前/后路腰椎融合术与经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术:并发症及预测因素分析

H. Hee, F. Castro, M. Majd, R. Holt, Leann Myers
{"title":"前/后路腰椎融合术与经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术:并发症及预测因素分析","authors":"H. Hee, F. Castro, M. Majd, R. Holt, Leann Myers","doi":"10.1097/00002517-200112000-00013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"No previous study has compared the complications between anterior/posterior and transforaminal interbody fusions. We performed a retrospective analysis of 164 patients to compare the complications and associated predictive factors of the two techniques of circumferential lumbar fusion. Fifty-three had same-day anterior/posterior fusion (group 1), and 111 had transforaminal interbody fusion (group 2). Mean operating time (p < 0.0001) and hospital stay (p < 0.0001) was significantly longer for group 1 patients. Average blood loss was greater for group 1 patients (p < 0.01). Higher complication rates were found in group 1 patients (p < 0.004). Wound infection occurred more frequently in patients with adjunctive treatment (p < 0.04). Hospital stay was an independent predictor of complications in both groups. In group 1, body mass index was independently associated with complications. In group 2, both hospital stay and adjunctive treatment were predictive of complications. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion is the preferred technique because it is associated with shorter operating time, less blood loss, shorter hospital stay, and lower incidence of complications.","PeriodicalId":77226,"journal":{"name":"Journal of spinal disorders","volume":"14 6 1","pages":"533-40"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2001-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1097/00002517-200112000-00013","citationCount":"190","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Anterior/posterior lumbar fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: analysis of complications and predictive factors.\",\"authors\":\"H. Hee, F. Castro, M. Majd, R. Holt, Leann Myers\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/00002517-200112000-00013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"No previous study has compared the complications between anterior/posterior and transforaminal interbody fusions. We performed a retrospective analysis of 164 patients to compare the complications and associated predictive factors of the two techniques of circumferential lumbar fusion. Fifty-three had same-day anterior/posterior fusion (group 1), and 111 had transforaminal interbody fusion (group 2). Mean operating time (p < 0.0001) and hospital stay (p < 0.0001) was significantly longer for group 1 patients. Average blood loss was greater for group 1 patients (p < 0.01). Higher complication rates were found in group 1 patients (p < 0.004). Wound infection occurred more frequently in patients with adjunctive treatment (p < 0.04). Hospital stay was an independent predictor of complications in both groups. In group 1, body mass index was independently associated with complications. In group 2, both hospital stay and adjunctive treatment were predictive of complications. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion is the preferred technique because it is associated with shorter operating time, less blood loss, shorter hospital stay, and lower incidence of complications.\",\"PeriodicalId\":77226,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of spinal disorders\",\"volume\":\"14 6 1\",\"pages\":\"533-40\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2001-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1097/00002517-200112000-00013\",\"citationCount\":\"190\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of spinal disorders\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/00002517-200112000-00013\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of spinal disorders","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/00002517-200112000-00013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 190

摘要

以前没有研究比较前/后路和经椎间孔椎间融合的并发症。我们对164例患者进行回顾性分析,比较两种腰椎融合术的并发症和相关预测因素。53例患者当日行前后路融合术(组1),111例行椎间孔椎间融合术(组2)。组1患者的平均手术时间(p < 0.0001)和住院时间(p < 0.0001)明显更长。1组患者平均失血量较大(p < 0.01)。1组患者并发症发生率较高(p < 0.004)。辅助治疗组伤口感染发生率较高(p < 0.04)。住院时间是两组并发症的独立预测因子。在组1中,体重指数与并发症独立相关。在第二组中,住院时间和辅助治疗均可预测并发症的发生。经椎间孔腰椎椎体间融合术是首选的技术,因为它与更短的手术时间、更少的出血量、更短的住院时间和更低的并发症发生率有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Anterior/posterior lumbar fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: analysis of complications and predictive factors.
No previous study has compared the complications between anterior/posterior and transforaminal interbody fusions. We performed a retrospective analysis of 164 patients to compare the complications and associated predictive factors of the two techniques of circumferential lumbar fusion. Fifty-three had same-day anterior/posterior fusion (group 1), and 111 had transforaminal interbody fusion (group 2). Mean operating time (p < 0.0001) and hospital stay (p < 0.0001) was significantly longer for group 1 patients. Average blood loss was greater for group 1 patients (p < 0.01). Higher complication rates were found in group 1 patients (p < 0.004). Wound infection occurred more frequently in patients with adjunctive treatment (p < 0.04). Hospital stay was an independent predictor of complications in both groups. In group 1, body mass index was independently associated with complications. In group 2, both hospital stay and adjunctive treatment were predictive of complications. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion is the preferred technique because it is associated with shorter operating time, less blood loss, shorter hospital stay, and lower incidence of complications.
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信