目的:总结汶川大地震期间合并有多发伤的脊柱骨折的临床特点和治疗经验。方法:回顾分析汶川大地震期间四川大学华西医院收治的281例脊柱骨折,其中223例合并有多发伤,分析其临床特点和治疗方式。结果:223例合并多发伤的脊柱骨折中单纯椎体骨折138例,单纯附件损伤37例,椎体+附件骨折48例;平均年龄43.45±14.05岁;椎体分布以下胸段和腰段为主,胸腰段占60%左右;致伤原因中砸伤占82.1%;脊柱手术治疗35例,占需手术治疗的27.8%;合并伤共267例次;严重并发症127例次;合并脊髓或马尾神经损伤101例,占45.3%,有15例在搬运中发生脊髓损伤。结论:汶川大地震发生在山区,地震烈度高,伤员多为复合伤,存在严重的并发症,受累椎体多,治疗的重点首先放在处理开放伤、感染、并发症上,影响了脊柱骨折的治疗;早期救援时正确施救才能有效防范继发性脊髓损伤。
Objective To evaluate the effect of self-designed antirotation reduction internal fixator(ARRIF) on treating different spine segment fracture.Methods From August 1999 to March 2003, 76 patients(48 males and 28 females, aged from 22 to 59 with an average of 34.1) with thoracolumbar fracture were operatively treated by ARRIF. The follow-up period ranged from 6 to 21 months(15 months in average). Classification according to injury segment: flexion compression racture 27 cases, burst fracture 42 cases, flexion distraction injury 3 cases, flexion revolving type fracture dislocation 2 cases, shear force type dislocation 2 cases. Classification according Frankel’s grade:A grade 16 cases, B grade 15 cases, C grade 27 cases, D grade 10 cases, E grade 8 cases.Operation duration, volume of bleeding, incidence postoperation complication and effect of reduction fixation were observed. Results The operation duration of ARRIF was 1.2 h in average, and there was about 200 ml volume of bleeding during operation. The nerve function showed one Frankel’s grade improvement after operation were as follows:A grade 8 cases(50%), B grade 11 cases (73.3%), C grade20 cases(74.1%), D grade 3 cases (30%); 2 Frankel’s E cases have no nerve function changes.The nerve function damage have no aggravation in all the patients,the postoperation Cobb’s angle was averagely corrected 22°. The horizontal displacement of dislocation vertebrae was averagely corrected 28% in sagittal plane, the statistical analysis had significant variance(Plt;0.01).ARRIF had no complications of the breakage of screws and rods. Conclusion ARRIF proves to be a valid internal fixator in reducing and fixing different thoracic lumbar segment spine fracture.
Thoracolumbar injury is a common injury in clinic. Accurate diagnosis and classification is of great significance for guiding treatment. Although there are many typing systems, no typing system has been widely accepted and used to guide clinical practice. Denis classification, spinal load classification, thoracolumbar injury classification system and severity score or thoracolumbar injury classification and severity score and AO classification have great influence in clinical practice, but they all have some shortcomings. In recent years, the classification of thoracolumbar injury has been updated, modified and supplemented constantly. When using these fracture types in clinical practice, different people often have some deviation. This paper reviews the widely used thoracolumbar injury classification system, discusses the main viewpoints, advantages and disadvantages of each classification system, and looks into the future research direction based on the current research progress.
Thoracolumbar fractures are common injuries. Accurate diagnosis and classification are of great significance for guiding treatment. Although there are many classification systems, they have not been universally accepted and used to guide clinical practice. Denis classification, load sharing classification, Magerl/AO classification, and Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score have a great clinical influence, but they also have some shortcomings. Recently, some new classifications of thoracolumbar fractures have been proposed, and some of them have been updated and revised, which makes it easy to cause confusion, and puts forward new requirements on how to grasp and apply these classification systems. This article reviews the main and commonly used classification systems of thoracolumbar fractures, discusses the main viewpoints, advantages and disadvantages of each classification system, and looks ahead to the future research direction.
