-
Zhonghua yi xue za zhi · Sep 2014
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study[Comparison of clinical efficacies of single segment transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with cage versus autogenous morselized bone for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: a prospective randomized controlled study].
- Peisheng Liu, Xiaozhen Liu, Xuejing Qiao, Wennan Du, Dawei Luo, and Xiujun Zheng.
- Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao 266011, China.
- Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2014 Sep 23; 94 (35): 2731-5.
ObjectiveTo compare the clinical efficacies of single segment transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) with cage versus autogenous morselized bone for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis.MethodsA total of 87 patients undergoing single segment TLIF were randomly divided into 2 groups. A cage was implanted into intervertebral space in group A patients while autogenous morselized bone in group B patients. Operative duration, blood loss, length of stay and cost of hospitalization of two groups were recorded. They were followed up at 1 week, 12, 24 months post-operation. Oswestry disability index (ODI), visual analogue scale (VAS) fusion rates, intervertebral space and foramen height restoration, lumbar lordosis and postoperative complications were compared between two groups.ResultsNo significant inter-group difference existed in operative duration, blood loss or length of stay. However, the average hospitalization cost in group A were 18% higher than that of group B (P < 0.05). Both groups achieved excellent clinical outcomes within 2 years. ODI, VAS score improvement rates and postoperative complication rates were not statistically different. Lumbar fusion rate was 86.7% in group A versus 85.7% in group B after 2 years. And there was no significant difference (P > 0.05). The heights of intervertebral space and foramen in group A achieved a better recovery than those of group B. Both groups had similar improvements of lumbar lordosis.ConclusionFor degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis, usage of interbody cage is more effective in terms of recovery of intervertebral space and foraminal height compared with usage of bone graft. However it brings no better clinical efficacy while the usage of autogenous morselized bone is more cost-effective. Two grafting methods yield similar overall clinical outcomes.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.