单侧双通道内镜技术治疗后路腰椎融合术后邻椎病的短期临床研究

doi:10.13418/j.issn.1001-165x.2024.3.11

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的探讨单侧双通道内镜技术（UBE）治疗后路腰椎融合术后邻椎病(ASD)的短期临床研究。方法回顾性分析2020年5月至2022年1月本院脊柱外科收治的采用UBE治疗因腰椎退行性疾病行后路腰椎融合术后出现ASD的患者临床资料及随访情况。结果符合标准的患者共12例，均顺利完成手术，随访时间为16~36个月，平均(24.3±4.6)个月。手术时间47~83 min，平均(62.9±9.8) min。1例出现神经根刺激症状，予以激素、脱水等对症处理，2 d后患者症状缓解。无其他并发症发生。住院时间5~10 d，平均（6.9±1.6）d。术后3 d、3个月、6个月、12个月及末次随访时，腰痛VAS评分、下肢痛VAS评分、ODI评分均较术前明显下降，差异具有统计学意义（P<0.001）。术后6个月随访时，根据改良MacNab标准评估：优良率为91.67%（11/12）。影像学方面：术后3 d复查MRI可见神经减压彻底；复查腰椎CT示下关节突骨质切除范围至关节面距离3.84~6.93 mm，平均(5.07[±]1.03) mm；峡部骨质保留保留4.85~7.94 mm，平均(5.96[±]0.81) mm；术后3个月及末次随访时，复查腰椎动力位，无椎体失稳，无责任节段复发。结论单侧双通道内镜技术治疗后路腰椎融合术后邻椎病，创伤小、手术时间短、患者满意度高、短期疗效明确。

关键词: 单侧双通道内镜技术； , , 后路腰椎融合术； , , 邻椎病

Abstract: Objective To explore the short-term clinical study of unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) technique in the treatment of adjacent segment disease (ASD) after posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Methods The clinical data and follow-up of patients admitted to the department of spine surgery using UBE for the treatment of ASD after posterior lumbar interbody fusion from May 2020 to January 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. Results A total of 12 patients who met the criteria were successfully completed the surgery, and the follow-up time ranged from 16 to 36 months, with a mean of (24.3±4.6) months. Surgical time ranged from 47 min to 83 min, with a mean of (62.9±9.8) min. One case developed nerve root irritation symptoms, which were treated with hormones, dehydration and other symptomatic treatments, and the patient's symptoms were relieved after 2 days. No other complications occurred. The length of hospitalization ranged from 5 days to 10 days, with a mean of (6.9±1.6) days. At 3 days, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months and the final follow-up after surgery, the VAS score of low back pain, VAS score of lower limb pain and ODI score were significantly decreased compared with those before surgery, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.001). At the 6-month postoperative follow-up, the excellent rate was 91.67% (11/12) as assessed by the modified MacNab criteria. In terms of imaging: complete nerve decompression was seen on review MRI at 3 days postoperatively. Review lumbar spine CT showed that the range of osteotomy of the inferior articular eminence to the articular facet distance was (3.84~6.93) mm, with an average of (5.07±1.03) mm. Isthmus bone retention preservation ranged from 4.85 mm to 7.94 mm, with an average of (5.96±0.81) mm. Lumbar spine power position was reviewed at 3 months postoperatively and at the final follow-up visit, and there was no vertebral instability and no responsible segmental recurrence. Conclusions Unilateral biportal endoscopic technique for treating adjacent segment disease after posterior lumbar interbody fusion is less traumatic, shorter operation time, higher patient satisfaction, and clear short-term efficacy.

Key words: Unilateral biportal endoscopic; , , Posterior lumbar interbody fusion; , , Adjacent segment disease

中图分类号:

R681.53

刘伟湘, 吴宇鹏, 夏超, 龚泳豪, 高义强, 姚女兆. 单侧双通道内镜技术治疗后路腰椎融合术后邻椎病的短期临床研究[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2024, 42(3): 310-315.

Liu Weixiang, Wu Yupeng, Xia Chao, Gong Yonghao, Gao Yiqiang, Yao Nvzhao. Short-term clinical efficacy of unilateral piportal endoscopic technique in the treatment of adjacent segment disease after posterior lumbar interbody fusion[J]. Chinese Journal of Clinical Anatomy, 2024, 42(3): 310-315.

