[1]张永金.TLIF与PLIF对单节段腰椎退行性病变患者术后疼痛及腰椎功能的影响[J].医学信息,2023,36(15):128-131.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2023.15.026]
　ZHANG Yong-jin.Effects of TLIF and PLIF on Postoperative Pain and Lumbar Function in Patients with Single-segment Lumbar Degenerative Disease[J].Journal of Medical Information,2023,36(15):128-131.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2023.15.026]
点击复制

TLIF与PLIF对单节段腰椎退行性病变患者术后疼痛及腰椎功能的影响()
分享到：

医学信息[ISSN:1006-1959/CN:61-1278/R]

卷:
36卷
期数:
2023年15期
页码:
128-131
栏目:
论著
出版日期:
2023-08-01

文章信息/Info

Title:
Effects of TLIF and PLIF on Postoperative Pain and Lumbar Function in Patients with Single-segment Lumbar Degenerative Disease
文章编号:
1006-1959（2023）15-0128-04
作者:
张永金
（六枝特区人民医院外三科，贵州 六盘水 553400）
Author(s):
ZHANG Yong-jin
(The Third Department of Surgery,People’s Hospital of Liuzhi Special Zone,Liupanshui 553400,Guizhou,China)
关键词:
腰椎退行性病变; 经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术; 后路腰椎体间融合术; 腰椎功能
Keywords:
Lumbar degenerative disease; Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion; Posterior lumbar interbody fusion; Lumbar function
分类号:
R687.3
DOI:
10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2023.15.026
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
目的 探讨经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术（TLIF）与后路腰椎体间融合术（PLIF）在单节段腰椎退行性病变患者中的应用效果。方法 选取2020年8月-2022年8月六枝特区人民医院收治的82例单节段腰椎退行性病变患者，按随机数字表法分为对照组和观察组，各41例。对照组行PLIF治疗，观察组行TLIF治疗。比较两组手术情况、腰椎功能（JOA评分）、术后疼痛评分、日常生活能力（Barthel指数）、生活质量及并发症。结果 观察组手术时间、住院时间短于对照组，术中出血量、术后引流量少于对照组，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；观察组术后JOA评分中主观症状、临床特征、日常活动受限得分及总分均高于对照组，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；观察组术后7 d、3个月疼痛评分低于对照组，术后Barthel指数评分高于对照组，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；观察组术后生理、心理、社会及环境领域评分高于对照组，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；两组并发症发生率比较，差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。结论 TLIF治疗单节段腰椎退行性病变效果更佳，可加快腰椎功能恢复，减轻术后疼痛，更好的改善患者生活质量。
Abstract:
Objective To investigate the application effect of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in patients with single-segment lumbar degenerative disease.Methods A total of 82 patients with single-segment lumbar degenerative disease admitted to People’s Hospital of Liuzhi Special Zone from August 2020 to August 2022 were selected and divided into control group and observation group according to random number table method, with 41 patients in each group. The control group was treated with PLIF, and the observation group was treated with TLIF. The operation condition, lumbar function (JOA score), postoperative pain score, daily living ability (Barthel index), quality of life and complications were compared between the two groups.Results The operation time and hospitalization time of the observation group were shorter than those of the control group, the intraoperative blood loss and postoperative drainage volume were less than those of the control group, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). The scores of subjective symptoms, clinical characteristics, daily activity limitation and total score of JOA score in the observation group were higher than those in the control group, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). The pain score of the observation group was lower than that of the control group at 7 days and 3 months after operation, and the Barthel index score was higher than that of the control group, the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). The scores of physiological, psychological, social and environmental fields in the observation group were higher than those in the control group, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications between the two groups (P>0.05).Conclusion TLIF is more effective in the treatment of single-segment lumbar degenerative diseases, which can accelerate the recovery of lumbar function, reduce postoperative pain, and better improve the quality of life of patients.

