| Literature DB >> 29202743 |
Weiwei Li1, Jun Liu2, Liqun Gong2, Yongchun Zhou3, Dapeng Duan2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The choice of surgical methods for lumbosacral tuberculosis is controversial due to the complex anterior anatomy and peculiar biomechanics of the lumbosacral junction. The objective of this study was to explore the clinical effect of posterior intervertebral space debridement with annular bone graft fusion and fixation for the treatment of lumbosacral tuberculosis.Entities:
Keywords: Bone graft; Fixation; Fusion; Intervertebral space debridement; Posterior
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29202743 PMCID: PMC5716235 DOI: 10.1186/s12893-017-0310-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Surg ISSN: 1471-2482 Impact factor: 2.102
Fig. 1A 46-year-old female patient with lumbosacral tuberculosis with L4–5 lesions who underwent posterior intervertebral space debridement with annuar bone graft fusion and fixation. a-e Preoperative X-ray, computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging showed bone destruction and abscess formation. f The intraoperative image showed posterior fixation, decompression and transintervertebral space debridement. g-j Postoperative radiographs. Postoperative CT in the axial and sagittal planes at 14 months showed a good position of internal fixation and excellent intervertebral bone fusion
Fig. 2A 61-year-old female patient with lumbosacral tuberculosis with L5–S1 intervertebral lesion who also underwent posterior intervertebral space debridement with annular bone graft fusion and fixation. a-f Preoperative images. Preoperative computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging showed bone destruction and extensive flow abscess (c–f). g-j Postoperative radiographs. Postoperative CT in the coronal and sagittal planes at 18 months showed a good position of internal fixation and excellent intervertebral bone fusion
Patient demographics, operative information and disease characteristics
| Case no. | Age (years)/sex | Level | Duration of symptoms (months) | Blood loss (ml) | Operation time (min) | Follow-up (months) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 49/M | L5-S1 | 13 | 1150 | 200 | 45 |
| 2 | 51/F | L4–5 | 8 | 1000 | 150 | 38 |
| 3 | 49/M | L5-S1 | 12 | 700 | 150 | 35 |
| 4 | 48/F | L4–5 | 9 | 950 | 160 | 30 |
| 5 | 57/M | L5-S1 | 11 | 1050 | 210 | 38 |
| 6 | 45/F | L5-S1 | 7 | 600 | 140 | 31 |
| 7 | 45/M | L4–5 | 14 | 900 | 170 | 28 |
| 8 | 51/M | L3–4 | 7 | 850 | 150 | 31 |
| 9 | 71/M | L5-S1 | 6 | 500 | 170 | 38 |
| 10 | 48/F | L5-S1 | 8 | 750 | 210 | 36 |
| 11 | 63/F | L3–4 | 9 | 800 | 160 | 45 |
| 12 | 51/M | L5-S1 | 20 | 800 | 200 | 18 |
| 13 | 37/M | L4–5 | 9 | 650 | 190 | 36 |
| 14 | 42/M | L4–5 | 13 | 800 | 170 | 42 |
| 15 | 61/F | L5-S1 | 8 | 950 | 200 | 28 |
| 16 | 47/F | L4–5 | 13 | 500 | 130 | 35 |
| 17 | 55/F | L4–5 | 10 | 550 | 140 | 31 |
| 18 | 35/M | L4–5 | 9 | 750 | 180 | 42 |
| 19 | 46/F | L4–5 | 11 | 600 | 130 | 29 |
| 20 | 52/F | L4–5 | 9 | 850 | 170 | 32 |
| 21 | 55/M | L5-S1 | 10 | 500 | 140 | 36 |