参考文献

[1] Hilibrand A S, Robbins M. Adjacent segment degeneration and adjacent segment disease: the consequences of spinal fusion? [J]. The spine journal: official journal of the North American Spine Society, 2004, 4(6S): 190S-194S. DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2004.07.007.
[2] Hashimoto K, Aizawa T, Kanno H, et al. Adjacent segment degeneration after fusion spinal surgery-a systematic review [J]. Int Orthop, 2019, 43(4): 987-993. DOI: 10.1007/s00264-018-4241-z.
[3] Maragkos G A, Motiei-Langroudi R, Filippidis A S, et al. Factors Predictive of Adjacent Segment Disease After Lumbar Spinal Fusion [J]. World Neurosurg, 2020,133: e690-e694. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu. 2019.09.112.
[4] McDonald C L, Alsoof D, Glueck J, et al. Adjacent Segment Disease After Spinal Fusion [J]. JBJS Rev, 2023, 11(6):e23.00028. DOI: 10.2106/jbjs.Rvw.23.00028.
[5] 钟建斌, 张凯伦, 赵波捷, 等. 腰椎邻椎病的危险因素及治疗进展[J]. 中国骨与关节杂志,2020,9(07): 555-559. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-252X.2020.07.015.
[6] Lambrechts M J, Toci G R, Siegel N, et al. Revision lumbar fusions have higher rates of reoperation and result in worse clinical outcomes compared to primary lumbar fusions [J]. The spine journal: official journal of the North American Spine Society, 2023, 23(1): 105-115. DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2022.08.018.
[7] Zhou J W, Li M, Chi C, et al. [Observation of early clinical efficacy of unilateral biportal endoscopy technique in the treatment of lumbar postoperative adjacent segmental diseases] [J]. Zhongguo Gu Shang, 2023, 36(5): 480-486. DOI: 10.12200/j.issn.1003-0034.2023.05.016.
[8] Wang W, Lyu P, Liu Z. How I do it: biportal endoscopic spinalsurgery for revision of adjacent segment disease after instrumented lumbar fusion [J]. Acta Neurochir (Wien), 2022, 164(9): 2337-2342. DOI: 10.1007/s00701-022-05318-3.
[9] 陈思远, 谢中, 夏超, 等. 单侧双通道内镜下椎间盘切除术与经皮内镜下经椎间孔入路椎间盘切除术治疗腰椎间盘突出症的临床疗效对比[J]. 中国脊柱脊髓杂志, 2022, 32(04): 340-346. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-406X.2022.04.08.
[10] Dekutoski M B, Schendel M J, Ogilvie J W, et al. Comparison of in vivo and in vitro adjacent segment motion after lumbarfusion [J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 1994, 19(15): 1745-1751. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199408000-00015.
[11]Lin G X, Huang P, Kotheeranurak V, et al. A Systematic Review of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Spinal Surgery: Preliminary Clinical Results and Complications [J]. World Neurosurg, 2019, 125: 425-432. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.02.038.
[12]Wang L, Li C, Han K, et al. Comparison of Clinical Outcomes and Muscle Invasiveness between Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Discectomy and Percutaneous Endoscopic Interlaminar Discectomy for Lumbar Disc Herniation at L5/S1 Level [J]. Orthop Surg, 2023, 15(3): 695-703. DOI: 10.1111/os.13627.
[13] Heo D H, Lee D C, Park C K. Comparative analysis of three types of minimally invasive decompressive surgery for lumbar central stenosis: biportal endoscopy, uniportal endoscopy, and microsurgery [J]. Neurosurg Focus, 2019, 46(5): E9. DOI: 10.3171/2019.2.Focus197.
[14] Li X, Liu J, Liu Z. Comparison of the results of open PLIF versus UBE PLIF in lumbar spinal stenosis: postoperative adjacent segment instability is lesser in UBE [J]. J Orthop Surg Res, 2023, 18(1): 543. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-023-04038-3.
[15] 李新锋, 王琨, 靳林煜. 脊柱内镜减压治疗高龄腰椎退变性脊柱侧凸合并神经根管狭窄[J]. 中国微创外科杂志, 2020, 20(02): 151-155. DOI: 10.3969 /j.issn.1009-6604.2020.02.016.
[16]Telfeian A E. Transforaminal Endoscopic Surgery for Adjacent Segment Disease After Lumbar Fusion [J]. World Neurosurgery, 2017, 97: 231-235. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2016.09.099.
[17] 蒋强, 丁宇, 刘金玉, 等. 有限元模拟全内镜下精准椎板开窗减压术及生物力学分析[J]. 中国组织工程研究, 2020, 24(12): 1891-1896. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2520.
[18]黄陈翼, 李敬池, 徐文强, 等. 经皮内镜髓核摘除过程中保护关节囊降低邻椎病发病风险的生物力学分析[J]. 中国组织工程研究, 2021, 25(30): 4818-4822. DOI: 10.12307/2021.267.
[19] 王建业, 刘鑫, 任佳彬, 等. 单侧双通道脊柱内镜技术对侧入路治疗上腰椎椎间盘突出症的影像学研究及临床应用[J]. 中国修复重建外科杂志, 2022, 36(10): 1213-1220. DOI: 10.7507/1002-1892. 202205 017.
[20] Bui A T, Trinh G M, Wu M H, et al. Indications for and Outcomes of Three Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Approaches for the Decompression of Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Systematic Review [J]. Diagnostics (Basel), 2023, 13(6). DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics 13061092.