RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      검색결과 좁혀 보기

      선택해제
      • 좁혀본 항목 보기순서

        • 원문유무
        • 원문제공처
        • 등재정보
        • 학술지명
        • 주제분류
        • 발행연도
        • 작성언어
        • 저자
          펼치기

      오늘 본 자료

      • 오늘 본 자료가 없습니다.
      더보기
      • 무료
      • 기관 내 무료
      • 유료
      • KCI등재
      • KCI등재

        Risk of Revision After Vertebral Augmentation for Osteoporotic Vertebral Fracture: A Narrative Review

        Shinji Takahashi,Hiroyuki Inose,Koji Tamai,Masayoshi Iwamae,Hidetomi Terai,Hiroaki Nakamura 대한척추신경외과학회 2023 Neurospine Vol.20 No.3

        Osteoporotic vertebral fractures (OVFs) can hinder physical motor function, daily activities, and the quality of life in elderly patients when treated conservatively. Vertebral augmentation, which includes vertebroplasty and balloon kyphoplasty, is a commonly used procedure for OVFs. However, there have been reports of complications. Although serious complications are rare, there have been instances of adjacent vertebral fractures, cement dislocation, and insufficient pain relief due to cement failure, sometimes necessitating revision surgery. This narrative review discusses the common risks associated with vertebral augmentation for OVFs, such as cement leakage and adjacent vertebral fractures, and highlights the risk of revision surgery. The pooled incidence of revision surgery was 0.04 (0.02– 0.06). The risks for revision are reported as follows: female sex, advanced age, diabetes mellitus, cerebrovascular disease, dementia, blindness or low vision, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, split type fracture, large angular motion, and large endplate deficit. Various treatment strategies exist for OVFs, but they remain a subject of controversy. Current literature underscores the lack of substantial evidence to guide treatment strategies based on the risks of vertebral augmentation. In cases with a high risk of failure, other surgeries and conservative treatments should also be considered as treatment options.

      • Can Conventional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Substitute Three-Dimensional Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis?

        Hasib Maruf Mohammad,Yamada Kentaro,Hoshino Masatoshi,Yamada Eiji,Tamai Koji,Takahashi Shinji,Suzuki Akinobu,Toyoda Hiromitsu,Terai Hidetomi,Nakamura Hiroaki 대한척추외과학회 2021 Asian Spine Journal Vol.15 No.4

        Study Design: Retrospective radiological comparative design.Purpose: To investigate whether conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) could substitute three-dimensional (3D)-MRI for the calculation of the foraminal stenotic ratio (FSR) and clarification of which patients can be assessed more accurately using 3D-MRI.Overview of Literature: Previous studies have indicated that 3D-MRI is useful for diagnosing lumbar foraminal stenosis. The FSR obtained using 3D-MRI, described as the ratio of stenosis length, characterized by perineural fat obliteration, to the length of the entire foramen, could indicate the stenosis severity; however, this method is time-consuming and expensive. The FSR also can be calculated using conventional MRI.Methods: We investigated 154 foramina at L5–S1 in 77 patients. All the patients had degenerative lumbar disorders and had undergone both conventional MRI and 3D-MRI during the same visit. Differences between the FSRs calculated from conventional and 3D-MRI reconstructions and any correlations with the plain radiography findings were assessed.Results: In foramina that had a FSR of <50% on conventional MRI, the difference between the FSR obtained using conventional MRI and 3D-MRI was 5.1%, with a correlation coefficient of 0.777. For foramina with a FSR ≥50% on conventional MRI, the difference was 20.2%, with a correlation coefficient of 0.54. FSR obtained using 3D-MRI was significantly greater in patients who required surgery than in those who were successfully treated with conservative methods (88% and 42%, respectively). Segments with spondylolisthesis or lateral wedging showed higher FSRs than those without these conditions on both types of MRI.Conclusions: FSRs <50% obtained using conventional MRI were sufficiently reliable; however, the results were inaccurate for FSRs ≥50%. Patients with high FSRs on 3D-MRI were more likely to require surgical treatment. Therefore, 3D-MRI is recommended in patients with suspected stenosis detected using conventional MRI or plain radiographs.

      • KCI등재

        Short-Term Risk Factors for Distal Junctional Kyphosis after Spinal Reconstruction Surgery in Patients with Osteoporotic Vertebrae

        Sawada Yuta,Takahashi Shinji,Terai Hidetomi,Kato Minori,Toyoda Hiromitsu,Suzuki Akinobu,Tamai Koji,Yabu Akito,Iwamae Masayoshi,Nakamura Hiroaki 대한척추외과학회 2024 Asian Spine Journal Vol.18 No.1

        Study Design: Level 3 retrospective cohort case-control study.Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the risk factors for distal junctional kyphosis (DJK) caused by osteoporotic vertebral fractures following spinal reconstruction surgery, with a focus on the sagittal stable vertebra.Overview of Literature: Despite the rarity of reports on DJK in this setting, DJK was reported to reduce when the lower instrumented vertebra (LIV) was extended to the sagittal stable vertebra in the posterior corrective fixation for Scheuermann’s disease.Methods: This study included 46 patients who underwent spinal reconstruction surgery for thoracolumbar osteoporotic vertebral fractures and kyphosis and were followed up for 1 year postoperatively. DJK was defined as an advanced kyphosis angle >10° between the LIV and one lower vertebra. The patients were divided into groups with and without DJK. The risk factors of the two groups, such as patient background, surgery-related factors, radiographic parameters, and clinical outcomes, were analyzed.Results: The DJK and non-DJK groups included 14 and 32 patients, respectively, without significant differences in patient background. Those with instability in the distal adjacent LIV disc had a significantly higher risk of DJK occurrence (28.6% vs. 3.2%, <i>p</i>=0.027). DJK occurrence significantly increased in those with the sagittal stable vertebra not included in the fixation range (57.1% vs. 18.8%, <i>p</i>=0.020). Other preoperative radiographic parameters were not significantly different. Instability in the distal adjacent LIV disc (adjusted odds ratio, 14.50; <i>p</i>=0.029) and the exclusion of the sagittal stable vertebra from the fixation range (adjusted odds ratio, 5.29; <i>p</i>=0.020) were significant risk factors for DJK occurrence.Conclusions: Regarding spinal reconstruction surgery in patients with osteoporotic vertebral fractures, instability in the distal adjacent LIV disc and the exclusion of the sagittal stable vertebra from the fixation range were risk factors for DJK occurrence in the short term.

      연관 검색어 추천

      이 검색어로 많이 본 자료

      활용도 높은 자료

      해외이동버튼