感染性脊柱炎器械手术的安全性与决策

K. Baek, Young-Seok Lee, D. Kang, C. Lee, S. Hwang, I. Park
{"title":"感染性脊柱炎器械手术的安全性与决策","authors":"K. Baek, Young-Seok Lee, D. Kang, C. Lee, S. Hwang, I. Park","doi":"10.14245/kjs.2016.13.3.120","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective Infectious spondylitis is mostly managed by appropriate antibiotic treatment options, and some patients may require surgical interventions. However, surgical interventions that use spinal instrumentation to correct the mechanical instability may be associated with the risk of an increase in the recurrence rate. In this study, we investigated whether spinal instrumentation effects on recurrence of infectious spondylitis. Methods The study was conducted as a retrospective study by dividing the subjects into the noninstrumentation surgery and instrumentation surgery groups among a total of 95 patients who had received surgical interventions in infectious spondylitis from 2009 to 2014. The study investigated patient variables such as underlying illness, presumed source of infection, clinical data, laboratory and radiological data, and ultimate outcome, and compared them between the 2 groups. Results In the 95 patients, instrumentation was not used in 21 patients but it was used in 74 patients. When the disease involved ≥3 vertebral bodies, lumbosacral level and epidural part, noninstrumentation surgery was mainly conducted, but when the disease involved the thoracic level and psoas muscle part, instrumentation surgery was mainly conducted. However, there were no differences between the 2 groups in terms of the recurrence rate and the incidence of primary failure. Conclusion The use of instrumentation in treating infectious spondylitis was determined by the level of involvement and part of the infection, but the use of instrumentation did not cause any increases in the recurrence rate and the incidence of primary failure.","PeriodicalId":17867,"journal":{"name":"Korean Journal of Spine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Safety and Decision Making of Instrumented Surgery in Infectious Spondylitis\",\"authors\":\"K. Baek, Young-Seok Lee, D. Kang, C. Lee, S. Hwang, I. Park\",\"doi\":\"10.14245/kjs.2016.13.3.120\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective Infectious spondylitis is mostly managed by appropriate antibiotic treatment options, and some patients may require surgical interventions. However, surgical interventions that use spinal instrumentation to correct the mechanical instability may be associated with the risk of an increase in the recurrence rate. In this study, we investigated whether spinal instrumentation effects on recurrence of infectious spondylitis. Methods The study was conducted as a retrospective study by dividing the subjects into the noninstrumentation surgery and instrumentation surgery groups among a total of 95 patients who had received surgical interventions in infectious spondylitis from 2009 to 2014. The study investigated patient variables such as underlying illness, presumed source of infection, clinical data, laboratory and radiological data, and ultimate outcome, and compared them between the 2 groups. Results In the 95 patients, instrumentation was not used in 21 patients but it was used in 74 patients. When the disease involved ≥3 vertebral bodies, lumbosacral level and epidural part, noninstrumentation surgery was mainly conducted, but when the disease involved the thoracic level and psoas muscle part, instrumentation surgery was mainly conducted. However, there were no differences between the 2 groups in terms of the recurrence rate and the incidence of primary failure. Conclusion The use of instrumentation in treating infectious spondylitis was determined by the level of involvement and part of the infection, but the use of instrumentation did not cause any increases in the recurrence rate and the incidence of primary failure.\",\"PeriodicalId\":17867,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Korean Journal of Spine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Korean Journal of Spine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14245/kjs.2016.13.3.120\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean Journal of Spine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14245/kjs.2016.13.3.120","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

摘要

目的传染性脊柱炎大多通过适当的抗生素治疗,部分患者可能需要手术干预。然而,使用脊柱内固定来纠正机械不稳定的手术干预可能与复发率增加的风险相关。在这项研究中,我们研究了脊柱内固定是否会影响感染性脊柱炎的复发。方法采用回顾性研究的方法,将2009 - 2014年接受感染性脊柱炎手术干预的95例患者分为非器械固定组和器械固定组。该研究调查了患者的变量,如潜在疾病、假定的感染源、临床数据、实验室和放射学数据以及最终结果,并在两组之间进行了比较。结果95例患者中21例未使用器械,74例使用器械。当病变累及≥3个椎体、腰骶段及硬膜外部分时,以非固定化手术为主,累及胸段及腰肌部分时,以固定化手术为主。然而,两组在复发率和原发失败发生率方面没有差异。结论使用器械治疗感染性脊柱炎取决于受累程度和感染部位,但器械的使用并未导致复发率和原发性失败率的增加。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Safety and Decision Making of Instrumented Surgery in Infectious Spondylitis
Objective Infectious spondylitis is mostly managed by appropriate antibiotic treatment options, and some patients may require surgical interventions. However, surgical interventions that use spinal instrumentation to correct the mechanical instability may be associated with the risk of an increase in the recurrence rate. In this study, we investigated whether spinal instrumentation effects on recurrence of infectious spondylitis. Methods The study was conducted as a retrospective study by dividing the subjects into the noninstrumentation surgery and instrumentation surgery groups among a total of 95 patients who had received surgical interventions in infectious spondylitis from 2009 to 2014. The study investigated patient variables such as underlying illness, presumed source of infection, clinical data, laboratory and radiological data, and ultimate outcome, and compared them between the 2 groups. Results In the 95 patients, instrumentation was not used in 21 patients but it was used in 74 patients. When the disease involved ≥3 vertebral bodies, lumbosacral level and epidural part, noninstrumentation surgery was mainly conducted, but when the disease involved the thoracic level and psoas muscle part, instrumentation surgery was mainly conducted. However, there were no differences between the 2 groups in terms of the recurrence rate and the incidence of primary failure. Conclusion The use of instrumentation in treating infectious spondylitis was determined by the level of involvement and part of the infection, but the use of instrumentation did not cause any increases in the recurrence rate and the incidence of primary failure.
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