Literature DB >> 31185118

Early Clinical Outcome of Lumbar Spinal Fixation With Cortical Bone Trajectory Pedicle Screws in Patients With Osteoporosis With Degenerative Disease.

Lei Liu, Shaodong Zhang, Guozhen Liu, Baolin Yang, Xiaotao Wu.   

Abstract

This cohort study aimed to elucidate early surgical outcomes after midline lumbar fusion (MidLIF) with cortical bone trajectory (CBT) screw fixation compared with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) using traditional pedicle screw (TPS) fixation for lumbar degenerative disease (LDD) in patients with osteoporosis. The authors randomly assigned 70 patients with osteoporosis who had LDD at 1 or 2 adjacent vertebral levels to undergo either MidLIF with CBT (CBT group) or TLIF with TPS fixation (TPS group) from February 2015 to March 2016. Pre- and postoperative lumbar Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scale scores were assessed and radiographic measurements on dynamic plain radiographs and computed tomography images were analyzed. The final data analysis included 31 patients in the CBT group (mean age, 73.42±6.74 years; t-score, -2.94±0.75) and 32 patients in the TPS group (mean age, 74.84±5.37 years; t-score, -2.92±0.66). Mean JOA score improved significantly in both groups, although no intragroup differences of JOA score improvement were found at the latest follow-up evaluation (P>.05). In addition, significantly higher rates of screw loosening (28.13% vs 6.5%, P=.03) and the amount of subsidence (3.01±0.52 vs 2.49±0.45 mm, P=.02) were found in the TPS group. Rate of radiographic fusion of both groups showed no statistical difference. Both groups of patients achieved a similar rate of radiographic fusion at the 1.5-year follow-up and experienced similar intra- or postoperative complications and postoperative recovery. The MidLIF with CBT screw fixation for short-level lumbar fusion in patients with osteoporosis provided improvement of clinical symptoms comparable to that of TLIF using traditional TPS fixation. In addition, statistically significant lumbar stability was found in the CBT group compared with the TPS group. [Orthopedics. 2019; 42(5):e465-e471.]. Copyright 2019, SLACK Incorporated.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31185118     DOI: 10.3928/01477447-20190604-01

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Orthopedics        ISSN: 0147-7447            Impact factor:   1.390


  5 in total

1.  A Novel Calcium Phosphate-Based Nanocomposite for Augmentation of Cortical Bone Trajectory Screw Fixation.

Authors:  Yuetian Wang; Chun Liu; Huiling Liu; Haoyong Fu; Chunde Li; Lei Yang; Haolin Sun
Journal:  Int J Nanomedicine       Date:  2022-07-09

2.  Comparison of Different Insertion Techniques for Lumbosacral Fixation Improvement: A Finite Element Study.

Authors:  Da-Peng Han; Jia-Yin Wang
Journal:  Orthop Surg       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 2.071

3.  Cortical Trajectory Fixation Versus Traditional Pedicle-Screw Fixation in the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Patients with Osteoporosis: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Hongtao Ding; Yong Hai; Yuzeng Liu; Li Guan; Aixing Pan; Xinuo Zhang; Bo Han; Yue Li; Peng Yin
Journal:  Clin Interv Aging       Date:  2022-02-23       Impact factor: 4.458

4.  Cortical Trajectory Screw Fixation in Lumbar Spine Surgery: A Review of the Existing Literature.

Authors:  Kun-Tae Kim; Myung-Geun Song; Young-Jin Park; Dong-Yeong Lee; Dong-Hee Kim
Journal:  Asian Spine J       Date:  2021-05-03

5.  Level-based analysis of screw loosening with cortical bone trajectory screws in patients with lumbar degenerative disease.

Authors:  Chao-Hsuan Chen; Der-Cherng Chen; Hsiang-Ming Huang; Hao-Yu Chuang; Wei-Lin Hsu; Der-Yang Cho; Han-Chung Lee; Da-Tian Bau
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2020-10-02       Impact factor: 1.817

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.