在重组BMP的时代,额外的前路稳定是否会增加后外侧融合的价值?

Priyesh Dhoke, Ben Goss, Satyen Mehta, Sanela Stanojevic, Richard Williams
{"title":"在重组BMP的时代,额外的前路稳定是否会增加后外侧融合的价值?","authors":"Priyesh Dhoke, Ben Goss, Satyen Mehta, Sanela Stanojevic, Richard Williams","doi":"10.1055/s-0032-1328139","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT\n Study design: Retrospective cohort study. Clinical question or objective: Is there a benefit to additional transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) if a solid posterolateral (PL) fusion can be achieved with routine bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) use in low-grade spondylolisthesis? Methods: We performed a retrospective review of patients who had undergone surgery for grade I or II lumbar spondylolisthesis stratified into two groups. Group 1 had 46 patients who underwent TLIF along with PL instrumented fusion. Group 2 had 40 patients who underwent PL instrumented fusion alone. In both groups, adequate posterior decompression with pedicle screw instrumentation was performed and rhBMP-7 was used. All patients were evaluated clinically using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and by independent radiological examination at 3 and 12 months. Results: At a minimum follow-up of 12 months, there was no statistically significant difference in the rate of fusion. In addition, there were no differences in the proportion of patients who had a minimal clinically significant difference in their ODI. There was a similar rate of complications between each cohort. Conclusions: The use of BMP was associated with a high rate of PL lumbar fusion. In the presence of a PL fusion, there appears to be little clinical benefit to additional anterior TLIF in degenerative spondylolisthesis. Final class of evidence-treatment Study design RCT Cohort • Case control Case series Methods Concealed allocation (RCT) Intention to treat (RCT) Blinded/independent evaluation of primary outcome F/U ≥ 85% • Adequate sample size • Control for confounding Overall class of evidence III The definiton of the different classes of evidence is available here.","PeriodicalId":89675,"journal":{"name":"Evidence-based spine-care journal","volume":" ","pages":"21-5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1055/s-0032-1328139","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"In the era of recombinant BMP, does additional anterior stabilization add value to a posterolateral fusion?\",\"authors\":\"Priyesh Dhoke, Ben Goss, Satyen Mehta, Sanela Stanojevic, Richard Williams\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/s-0032-1328139\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT\\n Study design: Retrospective cohort study. Clinical question or objective: Is there a benefit to additional transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) if a solid posterolateral (PL) fusion can be achieved with routine bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) use in low-grade spondylolisthesis? Methods: We performed a retrospective review of patients who had undergone surgery for grade I or II lumbar spondylolisthesis stratified into two groups. Group 1 had 46 patients who underwent TLIF along with PL instrumented fusion. Group 2 had 40 patients who underwent PL instrumented fusion alone. In both groups, adequate posterior decompression with pedicle screw instrumentation was performed and rhBMP-7 was used. All patients were evaluated clinically using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and by independent radiological examination at 3 and 12 months. Results: At a minimum follow-up of 12 months, there was no statistically significant difference in the rate of fusion. In addition, there were no differences in the proportion of patients who had a minimal clinically significant difference in their ODI. There was a similar rate of complications between each cohort. Conclusions: The use of BMP was associated with a high rate of PL lumbar fusion. In the presence of a PL fusion, there appears to be little clinical benefit to additional anterior TLIF in degenerative spondylolisthesis. Final class of evidence-treatment Study design RCT Cohort • Case control Case series Methods Concealed allocation (RCT) Intention to treat (RCT) Blinded/independent evaluation of primary outcome F/U ≥ 85% • Adequate sample size • Control for confounding Overall class of evidence III The definiton of the different classes of evidence is available here.\",\"PeriodicalId\":89675,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Evidence-based spine-care journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"21-5\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1055/s-0032-1328139\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Evidence-based spine-care journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1328139\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence-based spine-care journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1328139","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

研究设计:回顾性队列研究。临床问题或目的:如果常规骨形态发生蛋白(BMP)治疗轻度腰椎滑脱可以实现后外侧(PL)融合,那么额外的经椎间孔腰椎体间融合术(TLIF)是否有好处?方法:我们对接受过I级或II级腰椎滑脱手术的患者进行回顾性研究,并将其分为两组。第1组有46例患者行TLIF合并PL内固定融合。第二组40例患者单独行PL内固定融合术。两组均行足量后路减压椎弓根螺钉内固定,并使用rhBMP-7。所有患者均在3个月和12个月时采用Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)和独立放射学检查进行临床评估。结果:在至少12个月的随访中,融合率没有统计学意义上的差异。此外,ODI有最小临床显著差异的患者比例也没有差异。每个队列之间的并发症发生率相似。结论:BMP的使用与高腰椎融合率相关。在前路融合术存在的情况下,在退行性椎体滑脱中进行额外的前路TLIF似乎没有什么临床益处。[表:见正文]。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

In the era of recombinant BMP, does additional anterior stabilization add value to a posterolateral fusion?

In the era of recombinant BMP, does additional anterior stabilization add value to a posterolateral fusion?
ABSTRACT Study design: Retrospective cohort study. Clinical question or objective: Is there a benefit to additional transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) if a solid posterolateral (PL) fusion can be achieved with routine bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) use in low-grade spondylolisthesis? Methods: We performed a retrospective review of patients who had undergone surgery for grade I or II lumbar spondylolisthesis stratified into two groups. Group 1 had 46 patients who underwent TLIF along with PL instrumented fusion. Group 2 had 40 patients who underwent PL instrumented fusion alone. In both groups, adequate posterior decompression with pedicle screw instrumentation was performed and rhBMP-7 was used. All patients were evaluated clinically using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and by independent radiological examination at 3 and 12 months. Results: At a minimum follow-up of 12 months, there was no statistically significant difference in the rate of fusion. In addition, there were no differences in the proportion of patients who had a minimal clinically significant difference in their ODI. There was a similar rate of complications between each cohort. Conclusions: The use of BMP was associated with a high rate of PL lumbar fusion. In the presence of a PL fusion, there appears to be little clinical benefit to additional anterior TLIF in degenerative spondylolisthesis. Final class of evidence-treatment Study design RCT Cohort • Case control Case series Methods Concealed allocation (RCT) Intention to treat (RCT) Blinded/independent evaluation of primary outcome F/U ≥ 85% • Adequate sample size • Control for confounding Overall class of evidence III The definiton of the different classes of evidence is available here.
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