Sponsor
  • ·
  • Chinese Association of
    Integrative Medicine;
    China Academy of Chinese
    Medicine Sciences
Editing
  • ·
  • Editorial Board of
    China Journal of
    Orthopaedics and Traumatology
Publishing
  • ·
  • Publishing House,
    China Journal of
    Orthopaedics and Traumatology
Overseas Distributor
  • ·
  • China International Book
    Trading Corporation
    P.O.Box 399,Beijing,China
    Code No.M587
Mail-order
  • ·
  • Publishing House,
    China Journal of
    Orthopaedics and Traumatology
    No.16A, Nanxiaojie, Dongzhimennei,
    Beijing 100700,China
    Tel:0086-10-84020925
    Fax:0086-10-84036581
    Http://www.zggszz.com
    E-mail:zggszz@sina.com
椎体成形与弯角椎体成形治疗骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折的临床效果与辐射暴露分析
Hits: 2121   Download times: 684   Received:October 16, 2020    
作者Author单位UnitE-Mail
崔志栋 CUI Zhi-dong 濮阳市油田总医院骨一科, 河南 濮阳 457000 The First Department of Orthopaedics, Puyang Oilfield General Hospital, Puyang 457000, Henan, China  
杨光 YANG Guang 濮阳市油田总医院骨一科, 河南 濮阳 457000 The First Department of Orthopaedics, Puyang Oilfield General Hospital, Puyang 457000, Henan, China  
张大鹏 ZHANG Da-peng 濮阳市油田总医院骨一科, 河南 濮阳 457000 The First Department of Orthopaedics, Puyang Oilfield General Hospital, Puyang 457000, Henan, China 872980991@qq.com 
期刊信息:《中国骨伤》2021年34卷,第8期,第725-731页
DOI:10.12200/j.issn.1003-0034.2021.08.007


目的:以经典双侧穿刺椎体成形为参照,评价弯角穿刺装置椎体成形的临床效果,分析术中患者及术者受到的辐射暴露,总结防护措施。

方法:对2018年3月至2019年9月收治的49例骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折的临床资料进行回顾性分析,49例患者按手术穿刺方式的不同分为椎体成形组(采用经典双侧穿刺)与弯角椎体成形组(采用弯角穿刺),其中椎体成形组26例,男7例,女19例;年龄(73.25±6.36)岁;胸段2例,胸腰段21例,腰段3例。弯角椎体成形组23例,男6例,女17例;年龄(73.09±6.52)岁;胸段3例,胸腰段19例,腰段1例。记录两组手术时间、骨水泥注入量,采用视觉模拟评分(visual analogue scale,VAS)和改良Oswestry功能障碍指数(Oswestry Disability Index,ODI)评定患者的疼痛程度及腰椎功能,观察术后骨水泥渗漏及并发症,并比较两组患者、术者部分暴露部位受照辐射剂量。

结果:49例患者均获随访,时间10~22(14.55±3.83)个月。椎体成形组11例,弯角椎体成形组9例术后发生骨水泥渗漏,两组比较差异无统计学意义。椎体成形组VAS评分术前及术后1 d分别为6.23±0.68,1.69±0.47,改良Oswestry功能障碍指数分别为(72.59±3.25)%,(33.59±2.85)%。弯角椎体成形组VAS评分术前及术后1 d分别为6.46±0.56,1.57±0.49,改良Oswestry功能障碍指数分别为(73.21±3.18)%,(33.17±2.37)%。两组患者术后疼痛程度和腰椎功能均得到明显改善,但组间比较差异无统计学意义。弯角椎体成形组与椎体成形组手术时间分别为(17.27±9.58) min,(23.19±8.56) min,骨水泥注入量分别为(4.91±1.49) ml,(6.58±1.42) ml,手术时间和骨水泥注入量方面弯角椎体成形组更有优势。弯角椎体成形组受福射剂量术者为(0.53±0.05) mSv,患者为(10.64±1.65) mSv,椎体成形组受福射剂量术者为(0.59±0.08) mSv,患者为(13.52±1.81) mSv。弯角椎体成形组患者的受福射剂量明显低于椎体成形组,而两组术者的受福射剂量差异无统计学意义。

