Objective To review the latest comparative research of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and traditional open approach. Methods The domestic and foreign literature concerning the comparative research of minimally invasive TLIF and traditional open TLIF was reviewed, then intraoperative indicators, length of hospitalization, effectiveness, complication, fusion rate, and the effect on paraspinal muscles were analyzed respectively. Results Minimally invasive TLIF has less blood loss and shorter length of hospitalization, but with longer operation and fluoroscopic time. Minimally invasive surgery has the same high fusion rate as open surgery, however, its effectiveness is not superior to open surgery, and complication rate is relatively higher. In the aspect of the effect on paraspinal muscles, in creatine kinase, multifidus cross-sectional area, and atrophy grading, minimally invasive surgery has no significant reduced damage on paraspinal muscles. Conclusion Minimally invasive TLIF is not significantly superior to open TLIF, and it does not reduce the paraspinal muscles injury. But prospective double-blind randomized control trials are still needed for further study.
Objective To compare the short-term effectiveness of minimally invasive surgery-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) versus open-TLIF in treatment of single-level lumbar degenerative disease. Methods Between February 2010 and February 2011, 147 patients with single-level lumbar degenerative diseases underwent open-TLIF in 104 cases (open-TLIF group) and MIS-TLIF in 43 cases (MIS-TLIF group), and the clinical data were analyzed retrospectively. There was no significant difference in gender, age, disease type, lesion level, disease duration, preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS), and preoperative Oswestry disability index (ODI) between 2 groups (P gt; 0.05). The operation time, intraoperative radiological exposure time, intra- and post-operative blood loss, postoperative hospitalization time, and postoperative complications were compared between 2 groups. The VAS score and ODI were observed during follow-up. The imaging examination was done to observe the bone graft fusion and the locations of internal fixator and Cage. Results There was no significant difference in operation time between 2 groups (t=0.402, P=0.688); MIS-TLIF group had a decreased intra- and post-operative blood loss, shortened postoperative hospitalization time, and increased intraoperative radiological exposure time, showing significant differences when compared with open-TLIF group (P lt; 0.05). Cerebrospinal fluid leakage (2 cases) and superficial infection of incision (2 cases) occurred after operation in open-TLIF group, with a complication incidence of 3.8% (4/104); dorsal root ganglion stimulation symptom (3 cases) occurred in MIS-TLIF group, with a complication incidence of 7.0% (3/43); there was no significant difference in the complication incidence between 2 groups (χ2=0.657, P=0.417). The patients were followed up 18-26 months (mean, 21 months) in MIS-TLIF group, and 18-28 months (mean, 23 months) in open-TLIF group. The VAS scores and ODI of 2 groups at each time point after operation were significantly improved when compared with those before operation (P lt; 0.05). There was no significant difference in VAS score between 2 groups at discharge and 3 months after operation (P gt; 0.05); VAS score of MIS-TLIF group was significantly lower than that of open-TLIF group at last follow-up (t= — 2.022, P=0.047). At 3 months and last follow-up, no significant difference was found in the ODI between 2 groups (P gt; 0.05). The imaging examination showed good positions of Cage and internal fixator, and bone graft fusion in 2 groups. Conclusion The short-term effectiveness of MIS-TLIF and open-TLIF for single-level degenerative lumbar diseases was similar. MIS-TLIF has the advantages of less invasion and quick recovery, but the long-term effectiveness needs more observation.
