【摘要】 目的探讨Coflex非融合固定植入治疗腰椎管狭窄的临床疗效。方法90例腰椎管狭窄患者分别应用Coflex植入治疗、单纯椎间盘髓核摘除术和后路腰椎椎体间融合术(PLIF),对其手术方法、术中评估及疗效进行总结。结果Coflex手术的手术时间(70.02±8.67)min和出血量(181.46±16.59)ml均明显低于PLIF组,差异均有统计学意义(t分别=6.09、3.01,P均<0.05),而与单纯腰椎间盘摘除术组比较,差异均无统计学意义(t分别=0.34、0.24,P均>0.05)。JOA评分中Coflex组优良率为94.32%,高于单纯摘除髓核组89.55%,略低于PLIF组为95.24%,差异均无统计学意义(χ2分别=1.11、1.26,P均>0.05)。随访期间未出现内固定松动脱出及棘突骨折等并发症。结论Coflex固定术能减少手术创伤,并取得良好疗效。更多还原

【Abstract】 Objective To investigate the dynamic stabilization device Coflex’s clinical curative effect on the lumbar canalis vertebralis stenosis. Methods Ninety patients were divided into 3 groups,and respectively treated with Coflex,discectomy and traditional posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Surgical approach,evaluation during operation and curative effect were summarized. Results The operating time was (70.02±8.67)min and the amount of bleeding was (181.46±16.59)ml in Cofelx group which were obviously less than those of the PLIF group,and the differences had statistical significance(t=6.09,3.01,P<0.05). Meanwhile,between Coflex group and discectomy group,the differences had no statistical significance (t=0.34,0.24,P>0.05). In addition,as for JOA grading,the rate of good rehabilitation of Coflex group was 94.32% which was higher than the discectomy group (89.55%),and slightly lower than the PLIF group (95.24%). The differences had no statistical significance(χ2=1.11,1.26,P>0.05).During the follow up period,fixation loosening or displacement,fracture of spinous process and other complications didn’t occur. Conclusions Coflex can reduce operation wound and achieve good curative effect.更多还原