气动凿刀与标准髂骨采收方法之比较。

Orthopaedic review Pub Date : 1994-08-01
R W Duncan, R A McGuire, E F Meydrech
{"title":"气动凿刀与标准髂骨采收方法之比较。","authors":"R W Duncan,&nbsp;R A McGuire,&nbsp;E F Meydrech","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Fifty consecutive patients undergoing posterior lumbar fusion by a single surgeon were prospectively randomized in a study designed to evaluate the efficacy of using a pneumatic oscillating gouge to obtain posterior outer table iliac crest bone graft versus the standard method of using osteotomes and gouges. Variables analyzed included graft harvesting time, blood loss, weight of graft obtained, and graft site morbidity. Mean graft harvesting time with the pneumatic gouge was 1 minute 44 seconds (range, 1 min 5 sec to 3 min 15 sec) compared with the standard method time of 4 minutes 4 seconds (range, 2 min 15 sec to 8 min 56 sec) (P = 0.0001). Blood loss was also less, with a mean of 25.4 cc for the pneumatic gouge compared with 65.2 cc using the standard method (P = 0.0001). There were no complications with the graft site in either group. We conclude that the pneumatic gouge is a viable alternative to standard bone graft harvesting techniques. Benefits include shorter operative time and decreased blood loss without an increased morbidity.</p>","PeriodicalId":19637,"journal":{"name":"Orthopaedic review","volume":"23 8","pages":"672-5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1994-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pneumatic gouge versus standard method for iliac crest harvesting.\",\"authors\":\"R W Duncan,&nbsp;R A McGuire,&nbsp;E F Meydrech\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Fifty consecutive patients undergoing posterior lumbar fusion by a single surgeon were prospectively randomized in a study designed to evaluate the efficacy of using a pneumatic oscillating gouge to obtain posterior outer table iliac crest bone graft versus the standard method of using osteotomes and gouges. Variables analyzed included graft harvesting time, blood loss, weight of graft obtained, and graft site morbidity. Mean graft harvesting time with the pneumatic gouge was 1 minute 44 seconds (range, 1 min 5 sec to 3 min 15 sec) compared with the standard method time of 4 minutes 4 seconds (range, 2 min 15 sec to 8 min 56 sec) (P = 0.0001). Blood loss was also less, with a mean of 25.4 cc for the pneumatic gouge compared with 65.2 cc using the standard method (P = 0.0001). There were no complications with the graft site in either group. We conclude that the pneumatic gouge is a viable alternative to standard bone graft harvesting techniques. Benefits include shorter operative time and decreased blood loss without an increased morbidity.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19637,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Orthopaedic review\",\"volume\":\"23 8\",\"pages\":\"672-5\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1994-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Orthopaedic review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthopaedic review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","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

在一项前瞻性随机研究中,连续50例患者接受了同一位外科医生的后路腰椎融合术,旨在评估使用气动振荡凿槽获得后外表髂骨移植物与使用截骨和凿槽的标准方法的疗效。分析的变量包括移植物收获时间、出血量、获得的移植物重量和移植物部位发病率。与标准方法的4分4秒(2分15秒至8分56秒)相比,气动凿取移植物的平均时间为1分44秒(范围,1分5秒至3分15秒)(P = 0.0001)。失血量也更少,气动凿法的平均失血量为25.4 cc,而标准方法为65.2 cc (P = 0.0001)。两组均无移植部位并发症发生。我们的结论是,气动凿是一个可行的替代标准骨移植采收技术。其优点包括缩短手术时间和减少出血量而不增加发病率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Pneumatic gouge versus standard method for iliac crest harvesting.

Fifty consecutive patients undergoing posterior lumbar fusion by a single surgeon were prospectively randomized in a study designed to evaluate the efficacy of using a pneumatic oscillating gouge to obtain posterior outer table iliac crest bone graft versus the standard method of using osteotomes and gouges. Variables analyzed included graft harvesting time, blood loss, weight of graft obtained, and graft site morbidity. Mean graft harvesting time with the pneumatic gouge was 1 minute 44 seconds (range, 1 min 5 sec to 3 min 15 sec) compared with the standard method time of 4 minutes 4 seconds (range, 2 min 15 sec to 8 min 56 sec) (P = 0.0001). Blood loss was also less, with a mean of 25.4 cc for the pneumatic gouge compared with 65.2 cc using the standard method (P = 0.0001). There were no complications with the graft site in either group. We conclude that the pneumatic gouge is a viable alternative to standard bone graft harvesting techniques. Benefits include shorter operative time and decreased blood loss without an increased morbidity.

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