| 22 | 41/F | L3–4 | 12 | 700 | 150 | 35 |
| 23 | 27/M | L4–5 | 6 | 750 | 170 | 28 |
| Mean | 49.0 ± 9.5 | 10.2 ± 3.2 | 767.4 ± 181.2 | 167.0 ± 25.1 | 34.2 ± 6.3 |
Summary of radiological and clinical outcomes
| Case no. | Lumbosacral angle (°) | ASIA grade | VAS | ESR (mm/h) | CRP (mg/L) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pre | Post* | Final | Pre | FinalΔ | Pre | Final* | Pre | Final* | Pre | Final* | |
| 1 | 19 | 28 | 27 | C | E | 8 | 1 | 46 | 15 | 69 | 3.0 |
| 2 | 25 | 31 | 30 | C | E | 7 | 0 | 42 | 13 | 48 | 1.5 |
| 3 | 25 | 30 | 28 | D | E | 9 | 1 | 39 | 12 | 45 | 2.5 |
| 4 | 22 | 29 | 27 | E | E | 9 | 1 | 48 | 13 | 51 | 3.5 |
| 5 | 18 | 27 | 26 | E | E | 8 | 1 | 52 | 10 | 79 | 2.0 |
| 6 | 21 | 27 | 27 | E | E | 7 | 1 | 49 | 13 | 71 | 2.5 |
| 7 | 19 | 27 | 25 | C | E | 9 | 0 | 52 | 11 | 83 | 3.5 |
| 8 | 20 | 26 | 25 | D | E | 9 | 1 | 65 | 12 | 97 | 3.0 |
| 9 | 26 | 33 | 32 | E | E | 8 | 2 | 58 | 14 | 85 | 3.5 |
| 10 | 20 | 29 | 29 | E | E | 8 | 1 | 61 | 13 | 91 | 1.0 |
| 11 | 25 | 32 | 31 | C | D | 8 | 1 | 37 | 14 | 50 | 4.5 |
| 12 | 18 | 25 | 23 | C | E | 7 | 2 | 38 | 15 | 48 | 3.5 |
| 13 | 17 | 27 | 26 | D | E | 8 | 2 | 47 | 12 | 55 | 3.5 |
| 14 | 24 | 30 | 30 | D | E | 7 | 0 | 45 | 13 | 56 | 3.0 |
| 15 | 19 | 29 | 28 | D | E | 9 | 2 | 57 | 10 | 69 | 2.5 |
| 16 | 22 | 29 | 27 | D | E | 9 | 2 | 53 | 14 | 75 | 1.5 |
| 17 | 21 | 28 | 28 | D | E | 8 | 1 | 50 | 11 | 64 | 2.0 |
| 18 | 19 | 27 | 26 | D | E | 8 | 3 | 47 | 13 | 63 | 2.5 |
| 19 | 21 | 30 | 29 | D | E | 7 | 1 | 56 | 13 | 68 | 2.5 |
| 20 | 18 | 27 | 27 | C | E | 8 | 1 | 39 | 11 | 47 | 2.0 |
| 21 | 23 | 32 | 30 | D | E | 9 | 1 | 49 | 12 | 52 | 3.5 |
| 22 | 21 | 31 | 28 | D | E | 8 | 1 | 48 | 14 | 62 | 3.5 |
| 23 | 20 | 29 | 29 | D | E | 8 | 1 | 51 | 13 | 65 | 3.0 |
| Mean | 21.0 ± 2.1 | 28.8 ± 1.7 | 27.7 ± 1.7 | 8.1 ± 0.6 | 1.2 ± 0.5 | 49.1 ± 5.6 | 12.7 ± 1.1 | 64.9 ± 11.9 | 2.8 ± 0.7 | ||
Pre preoperative, Post postoperative, Final final follow-up, ASIA American Spinal Injury Association, VAS visual analogue scale, ESR erythrocyte sedimentation rate, CRP C-reactive protein
* p < 0.05 compared with preop by paired t-test
Δ p < 0.05 compared with preop by Wilcoxon signed rank test
Preoperative, postoperative and final follow-up SF-36 scores
| Characteristic | Preop | Postop | Final follow up |
|---|---|---|---|
| PF | 77.43 ± 4.67 | 80.94 ± 3.30* | 87.43 ± 8.38Δ |
| RP | 27.0 ± 17.05 | 29.70 ± 14.24* | 39.8 ± 12.44Δ |
| BP | 24.59 ± 0.50 | 69.5 ± 13.06* | 78.57 ± 3.56Δ |
| GH | 68.2 ± 11.25 | 70.27 ± 9.92* | 77.70 ± 7.87Δ |
| VT | 72.43 ± 9.83 | 78.37 ± 9.86* | 85.90 ± 11.42Δ |
| SF | 69.00 ± 6.26 | 73.08 ± 9.88* | 81.10 ± 13.01Δ |
| RE | 59.8 ± 13.77 | 63.43 ± 18.70* | 72.50 ± 20.52Δ |
| MH | 81.40 ± 3.55 | 83.78 ± 2.97* | 89.08 ± 6.64Δ |
SF-36, Social Functioning-36, PF Physical Functioning, RP Role-Physical, BP Bodily Pain, GH General Health, VT Vitality, SF Social Functioning, RE Role-Emotional, MH Mental Health, preop preoperation, postop postoperation
* p < 0.05 compared with preop by paired t-test
Δ p < 0.05 compared with postop by paired t-test