结论:两种穿刺方式均能达到满意的临床效果,弯角穿刺可更加优化骨水泥的分布,降低患者的辐射剂量。
[关键词]:骨质疏松,绝经后  脊柱骨折  椎体成形术  辐射暴露
 
Clinical efficacy and radiation exposure analysis of vertebroplasty and curved vertebroplasty in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture
Abstract:

Objective: Taking the classic bilateral puncture vertebroplasty as a reference,to evaluate the clinical efficacy of vertebroplasty of the curved-angle puncture device,analyze the radiation exposure of patients and surgeons during the operation and summarize the protective measures.

Methods: The clinical data of 49 patients with osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures admitted from March 2018 to September 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. According to the different surgical puncture methods,49 patients were divided into vertebroplasty group (using classic bilateral puncture) and curved vertebroplasty group (using curved-angle puncture). Among them,there were 26 cases in vertebroplasty group,including 7 males and 19 females,aged(73.25±6.36) years,2 cases in thoracic segment,21 cases in thoracolumbar segment,and 3 cases in lumbar segment. In curved vertebroplasty group,there were 23 cases,including 6 males and 17 females,aged (73.09±6.52) years,3 cases in thoracic segment,19 cases in thoracolumbar segment,and 1 case in lumbar segment. The operation time and the amount of injected bone cement in the two groups were recorded. Visual analogue scale (VAS) and modified Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were respectively used to assess the pain degree and lumbar function,the postoperative bone cement leakage or other complications were observed. The radiation doses of the two groups of patients and surgeons were compared.

Results: All 49 patients were followed up for 10-22(14.55±3.83) months. Eleven cases in vertebroplasty group and 9 cases in curved vertebroplasty group occurred bone cement leakage after surgery,and there was no statistically significant difference between two groups. VAS scores of vertebroplasty group were 6.23±0.68 before operation and 1.69±0.47 at 1 day after operation,respectively,modified ODI were (72.59±3.25)% and (33.59±2.85)%. The preoperative and postoperative VAS scores of curved vertebroplasty group were 6.46±0.56 and 1.57±0.49,respectively,modified ODI were (73.21±3.18)% and (33.17±2.37)%. The postoperative pain degree and lumbar function of the two groups were significantly improved,but the difference between the groups was not statistically significant. The operation time of curved vertebroplasty group and vertebroplasty group were (17.27±9.58) min and(23.19±8.56) min,and the amount of injected bone cement were (4.91±1.49) ml and (6.58±1.42) ml. Obviously,curved vertebroplasty group has more advantages in operation time and the amount of injected bone cement. In curved vertebroplasty group,the radiation dose of the operator was (0.53±0.05) mSv and the patient was (10.64±1.65) mSv;in vertebroplasty group,the operator was (0.59±0.08) mSv and the patient was (13.52±1.81) mSv. The radiation dose of patients in curved vertebroplasty group was significantly lower than that of the vertebroplasty group,but there was no statistically significant difference in the operator between two groups.

Conclusion: Both puncture methods can achieve satisfactory clinical results,but curved-angle puncture can optimize the distribution of bone cement and reduce the radiation dose of patients.
KEYWORDS:Osteoporosis,postmenopausal  Spinal fractures  Vertebroplasty  Radiation exposure
 
引用本文,请按以下格式著录参考文献:
中文格式:崔志栋,杨光,张大鹏.椎体成形与弯角椎体成形治疗骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折的临床效果与辐射暴露分析[J].中国骨伤,2021,34(8):725~731
英文格式:CUI Zhi-dong,YANG Guang,ZHANG Da-peng.Clinical efficacy and radiation exposure analysis of vertebroplasty and curved vertebroplasty in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture[J].zhongguo gu shang / China J Orthop Trauma ,2021,34(8):725~731
View Full Text  View/Add Comment  Download reader
Close




版权所有:Editorial Office of China Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology京ICP备12048066号  版权声明
地址:No.16A, Nanxiaojie, Dongzhimennei, Beijing 100700, China
电话:0086-10-84036581 传真:0086-10-84036581 Email:zggszz@sina.com