Objective To compare the effectiveness of arthroscopic and open ankle arthrodeses. Methods The clinical data were retrospectively analyzed from 30 patients undergoing unilateral ankle arthrodesis between January 2008 and January 2011. Of 30 patients, 14 underwent arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis (arthroscopic group), and 16 underwent open ankle arthrodesis (open group). There was no significant difference in gender, age, lesion type, disease duration, and preoperative American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score between 2 groups (P gt; 0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative hospitalization days, postoperative AOFAS score, and bony union rate were observed to evaluate the effectiveness. Results The operation time of arthroscopic group was significantly longer than that of open group (P lt; 0.05); the intraoperative blood loss and postoperative hospitalization days of arthroscopic group were significantly less than those of open group (P lt; 0.05). Superficial infection of incision occurred in 1 case of open group, and healing of incision by first intention was obtained in the other patients. All patients were followed up 12 months. No screw breakage was observed. The X-ray films showed bony fusion in 13 cases (92.86%) of arthroscopic group and in 10 cases (62.50%) of open group at 3 months after operation, showing significant difference (χ2=3.850, P=0.049); but no significant difference was found (χ2=0.910, P=0.341) in bony fusion rate between the arthroscopic group (14/14, 100%) and open group (15/16, 93.75%) at 12 months after operation. The AOFAS scores at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after operation were significantly higher than preoperative score in 2 groups (P lt; 0.05). There was no significant difference in AOFAS score between 2 groups at 1 and 3 months (P gt; 0.05), but significant differences were found at 6 and 12 months (P lt; 0.05). Conclusion The overall effectiveness of arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis is better than that of open ankle arthrodesis, which can decrease intraoperative blood loss, shorten hospitalization days, get higher bony fusion rate, and obtain good ankle function recovery.
Objective To review the progress in the treatment of acute Achilles tendon rupture. Methods Recent literature about the treatment of acute Achilles tendon rupture was reviewed and analyzed. Results Treatments of acute Achilles tendon rupture include operative and non-operative treatments. Operative treatments include open surgery and percutaneous minimally invasive surgery. Compared with non-operative treatment, operative treatment can effectively reduce the re-rupture incidence, but it had higher complication incidences of wound infection and nerve injury. Although early functional rehabilitation during non-operative treatment could reduce the re-rupture incidence, there is no consistent orthopaedic device and guideline for functional rehabilitation. Conclusion Both operative and non-operative treatments have advantages and disadvantages for the treatment of acute Achilles tendon rupture. No consistent conclusion is arrived regarding functional recovery. Future studies should explore the strategy of early functional rehabilitation during non-operative treatment and its mechanism of promoting tendon healing.
Objective To compare the difference of traumatic related index in serum and its significance between minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) and open TLIF. Methods Sixty patients were enrolled by the entry criteria between May and November 2012, and were divided into MIS-TLIF group (n=30) and open TLIF group (n=30). There was no significant difference in gender, age, type of lesions, disease segment, and disease duration between 2 groups (P gt; 0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative hospitalization time were recorded, and the pain severity of incision was evaluated by visual analog scale (VAS). The serum levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) and creatine kinase (CK) were measured at preoperation and at 24 hours postoperatively. The levels of interleukin 6 (IL-6), IL-10, and tumor necrosis factor α (TNF-α) in serum were measured at preoperation and at 2, 4, 8, and 24 hours after operation. Results The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative hospitalization time of MIS-TLIF group were significantly smaller than those of open TLIF group (P lt; 0.05), and the VAS score for incision pain in MIS-TLIF group was significantly lower than that of open TLIF group at 1, 2, and 3 days after operation (P lt; 0.05). The levels of CRP, CK, IL-6, and IL-10 in MIS-TLIF group were significantly lower than those in open TLIF group at 24 hours after operation (P lt; 0.05), but there was no significant difference between 2 groups before operation (P gt; 0.05). No significant difference was found in TNF-α level between 2 groups at pre- and post-operation (P gt; 0.05). Conclusion Compared with the open-TLIF, MIS-TLIF may significantly reduce tissue injury and systemic inflammatory reactions during the early postoperative period.