参考文献/References:

[1]贺海怿,毛克亚,李鹏,等.一次性可扩张通道辅助下MIS-TLIF与PLIF治疗单节段腰椎退行性疾病的疗效比较[J] 中国骨与关节损伤杂志,2020,35(7):686-689.[2]刘烔,宋红星.MIS-TLIF与PLIF治疗腰椎退行性病变的围手术期指标及术后远期疗效比较[J].医学综述,2021,27(9):1819-1823.[3]郭跃跃,郑潮顺,何旭辉,等.MIS-TLIF与PLIF治疗单节段低度退行性腰椎滑脱的效果比较[J].广东医学,2021,42(7):858-861.[4]姚汝斌,杨开舜.改良TLIF手术与PLIF手术治疗老年腰椎管狭窄症的疗效对比[J].颈腰痛杂志,2021,42(1):115-117.[5]邢泽军,梅军,武晓飞,等.后正中入路和经通道椎旁入路椎间融合术治疗老年Ⅰ～Ⅱ度腰椎滑脱症患者的围术期分析[J].中华老年医学杂志,2020,39(3):311-314.[6]李赛,张凯,朱文辉,等.两种术式治疗3节段退变性腰椎管狭窄症早期疗效比较[J].临床骨科杂志,2020,23(2):187-190.[7]汪凡栋,张智,郑佳状,等.MA-OTIF与MIS-TLIF治疗对老年性腰椎退行性病变疗效和脊柱形态的影响[J].生物骨科材料与临床研究,2020,17(1):47-51.[8]范大鹏,张解元,张经纬,等.MIS-TLIF与TLIF治疗单节段腰椎退行性疾病近期疗效的对比分析[J].现代生物医学进展,2022,22(7):1243-1247.[9]胡勇,钟建斌,袁振山,等.Dynesys动态内固定联合减压治疗腰椎退行性疾病的中长期临床研究[J].中华骨科杂志,2020,41(17):1188-1197.[10]高放,方忠,李锋,等.同一体位OLIF联合后路导航辅助下经皮椎弓根螺钉固定治疗腰椎退行性疾病的初步应用[J].生物骨科材料与临床研究,2019,17(3):21-25.[11]褚开伟,孙英飞,彭正武,等.单侧及双侧椎弓根钉内固定术治疗腰椎退行性病变临床效果评价[J].临床军医杂志,2019,48(1):77-78.[12]朱文虎,陈国平,刘永征.后路腰椎Wilste入路腰椎融合联合超声骨刀治疗腰椎退行性病变临床研究[J].内蒙古医科大学学报,2019,42(2):197-201.[13]刘敏,刘艺明,王善松,等.MIS-TLIF单侧固定与双边侧固定治疗单节段腰椎退行性疾病的疗效对比[J].颈腰痛杂志,2021,42(5):628-631.[14]裘剑如,焦宇澄,郑建城,等.微创经椎间孔入路腰椎椎间融合术治疗单节段腰椎退行性疾病对椎旁肌的影响[J].脊柱外科杂志,2022,20(5):295-301.[15]肖俊,诸葛恒艳,许科峰,等.小切口开放与微创经椎间孔腰椎椎体间融合术治疗腰椎退行性疾病的效果[J].中国医药导报,2021,19(33):88-91.[16]李亚洲,谢威.可扩张通道下MIS-TLIF与PLIF治疗退行性腰椎管狭窄症的疗效比较[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志,2021,36(5):493-495.[17]陈斌,魏宝林,史世勤.单侧MIS-TLIF治疗腰椎间盘突出伴侧椎管狭窄症临床疗效及并发症分析[J].贵州医药,2021,45(3):401-402.[18]张晓越,王小红,任世超,等.后路椎体间融合术与经椎间孔入路腰椎融合术治疗退行性腰椎滑脱症的疗效对比及对AGEs、IL-6的影响[J].现代生物医学进展,2020,20(21):4186-4190.[19]陈安刚,常瑞,李想.两种不同手术方式治疗老年Ⅰ~Ⅱ°腰椎滑脱症疗效及对围术期指标和腰椎稳定性的影响[J].实用医院临床杂志,2022,19(1):171-174.

更新日期/Last Update: 1900-01-01