http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : Kurd Mark Faisal (검색결과 2 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
Lambrechts Mark James,Heard Jeremy,D’Antonio Nicholas,Bodnar John,Schneider Gregory,Bloom Evan,Canseco Jose,Woods Barrett,Kaye Ian David,Kurd Mark Faisal,Rihn Jeffrey,Hilibrand Alan,Schroeder Gregory 대한척추외과학회 2023 Asian Spine Journal Vol.17 No.4
Study Design: Retrospective cohort study.Purpose: To compare radiographic outcomes between unilateral and bilateral cage placement in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions (TLIF) and to determine if the rate of fusion at the 1-year postoperative point was different in patients who received bilateral versus unilateral cages.Overview of Literature: There is no clear evidence to dictate whether bilateral or unilateral cages promote superior radiographic or surgical outcomes in TLIF.Methods: Patients >18 years old who underwent primary one- or two-level TLIFs at our institution were identified and propensitymatched in a 3:1 fashion (unilateral:bilateral). Patient demographics, surgical characteristics, and radiographic outcomes, including vertebral endplate obliquity, segmental lordosis, subsidence, and fusion status, were compared between groups.Results: Of the 184 patients included, 46 received bilateral cages. Bilateral cage placement was associated with greater subsidence (1.06±1.25 mm vs. 0.59±1.16 mm, <i>p</i>=0.028) and enhanced restoration of segmental lordosis (5.74°±14.1° vs. −1.57°±10.9°, <i>p</i>=0.002) at the 1-year postoperative point, while unilateral cage placement was associated with an increased correction of endplate obliquity (−2.02°±4.42° vs. 0.24°±2.81°, <i>p</i><0.001). Bilateral cage placement was significantly associated with radiographic fusion on bivariate analysis (89.1% vs. 70.3%, <i>p</i>=0.018) and significantly predicted radiographic fusion on multivariable regression analysis (estimate, 1.35; odds ratio, 3.87; 95% confidence interval, 1.51–12.05; <i>p</i>=0.010).Conclusions: Bilateral interbody cage placement in TLIF procedures was associated with restoration of lumbar lordosis and increased fusion rates. However, endplate obliquity correction was significantly greater for patients who received a unilateral cage.
-
Ledesma Jonathan Andrew,Lambrechts Mark J.,Dees Azra,Thomas Terence,Hiranaka Cannon Greco,Kurd Mark Faisal,Radcliff Kris E.,Anderson David Greg 대한척추외과학회 2023 Asian Spine Journal Vol.17 No.1
Study Design: Retrospective cohort study. Purpose: To compare the radiographic and clinical outcomes of static versus expandable interbody cages in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using minimally invasive surgery (MIS-TLIF). Overview of Literature: Expandable interbody cages may potentially improve radiographic and clinical outcomes following MIS-TLIF compared to static pages, but at a potentially higher cost and increased rates of subsidence. Methods: A retrospective chart review of 1- and 2-level MIS-TLIFs performed from 2014 to 2020 was reviewed. Radiographic measurements were obtained preoperatively, 6 weeks postoperatively, and at final follow-up. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) including the Oswestry Disability Index, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) back, and VAS leg were evaluated. Multivariate linear regression analysis determined the effect of cage type on the change in PROMs, controlling for demographic characteristics. Alpha was set at 0.05. Results: A total of 221 patients underwent MIS-TLIF including 136 static and 85 expandable cages. Expandable cages had significantly greater anterior (static: 11.41 mm vs. expandable: 13.11 mm, p<0.001) and posterior disk heights (static: 7.22 mm vs. expandable: 8.11 mm, p<0.001) at 1-year follow-up. Expandable cages offered similar improvements in segmental lordosis at 6 weeks (static: 1.69° vs. expandable: 2.81°, p=0.243), but segmental lordosis was better maintained with expandable cages leading to significant differences at 1-year follow-up (static: 0.86° vs. expandable: 2.45°, p=0.001). No significant differences were noted in total complication (static: 12.5% vs. expandable: 16.5%, p=0.191) or cage subsidence rates (static: 19.7% vs. expandable: 22.4%, p=0.502) groups at 1-year follow-up. Conclusions: Expandable devices provide greater improvements in radiographic measurements including anterior disk height, posterior disk height, and segmental lordosis, but this did not lead to significant improvements in PROMs, complication rates, subsidence rates, or subsidence distance.
연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