Objective To compare the effectiveness, complications, and follow-up results between endovascular recanalization (EVR) and open surgical revascularization (OSR) in the treatment of peripheral pseudoaneurysm, so as to provide a reference for choosing a appropriate surgical procedure. Methods Clinical data of 62 cases of peripheral pseudoaneurysm between January 2001 and January 2012 were analyzed retrospectively. EVR was performed in 28 patients (EVR group) and OSR in 34 patients (OSR group). There was no significant difference in gender, age, cause of injury, tumor location, and diameter of tumor between 2 groups (P gt; 0.05). Results The operation time, blood loss, ICU monitoring time, and hospitalization time in EVR group were significantly shorter than those in OSR group (P lt; 0.05). In OSR group, 12 cases (35.29%) had early postoperative complications, including 2 deaths due to acute respiratory distress syndrome, 5 cases of pulmonary infection, 3 cases of wound infection, and 2 cases of deep vein thrombosis; in EVR group, 2 cases (7.14%) had early postoperative complications, including 1 case of hematoma at puncture site and 1 case of thrombosis in stent. There was significant difference in early postoperative complication incidence between 2 groups (χ2=6.691, P=0.008). The patients were followed up 12-39 months (mean, 26 months). In OSR and EVR groups after operation, the patency rates of the reconstructed vessels were 96.88% (31/32) and 92.86% (26/28) respectively at 12 months, showing no significant difference (χ2=0.014, P=0.905); the patency rates were 89.29% (25/28) and 84.00% (21/25) respectively at 24 months, showing no significant difference (χ2=0.322, P=0.570). Conclusion Compared with OSR, EVR is a minimally invasive, safe, and effective therapy for peripheral pseudoaneurysm with the advantages of less bleeding, shorter hospitalization time, and less complications. Long-term effectiveness still needs further observation, and patients have to take antiplatelet drugs for long time after EVR.
Objective To compare microendoscopic discectomy (MED) with open discectomy (OD) for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis in terms of cl inical outcomes, and provide experience and therapeutic evidence for cl inical appl ication.Methods From May 2002 to October 2007, 215 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis were randomized into two groups, and underwent either MED or OD. In group A, 105 patients underwent MED, including 56 males and 49 females aged 34 to 83 years old (average 45 years old); the duration of the disease ranged from 9 months to 26 years (average 50 months); the spinal stenosis involved one segment in 76 cases, two segments in 27 cases, and three segments in 2 cases. In group B, 110 patients received OD, including 57 males and 53 females aged 35 to 85 years old (average 47 years old); the duration of the disease ranged from 8 months to 25 years (average 48 months); the spinal stenosis involved one segment in 78 cases, two segments in 29 cases, and three segments in 3 cases. No significant difference was evident between two groups in terms of the general information(P gt; 0.05). Results Operation was successfully performed in all cases. Volume of intraoperative blood loss was (82.14 ± 6.18) mL in group A and (149.24 ± 11.17) mL in group B. Length of hospital stay was (7.0 ± 2.1) days in group A and (12.0 ± 2.6) days in group B. Significant difference was noted between two groups in terms of the above parameters (P lt; 0.01). All the wounds healed by first intention. The patients were followed up for 13-54 months (average 27 months) in group A and 12-55 months (average29 months) in group B. Four patients in each group suffered from spinal dural rupture during operation and recovered after corresponding treatment. Three patients in group B had lumbar instabil ity 3 years after operation and recovered using lumbar interbody fusion combined with general spine system internal fixation. No such compl ications as wrong orientation, nerve root injury, cauda equina injury and infection occurred in each group, and radiology exam showed no relapse. Therapeutic effect was evaluated by Nakai standard, 52 cases in group A were graded as excellent, 45 as good, 7 as fair, 1 as poor, and the excellent and good rate was 92.4%; 53 cases in group B were graded as excellent, 48 as good, 8 as fair, 1 as poor, and the excellent and good rate was 91.8%; there was no significant difference between two groups (P gt; 0.05). Conclusion Two methods have the similar therapeutic effect, but MED el iminates the shortcomings of traditional OD, so it is one of ideal minimally invasive operative approaches for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis.
