ObjectiveTo compare the effectiveness and imaging features between implanting single and double Cage into intervertebral body through unilateral transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). MethodsThe clinical data were collected and analyzed from 104 patients who underwent unilateral TLIF between January 2013 and October 2014, who were divided into 2 groups:single Cage was implanted into intervertebral body in 64 cases (76 segments) in traditional group, and double Cage was implanted into intervertebral body in 56 cases (70 segments) in reformative group. There was no significant difference in age, gender, bone mineral density, operation segments between 2 groups (P>0.05). The visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), and Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scores were used to evaluate the effectiveness; the area of intervertebral bone-graft, fusion rate, height of intervertebral space, and the number of Cage subsidence were measured by CT scan. ResultsAll the patients were followed up 12.85 months on average (range, 9-15 months). The VAS, ODI, and JOA scores were significantly improved at each time point after operation when compared with preoperative values (P<0.05), and no significant difference was found between 2 groups (P>0.05) except VAS and ODI at 12 months after operation (P<0.05). However, the area of intervertebral bone-graft in reformative group[(5.94±1.17) cm2] was significantly larger than that in traditional group[(4.81±0.97) cm2] at 7 days after operation (t=-6.365, P=0.000). At 3 and 12 months after operation, the fusion rate was respectively 84.2% and 92.1% in traditional group and was respectively 88.6% and 94.3% in reformative group. Although the height of intervertebral space were increased when compared with preoperative height, the incidence rates of Cages subsidence in traditional group were 44.74% and 47.37% respectively at 3 and 12 months after operation and were significantly higher those that in reformative group (11.43% and 14.29% respectively) (P<0.05). In addition, the height difference between affected side and normal side in traditional group was significantly larger than that in reformative group (P<0.05). ConclusionBoth single and double Cage implanted into the intervertebral body through unilateral TLIF have good effectiveness. However, double Cage implanted into intervertebral body may hold the height of intervertebral space, reduce the incident rate of Cage subsidence, and prevent sagittal imbalance.
ObjectiveTo investigate the classification and treatment strategies of symptomatic severe osteoporotic vertebral fracture and collapse. MethodsBetween August 2010 and January 2014, 42 patients with symptomatic severe osteoporotic vertebral fracture and collapse were treated, and the clinical data were retrospectively analyzed. According to clinical symptom and imaging materials, 23 cases were classified as type I (local pain, limitation of motion, no neurological symptom, and no obvious deformity), 12 cases as type II (slight neurological symptom and kyphotic Cobb angle ≤ 30°), and 7 cases as type III (severe neurological symptom and kyphotic Cobb angle <30°). In 23 type I patients, 17 underwent percutaneous vertebral augmentation, 6 underwent posterior pedicle screw fixation strengthened with bone cement combined with percutaneous vertebral augmentation. In 12 type II patients, they were treated with local spinal decompression and internal fixation strengthened with bone cement. In 7 type III patients, 5 underwent posterior osteotomy, and 2 underwent one stage posterior approach of vertebral resection and reconstruction. The visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), and local kyphotic Cobb angle were used to evaluate the neurological function. The complications were recorded. ResultsThe operation was successfully completed in all patients. Wound infection and ketoacidosis secondary to stress blood glucose rise occurred in 1 case of type III patients respectively, and were cured after corresponding treatment; primary healing of wound was obtained in the other patients. The patients were followed up from 6 to 36 months (mean, 11.6 months). The nerve function was improved in 17 cases, and micturition disability was observed in 2 cases. Asymptomatic cement leakage occurred in 13 cases (30.95%) (7 cases in type I, 4 cases in type II, and 2 cases in type III). No bone cement dislocation and internal fixation failure were found during follow-up. The VAS score, ODI, and the local kyphotic Cobb angle at 1 week and last follow-up were significantly improved when compared with preoperative ones (P<0.05), but no significant difference was found between at 1 week and last follow-up (P>0.05). ConclusionIn order to improve the effectiveness and reduce the risk and complications of operation, individualized strategies should be performed according to different types of severe osteoporotic vertebral fracture and collapse.