad Abubakar, Ali Irfan\",\"doi\":\"10.53350/pjmhs2023176240\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: To determine meantime to return to work of patients with traumatic thoracolumbar spine fracture managed with open versus percutaneous trans-pedicular screw fixation. Materials and methods: A randomized controlled trial conducted in a joint venture of orthopedic and neurosurgeons in a private hospital of Lahore. Study was completed in six months duration from July to December 2022. 80 patients having traumatic thoracolumbar spine fractures presenting to the study hospital and falling in inclusion criteria were enrolled into this study. Two groups made containing equal number of patients in each (n=40). One group underwent open transpedicular screw fixation and other group underwent percutaneous trans-pedicular screw fixation. Monthly follow up was done and the time taken return to work (TTRW) was noted. Results: Mean age of the patients was 34.62 years. There were 40(50%) male and 40(50%) female patients in the study group (n=80). Mean time taken return to work after the surgery was 3.1±0.61 months in group-A (percutaneous screw fixation) versus 5.2±0.84 months in group-B (open screw fixation). The difference in two groups regarding TTRW was significant (p<0.005). Male and female patients showed significant difference in TTRW within group-A (p=0.021) while no significance difference found in TTRW among male and female patients within group-B (p=0.18). Duration of the procedure had significant impact on TTRW (p=0.001). Practical Implication: Percutaneous technique has been proved to be safer, quicker and minimal invasive method that should replace open technique. It is recommended to conduct comparative randomized controlled trials on larger study groups to obtain more data regarding outcomes of percutaneous versus open technique. This study helps us to understand comparatively safety, efficacy and feasibility of both techniques so that better treatment option may be used in such patients for better outcomes. Conclusion: We concluded that time taken return to work was shorter in the patients treated by percutaneous technique of transpedicular screw fixation versus those patients treated by open technique. Percutaneous technique has shorter duration of the procedure, less morbidity, early recovery and more effective. Keywords: Transpedicular screw fixation, Thoracolumbar spine fracture, Spinal cord injury, Time taken return to work\",\"PeriodicalId\":19842,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pakistan Journal of Medical and Health Sciences\",\"volume\":\"3 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pakistan Journal of Medical and Health Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.53350/pjmhs2023176240\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pakistan Journal of Medical and Health Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53350/pjmhs2023176240","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:确定胸腰椎外伤性骨折患者采用开放式与经皮经关节螺钉固定术治疗后重返工作岗位的时间。材料与方法:拉合尔一家私立医院的骨科医生和神经外科医生联合开展了一项随机对照试验。研究从 2022 年 7 月至 12 月,历时 6 个月。80名胸腰段脊柱创伤性骨折患者在研究医院就诊,并符合纳入标准。分为两组,每组患者人数相等(n=40)。一组接受开放式经关节螺钉固定术,另一组接受经皮经关节螺钉固定术。每月进行一次随访,并记录重返工作岗位所需时间(TTRW)。结果患者平均年龄为 34.62 岁。研究组(80 人)中男性患者 40 人(50%),女性患者 40 人(50%)。A组(经皮螺钉固定)术后恢复工作的平均时间为(3.1±0.61)个月,B组(开放螺钉固定)术后恢复工作的平均时间为(5.2±0.84)个月。两组患者的 TTRW 差异显著(P<0.005)。在 A 组中,男性和女性患者的 TTRW 有明显差异(p=0.021),而在 B 组中,男性和女性患者的 TTRW 没有明显差异(p=0.18)。手术持续时间对 TTRW 有显著影响(p=0.001)。实际意义:经皮技术已被证明是一种更安全、更快捷、微创的方法,应取代开放技术。建议在更大的研究群体中开展随机对照比较试验,以获得更多有关经皮技术与开放技术效果的数据。这项研究有助于我们了解两种技术的安全性、有效性和可行性,从而为此类患者提供更好的治疗方案,获得更好的治疗效果。结论我们得出的结论是,采用经皮穿刺螺钉固定技术治疗的患者与采用开放技术治疗的患者相比,重返工作岗位所需的时间更短。经皮技术的手术时间更短、发病率更低、恢复更快、效果更好。关键词经皮螺钉固定术、胸腰椎骨折、脊髓损伤、恢复工作所需时间
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Transpedicular Screw Fixation of Traumatic Thoracolumbar Spine Fracture Open Versus Percutaneous Technique
Objective: To determine meantime to return to work of patients with traumatic thoracolumbar spine fracture managed with open versus percutaneous trans-pedicular screw fixation. Materials and methods: A randomized controlled trial conducted in a joint venture of orthopedic and neurosurgeons in a private hospital of Lahore. Study was completed in six months duration from July to December 2022. 80 patients having traumatic thoracolumbar spine fractures presenting to the study hospital and falling in inclusion criteria were enrolled into this study. Two groups made containing equal number of patients in each (n=40). One group underwent open transpedicular screw fixation and other group underwent percutaneous trans-pedicular screw fixation. Monthly follow up was done and the time taken return to work (TTRW) was noted. Results: Mean age of the patients was 34.62 years. There were 40(50%) male and 40(50%) female patients in the study group (n=80). Mean time taken return to work after the surgery was 3.1±0.61 months in group-A (percutaneous screw fixation) versus 5.2±0.84 months in group-B (open screw fixation). The difference in two groups regarding TTRW was significant (p<0.005). Male and female patients showed significant difference in TTRW within group-A (p=0.021) while no significance difference found in TTRW among male and female patients within group-B (p=0.18). Duration of the procedure had significant impact on TTRW (p=0.001). Practical Implication: Percutaneous technique has been proved to be safer, quicker and minimal invasive method that should replace open technique. It is recommended to conduct comparative randomized controlled trials on larger study groups to obtain more data regarding outcomes of percutaneous versus open technique. This study helps us to understand comparatively safety, efficacy and feasibility of both techniques so that better treatment option may be used in such patients for better outcomes. Conclusion: We concluded that time taken return to work was shorter in the patients treated by percutaneous technique of transpedicular screw fixation versus those patients treated by open technique. Percutaneous technique has shorter duration of the procedure, less morbidity, early recovery and more effective. Keywords: Transpedicular screw fixation, Thoracolumbar spine fracture, Spinal cord injury, Time taken return to work
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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