Cargando…
Cortical Trajectory Fixation Versus Traditional Pedicle-Screw Fixation in the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Patients with Osteoporosis: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial
STUDY DESIGN: This was a prospective randomized controlled trial study. OBJECTIVE: To elucidate clinical and radiographic outcomes and complications of cortical bone trajectory (CBT)-screw fixation in patients with osteoporosis at 24-month follow-up and to compare the results with those after transf...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Dove
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8882472/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35237030 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S349533 |
_version_ | 1784659712558497792 |
---|---|
author | Ding, Hongtao Hai, Yong Liu, Yuzeng Guan, Li Pan, Aixing Zhang, Xinuo Han, Bo Li, Yue Yin, Peng |
author_facet | Ding, Hongtao Hai, Yong Liu, Yuzeng Guan, Li Pan, Aixing Zhang, Xinuo Han, Bo Li, Yue Yin, Peng |
author_sort | Ding, Hongtao |
collection | PubMed |
description | STUDY DESIGN: This was a prospective randomized controlled trial study. OBJECTIVE: To elucidate clinical and radiographic outcomes and complications of cortical bone trajectory (CBT)-screw fixation in patients with osteoporosis at 24-month follow-up and to compare the results with those after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) using traditional pedicle screw (PS) fixation. METHODS: We enrolled 124 patients and randomly assigned them to two groups (each group had 62 participants). The primary outcome was fusion rate. Secondary outcomes were VAS, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores, operation duration, incision length, estimated blood loss, drainage volume, radiological outcomes, and complications. RESULTS: At the 6- and 12-month follow-up points, similar fusion rates were observed based on CT scans in both groups (P=0.583 and 0.583). CBT provided significantly better short-term functional status at 3 months postoperation on ODI and JOA scores (P=0.012 and 0) and similar improvements in pain intensity and functional status at other follow-up points. In addition, CBT resulted in significantly better surgical characteristics. Notably, CBT fixation led to lower incidence of screw loosening (P=0.006). CONCLUSION: CBT-screw fixation for single-level lumbar fusion in patients with osteoporosis provided improvement in clinical symptoms comparable to that of TLIF using PS fixation. Significantly better lumbar stability was found in the CBT group. We suggest that CBT-screw fixation is a reasonable and superior alternative to PS in TLIF in osteoporosis. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR1900022658. DATE OF REGISTRATION: April 20, 2019. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8882472 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Dove |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-88824722022-03-01 Cortical Trajectory Fixation Versus Traditional Pedicle-Screw Fixation in the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Patients with Osteoporosis: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial Ding, Hongtao Hai, Yong Liu, Yuzeng Guan, Li Pan, Aixing Zhang, Xinuo Han, Bo Li, Yue Yin, Peng Clin Interv Aging Original Research STUDY DESIGN: This was a prospective randomized controlled trial study. OBJECTIVE: To elucidate clinical and radiographic outcomes and complications of cortical bone trajectory (CBT)-screw fixation in patients with osteoporosis at 24-month follow-up and to compare the results with those after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) using traditional pedicle screw (PS) fixation. METHODS: We enrolled 124 patients and randomly assigned them to two groups (each group had 62 participants). The primary outcome was fusion rate. Secondary outcomes were VAS, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores, operation duration, incision length, estimated blood loss, drainage volume, radiological outcomes, and complications. RESULTS: At the 6- and 12-month follow-up points, similar fusion rates were observed based on CT scans in both groups (P=0.583 and 0.583). CBT provided significantly better short-term functional status at 3 months postoperation on ODI and JOA scores (P=0.012 and 0) and similar improvements in pain intensity and functional status at other follow-up points. In addition, CBT resulted in significantly better surgical characteristics. Notably, CBT fixation led to lower incidence of screw loosening (P=0.006). CONCLUSION: CBT-screw fixation for single-level lumbar fusion in patients with osteoporosis provided improvement in clinical symptoms comparable to that of TLIF using PS fixation. Significantly better lumbar stability was found in the CBT group. We suggest that CBT-screw fixation is a reasonable and superior alternative to PS in TLIF in osteoporosis. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR1900022658. DATE OF REGISTRATION: April 20, 2019. Dove 2022-02-23 /pmc/articles/PMC8882472/ /pubmed/35237030 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S349533 Text en © 2022 Ding et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) ). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php). |
spellingShingle | Original Research Ding, Hongtao Hai, Yong Liu, Yuzeng Guan, Li Pan, Aixing Zhang, Xinuo Han, Bo Li, Yue Yin, Peng Cortical Trajectory Fixation Versus Traditional Pedicle-Screw Fixation in the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Patients with Osteoporosis: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial |
title | Cortical Trajectory Fixation Versus Traditional Pedicle-Screw Fixation in the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Patients with Osteoporosis: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial |
title_full | Cortical Trajectory Fixation Versus Traditional Pedicle-Screw Fixation in the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Patients with Osteoporosis: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial |
title_fullStr | Cortical Trajectory Fixation Versus Traditional Pedicle-Screw Fixation in the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Patients with Osteoporosis: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Cortical Trajectory Fixation Versus Traditional Pedicle-Screw Fixation in the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Patients with Osteoporosis: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial |
title_short | Cortical Trajectory Fixation Versus Traditional Pedicle-Screw Fixation in the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Patients with Osteoporosis: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial |
title_sort | cortical trajectory fixation versus traditional pedicle-screw fixation in the treatment of lumbar degenerative patients with osteoporosis: a prospective randomized controlled trial |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8882472/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35237030 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S349533 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dinghongtao corticaltrajectoryfixationversustraditionalpediclescrewfixationinthetreatmentoflumbardegenerativepatientswithosteoporosisaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial AT haiyong corticaltrajectoryfixationversustraditionalpediclescrewfixationinthetreatmentoflumbardegenerativepatientswithosteoporosisaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial AT liuyuzeng corticaltrajectoryfixationversustraditionalpediclescrewfixationinthetreatmentoflumbardegenerativepatientswithosteoporosisaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial AT guanli corticaltrajectoryfixationversustraditionalpediclescrewfixationinthetreatmentoflumbardegenerativepatientswithosteoporosisaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial AT panaixing corticaltrajectoryfixationversustraditionalpediclescrewfixationinthetreatmentoflumbardegenerativepatientswithosteoporosisaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial AT zhangxinuo corticaltrajectoryfixationversustraditionalpediclescrewfixationinthetreatmentoflumbardegenerativepatientswithosteoporosisaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial AT hanbo corticaltrajectoryfixationversustraditionalpediclescrewfixationinthetreatmentoflumbardegenerativepatientswithosteoporosisaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial AT liyue corticaltrajectoryfixationversustraditionalpediclescrewfixationinthetreatmentoflumbardegenerativepatientswithosteoporosisaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial AT yinpeng corticaltrajectoryfixationversustraditionalpediclescrewfixationinthetreatmentoflumbardegenerativepatientswithosteoporosisaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial |