Cirugia y cirujanos · 2024
Comparison posterior lumbar stabilization with dynamic rod system and rigid rod system for lumbar degenerative disease.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Karaaslan Alp, Biber Necat, Özdemir Burak, Altaş Kadir, Kaya Ercan, Çifci Ece Sağlam, Başaran Recep
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This research aims to assess the clinical and radiological outcomes of both dynamic rod system (PLSDR) and rigid rod system (PLSRR) when treating lumbar degenerative disease (LDD).
METHOD: A retrospective review of 98 patients who underwent posterior stabilization surgery with a posterior approach in our clinic between 2018 and 2023 was conducted. The patients were divided into two groups based on the type of implant used: Those with PLSRR (Group 1) and those with PLSDR (Group 2).
RESULTS: In a comparative study, Group 1 had a higher prevalence of discopathy (49% vs. 24.5%, p = 0.012). Differences in surgical operation levels existed, and notably, only Group 1 had five-level surgeries (8.2%, p = 0.033). Pfirrmann disk degeneration grades differed significantly (p < 0.001), with Group 2 mainly in Grade I (77.6% vs. 36.7% in Group 1). Stenosis (57.1% vs. 28.6%, p = 0.004) and facet hypertrophy (71.4% vs. 47%, p = 0.014) were higher in Group 1. Group 1 also showed a greater adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) incidence (81.6% vs. 51%, p = 0.001). Both groups had primarily proximal ASD degeneration (p = 0.202). Compression fractures were absent. Follow-up durations were similar (p = 0.183).
CONCLUSIONS: In treating LDD, the PLSDR shows potential advantages over PLSRR, including preservation of degeneration in adjacent segments.
METHOD: A retrospective review of 98 patients who underwent posterior stabilization surgery with a posterior approach in our clinic between 2018 and 2023 was conducted. The patients were divided into two groups based on the type of implant used: Those with PLSRR (Group 1) and those with PLSDR (Group 2).
RESULTS: In a comparative study, Group 1 had a higher prevalence of discopathy (49% vs. 24.5%, p = 0.012). Differences in surgical operation levels existed, and notably, only Group 1 had five-level surgeries (8.2%, p = 0.033). Pfirrmann disk degeneration grades differed significantly (p < 0.001), with Group 2 mainly in Grade I (77.6% vs. 36.7% in Group 1). Stenosis (57.1% vs. 28.6%, p = 0.004) and facet hypertrophy (71.4% vs. 47%, p = 0.014) were higher in Group 1. Group 1 also showed a greater adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) incidence (81.6% vs. 51%, p = 0.001). Both groups had primarily proximal ASD degeneration (p = 0.202). Compression fractures were absent. Follow-up durations were similar (p = 0.183).
CONCLUSIONS: In treating LDD, the PLSDR shows potential advantages over PLSRR, including preservation of degeneration in adjacent segments.