Clinical efficacy and prevention of adjacent segment degeneration in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases through decompression and fusion preserving proximal upper laminae
陈豪杰,周庆双,蒲小江,王斯年,朱泽章,邱勇,王斌,孙旭
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn121113-20230708-00001
2023-01-01
Abstract:Objective:To investigate the clinical results of decompression preserving proximal upper laminae combined with lumbar instrumental fusion in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases and the prevention of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD).Methods:A retrospective analysis was conducted on 124 patients (the reserved group) with lumbar degeneration who underwent compression preserving proximal upper laminae combined with fusion surgery involving upper half of the lamina, upper half of the spinous process, adjacent facets, and interspinous ligament at Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital between March 2018 and February 2020. These patients were followed up for more than 2 years. Additionally, 130 patients who underwent traditional total laminectomy decompression combined with fusion surgery from January 2016 to February 2018 were selected as the control group (total laminectomy group). In the reserved group, there were 60 males and 64 females, aged 58.3±10.3 years, including 50 cases of giant lumbar disc herniation, 11 cases of lumbar disc herniation with ossification, 10 cases of simple lumbar spinal stenosis, and 53 cases of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Total laminectomy group comprised 62 males and 68 females, aged 59.6±9.2 years, with 51 cases of giant lumbar disc herniation, 13 cases of lumbar disc herniation with ossification, 11 cases of simple lumbar spinal stenosis, and 55 cases of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. The number of operative segments, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, complications, extent of laminectomy, dural sac area, and sagittal spinopelvic parameters were compared between the two groups. Fusion status, adjacent segment stability, and the incidence of ASD were assessed at the last follow-up. Oswestry disability index (ODI) and visual analogue scale (VAS) for back and leg were used to evaluate clinical effectiveness.Results:The follow-up time was 30.5±5.4 months in the reserved group and 31.0±5.8 months in total laminectomy group, and the difference was not statistically significant ( t=0.63, P=0.528). In patients undergoing single segment surgery, the operation time (173.6±47.3 min), blood loss (351.7±102.0 ml) and postoperative hospital stay (7.8±3.1 d) in the reserved group were lower than those in total laminectomy group (196.2±34.2 min, 401.9±97.2 ml, 9.9±3.6 d, respectively), and the differences were statistically significant ( t=2.93, P=0.004; t=2.69, P=0.008; t=3.26, P<0.001). The dural sac area in both groups was significantly improved after surgery, but the extent of laminectomy in the reserved group (22.8±4.5 mm) was smaller than that in total laminectomy group (29.5±4.8 mm), and the difference was statistically significant ( t=7.62, P<0.001). The above indicators of the patients with two segment or three segments in the reserved group were better than those in total resection group, with a statistically significant difference ( P<0.05). PI, PT, SS, and LL showed significant improvement in both groups compared to preoperative values ( P<0.05), with no statistically significant differences between the groups ( P>0.05). At the last follow-up, both groups achieved Bridwell I or II fusion level. The proportion of adjacent vertebral instability in the reserved group (11.3%, 14/124) was lower than that in total laminectomy group (22.3%, 29/130), and the difference was statistically significant (χ 2=5.48, P=0.019). The total incidence of ASD in the reserved group (20.9%, 26/124) was lower than that in total laminectomy group (36.2%, 47/130), and the difference was statistically significant (χ 2=7.15, P=0.008). R-ASD (16.9%, 21/124), S-ASD (4.0%, 5/124) and O-ASD (0, 0/124) in the reserved group were lower than those in total laminectomy group [(25.4% (33/130), 9.3% (12/130) and 1.5% (2/130), respectively)], and the difference was statistically significant (χ 2=8.20, P=0.027). ODI and VAS of back and leg were significantly reduced in both groups compared to preoperative values, and the differences were statistically significant ( P<0.05). There were no significant differences in ODI and VAS scores of back and leg in the reserved group compared with total laminectomy group at 3 months, 1 year, and the last follow-up ( P>0.05). Conclusion:Decompression with preservation of the upper half of the lamina can reduce intraoperative blood loss, shorten operation time and postoperative hospital stay, achieve comparable decompression effects to traditional decompression surgery, and effectively reduce the occurrence of adjacent segment instability and ASD.