Zhonghua yi xue za zhi · 2016
[Different posterior decompression for patients with spinal canal stenosis in the upper thoracic and cervical spine].
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Yao Y Z, Yin R F, Huang J, Liu D L, Zang H
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To retrospectively investigate the clinical manifestation of patients with spinal stenosis in the upper thoracic and cervical spine by posterior decompression in different ways.
METHODS: From January 2010 to December 2015, 18 patients of that complicated phenomenon were studied in Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, China-Japan Union Hospital, Jilin University.Ten patients received one-stage combined decompression (group A); while the other 8 received multi-stage posterior decompression(group B). The Visual analogue scale (JOA), thoracic Cobb and range of motion(ROM) were compared.
RESULT: No statistically significant inter-group difference existed in preoperative JOA score[(9.1±2.6)vs (9.1±2.2)]and postoperative JOA score[(15.4±1.2)vs(13.8±4.5)], but the mean recovery rate of nerve function of group A(79%±15%)is better than that of group B(69%±34%).
CONCLUSION: All the approaches are effective for the treatment of patients with spinal stenosis in the upper thoracic and cervical spine, while one-staged combined decompression was better than double-staged operation.
METHODS: From January 2010 to December 2015, 18 patients of that complicated phenomenon were studied in Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, China-Japan Union Hospital, Jilin University.Ten patients received one-stage combined decompression (group A); while the other 8 received multi-stage posterior decompression(group B). The Visual analogue scale (JOA), thoracic Cobb and range of motion(ROM) were compared.
RESULT: No statistically significant inter-group difference existed in preoperative JOA score[(9.1±2.6)vs (9.1±2.2)]and postoperative JOA score[(15.4±1.2)vs(13.8±4.5)], but the mean recovery rate of nerve function of group A(79%±15%)is better than that of group B(69%±34%).
CONCLUSION: All the approaches are effective for the treatment of patients with spinal stenosis in the upper thoracic and cervical spine, while one-staged combined decompression was better than double-staged operation.