Objective To describe the up-to-date development in spine and spine cord injuries. Methods To summarize the cl inical and basic research on spine and spine cord injuries were summarized by reviewing papers and combining them with our own experience. Results The occi pitocervical and atlantoaxial fusions by the pedicle or the lateral mass screw were widely used to treat the upper cervical fractures. The anterior cervical plate, posterior pedicle or lateral mass screw fixation techniques were used in treatment of lower cervical fractures. The cl inical appl ication of artificial cervical disc replacement showed the good biomechanical results in treatment of serious cervical disc diseases. However, there were no unified criteria for selection of the surgical approach, fixation level, and fusion model in the treatment of thoracolumbar spine fractures. Lumbar posterior dynamic fixation and artificial disc replacement for treatment of degenerative lumbar disc diseases provided the biomechanical stabil ization and reduced the morbidity of adjacent segment diseases, but there was lack of long-term follow-up results. The basic research in spine cord injuries, especially in apoptotic signal pathway, made great progress. The biological treatment including cell transplantation and gene therapy provided the sol id theoretical foundation for cl inical appl ication. Conclusion The reparative and reconstructive development in spine and spine cord injuries has made great progress in recent years.
目的 探讨经皮穿刺椎体成形术治疗老年性骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折的临床疗效。 方法 2006年1月-2009年1月收治患者147例（214个椎体）脊柱骨折者，男56例，女91例；年龄61～80岁，平均69岁。脊柱骨折部位为T8~L3，其中胸椎98个，腰椎116个。采用C形X线机透视引导下于俯卧位或侧卧位进行经皮穿刺椎体成形术，注射聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯（PMMA，骨水泥）。测量并计算术前和术后椎体前/后缘高度比值，疗效评价按WHO标准。 结果 118例获随访，随访时间3～7个月，平均4个月。147例214个椎体均手术成功，骨水泥注射量1.0～8.0 mL/椎体。术后2～4 h疼痛开始缓解，无显著危害性并发症发生，术前和术后椎体前/后缘高度比值无显著性差异，118例随访3～7个月疗效评价按WHO标准完全缓解加部分缓解率为100%。 结论 经皮穿刺椎体成形术是一种治疗老年性骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折的微创手术，能够有效缓解骨质疏松性椎体骨折引起的疼痛，维持椎体稳定性，恢复椎体的高度，是一种简单、安全、有效的方法。
Objective To investigate the effectiveness of kyphoplasty in treating osteoporotic vertebral fracture according to comparative study. Methods Between March 2006 and August 2007, 60 patients with osteoporotic vertebral fractures were treated. Kyphoplasty was performed in 40 patients (test group) and conservative treatment was performed in 20patients as control (control group). In test group, there were 6 males and 34 females with an average age of 68.7 years (range, 56-78 years). The disease duration was 10-18 months (mean, 12 months). A total of 73 vertebral bodies fractured. In control group, there were 5 males and 15 females with an average age of 70.1 years (range, 57-80 years). The disease duration was 9-16 months (mean, 13 months). A total of 41 vertebral bodies fractured. There was no significant difference in the general data between 2 groups (P gt; 0.05). Results All incisions healed by first intention in test group, and no leakage of bone cement occurred. The patients of 2 groups were followed up 36-38 months. The visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, European Vertebral Osteoporosis Study (EVOS) questionnaire scores, anterior and middle vertebral column heights, and Cobb angles of test group at 1-3 days, 12 and 36 months after treatment were significantly improved when compared with those before operation (P lt; 0.05); but there was no significant difference between before treatment and after treatment in control group (P gt; 0.05). After 12 and 36 months, the VAS scores, EVOS scores, anterior and middle vertebral column heights, and Cobb angles of test group were better than those of control group (P lt; 0.05). The incidence of vertebral re-fractures was higher in control group than in test group after 36 months (χ2=16.347, P=0.015). Conclusion Kyphoplasty can effectively rel ieve pain and restore the function after the procedure. The risk of vertebral re-fractures after kyphoplasty can be reduced in comparison with conservative treatment.