Objective To explore the cl inical effectiveness of debridement in treatment of Pes anserinus bursitis under arthroscopy by comparing the curative effect of three therapies: local block therapy, open operation and debridement under arthroscopy. Methods From January 2000 to January 2007, 90 cases of unilateral Pes anserinus bursitis were treated with debridement under arthroscopy (group A, n=30), local block therapy (group B, n=30) and open operation (group C, n=30),respectively. The group A included 18 males and 12 females, aged (40.0 ± 2.5) years old; the locations were left knee in 16 cases and right knee in 14 cases; 10 cases had injury history, 7 cases had tired history and 13 cases had no obvious inducement; the course of disease was (24.0 ± 3.2) weeks. The group B included 17 males and 13 females, aged (37.0 ± 2.5) years old; the locations were left knee in 15 cases and right knee in 15 cases; 10 cases had injury history, 8 cases had tired history and 12 cases had no obvious inducement; the course of disease was (26.3 ± 3.5) weeks. The group C included 16 males and 14 females, aged (39.8 ± 2.2) years old; the locations were left knee in 18 cases and right knee in 12 cases; 8 cases had injury history, 10 cases had tired history and 12 cases had no obvious inducement; the course of disease was (25.0 ± 3.9) weeks. There was no statistically significant difference in the general data among three groups (P gt; 0.05). Results All patients were followed up 15 months on average (12-24 months). In group C, the inflammatory reation occurred at wound in 9 cases (30%) at 3-10 days after operation and was cured after symptomatic management; other incision healed by first intention; and showing statistically significant differences when compared with other 2 groups (P lt; 0.05). In group C, joint swell ing occurred at 1 week after operation in 1 case, l imitation of joint motion in 2 cases at 10-12 weeks after operation and was recovered after symptomatic management. In group B, 21 cases (70%) had a recurrence at 6-12 months after operation, all patients of other 2 groups had no recurrence; showing statistically significant differences between group B and groups A, C (P lt; 0.05). At last follow-up, the pain remain rates were 3.3% (group A), 0 (group B) and 33.3% (group C), and the compl ication incidence rates were 3.3%, 26.7% and 70.0%, respectively; all showing statistically significant differences among three groups (P lt; 0.05). At last follow-up, there were statistically significant differences in the visual analogue scale (VAS) score, the HSS score, and range of motion (ROM) between preoperation and postoperation in group A (P lt; 0.05); there was no statistically significant difference in the VAS score, HSS score and ROM between preoperation and postoperation in group B (P gt; 0.05); the ROM of postoperation in group C was smaller than that of preoperation (P lt; 0.05). There were statistically significant differences in the VAS score and HSS score between group A and groups B, C (P lt; 0.05), and in ROM among three groups after operation (P lt; 0.05). Conclusion The treatment of Pes anserinus bursitis with debridement under arthroscopy has advantages of easy-to-do, less compl ication, low relapse rate and good functional rehabil itation.
目的:评估经后腹腔镜与开放肾囊肿去顶减压术的临床价值。方法:回顾性调查四川大学华西医院2004年4月至2008年4月468例经后腹腔镜肾囊肿去顶减压术(A组)和2003年4月至2008年4月121例开放肾囊肿去顶减压术(B组)的临床资料并进行比较,统计分析两种术式术前,术中和术后的数据资料,比如性别、年龄、侧别、囊肿直径、手术时间、术中出血量、术后下床时间、肛门排气时间、引流管拔除时间、术后住院天数、总住院天数等。开放手术均行肋缘下切口,经后腹腔镜均行腰部常规3孔穿刺。结果:所有手术均获成功。A组手术时间5318±095分,术中出血628±033mL,术后肛门排气时间2518±030h,术后下床时间3102±022h,引流管拔除时间2715±020h,术后住院490±007d,总住院895±012d;B组手术时间6772±148分,术中出血5116±077mL,术后肛门排气时间2691±033h,术后下床时间4331±103h,引流管拔除时间2963±079h,术后住院788±018d,总住院125±029d。术前两组基线对比无统计差异。A组手术时间、术中出血量、术后下床时间、总住院天数和术后住院天数均优于B组,差异具有统计学意义(Plt;001)。术后肛门排气时间及引流管拔除时间无显著性差异(Pgt;005)。结论〓:后腹腔镜肾囊肿去顶术在手术时间、术中出血量和术后下床时间等方面明显优于开放手术。