Objective To explore the feasibility and accuracy of ultrasound volume navigation (UVN) combined with X-ray fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous pedicle screw implantation through a prospective randomized controlled study. Methods Patients with thoracic and lumbar vertebral fractures scheduled for percutaneous pedicle screw fixation between January 2022 and January 2023 were enrolled. Among them, 60 patients met the selection criteria and were included in the study. There were 28 males and 32 females, with an average age of 49.5 years (range, 29-60 years). The cause of injury included 20 cases of traffic accidents, 21 cases of falls, 17 cases of slips, and 2 cases of heavy object impact. The interval from injury to hospital admission ranged from 1 to 5 days (mean, 1.57 days). The fracture located at T12 in 15 cases, L1 in 20 cases, L2 in 19 cases, and L3 in 6 cases. The study used each patient as their own control, randomly guiding pedicle screw implantation using UVN combined with X-ray fluoroscopy on one side of the vertebral body and the adjacent segment (trial group), while the other side was implanted under X-ray fluoroscopy (control group). A total of 4 screws and 2 rods were implanted in each patient. The implantation time and fluoroscopy frequency during implantation of each screw, angle deviation and distance deviation between actual and preoperative planned trajectory by imaging examination, and the occurrence of zygapophysial joint invasion were recorded. Results In terms of screw implantation time, fluoroscopy frequency, angle deviation, distance deviation, and incidence of zygapophysial joint invasion, the trial group showed superior results compared to the control group, and the differences were significant (P<0.05). Conclusion UVN combined with X-ray fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous pedicle screw implantation can yreduce screw implantation time, adjust dynamically, reduce operational difficulty, and reduce radiation damage.
Objective To compare the therapeutic effect of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and posterior lateral fusion (PLF) in treatment of thoracolumbar spine fracture and dislocation. Methods From January 2005 to July 2007, 35 patients (22 males, 13 females, aged 17-53 years old) with thoracolumbar spine fracture and dislocation (T11-L3) received posterior open reduction and pedicle nail-stick system internal fixation. Among which, 14 patients underwent TLIF(group TLIF), and the rest 21 patients underwent PLF (group PLF). According to AO classification, group TLIF had 3 cases of A3, 7 cases of B and 4 cases of C, while group PLF had 4 cases of A3, 10 cases of B and 7 cases of C. Based on American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) Scoring Standard formulated in 2000, the motor score of group TLIF and group PLF was (50.6 ± 3.6) and (50.8 ± 4.2) points, respectively; and the sensory score was (170.5 ± 42.7) and (153.8 ± 23.7) points, respectively. No significant difference was noted between 2 groups in general information (P gt; 0.05). Results The operation time of group TLIF and group PLF was (316 ± 32) minutes and (254 ± 27) minutes, and the blood loss of group TLIF and group PLF was (487 ± 184) mL and (373 ± 72) mL, indicating there were significant differences between 2 groups (P lt; 0.05). Wounds of all patients were healed by first intention and there was no death, aggravation of neurological function impairment and compl ication of internal fixation instrument loosening and breaking. All 35 cases were followed up for 9-23 months with an average of 14.6 months. Postoperatively, the thoracolumbar bone fusion rate of group TLIF and group PLF was 100% and 85.7%, respectively, indicating there was a significant difference (P lt; 0.05). At 3 months after operation, the motor score of group TLIF and group PLF was increased by (10.4 ± 10.0) and (9.4 ± 9.3) points, respectively; and the sensory score was upgraded by (26.5 ± 22.8) and (28.8 ± 28.4) points, respectively, showing there were no significant difference (P gt; 0.05). At immediate moment, 3, 6 and 12 months after operation, the spine height restoration of group TLIF was (5.4 ± 2.1), (5.4 ± 1.9), (5.4 ± 1.4) and (5.3 ± 1.3) mm, respectively; while it was (5.3 ± 2.6), (5.3 ± 2.2), (4.8 ± 3.1) and (4.2 ± 3.6) mm for group PLF. Meanwhile, the Cobbangle recovery of group TLIF was (14.5 ± 3.5), (14.5 ± 3.6), (14.4 ± 3.4) and (14.4 ± 3.6)º, respectively; while it was (14.3 ± 2.7), (14.2 ± 3.1), (12.2 ± 2.8) and (11.7 ± 3.3)º for group PLF. Concerning the spine height restoration and the Cobb angle recovery, no significant difference was observed between 2 groups at immediate moment and 3 months after operation (P gt; 0.05), but significant differences were noted at 6 and 12 months after operation (P lt; 0.05). Conclusion For the treatment othoracolumbar spine fracture and dislocation, TLIF is superior to PLF in bony fusion and restoration of spine column height.