| 薛鹏举,姬文慧,宋永枝,宁飞飞,康培培.PKP与PVP治疗骨质疏松性胸腰椎压缩性骨折疗效对比[J].中国烧伤创疡杂志,2024,(6):460~463. |
| DOI： |
| 中文关键词: 经皮椎体成形术 骨质疏松 经皮椎体后凸成形术 胸腰椎压缩性骨折 疼痛 椎体功能 |
| 英文关键词:Percutaneous vertebroplasty Osteoporosis Percutaneous kyphoplasty Thoracolumbar compression fracture Pain Vertebral function |
| 基金项目: |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 308 |
| 全文下载次数: 719 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 【摘要】 目的 对比分析经皮椎体后凸成形术(PKP)与经皮椎体成形术(PVP)治疗骨质疏松性胸腰椎压缩性骨折的临床效果。方法 选取 2020年6月至2022年6月河南科技大学第二附属医院收治的 84 例骨质疏松性胸腰椎压缩性骨折患者作为研究对象，根据不同治疗方法将其分为 PKP 组 (42 例) 与 PVP 组 (42 例)，PKP组患者接受 PKP 治疗，PVP 组患者接受 PVP 治疗，对比观察两组患者围手术期相关指标、疼痛情况、椎体结构及功能。结果 PKP 组患者手术时间明显长于 PVP 组、医疗费用明显多于 PVP 组 (t = 2.837、8.176，P= 0.006?P<0.001)，骨水泥用量、住院时间与 PVP 组无明显差异 (t = 0.572、0.389，P = 0.569、0.698); 术后 7 d 及术后 3个月，PKP 组患者视觉模拟评分法 (VAS) 评分、改良 Oswestry 功能障碍指数 (ODI) 评分与PVP组无明显差异(术后7 d: t=1.449、0.761，P=0.151、0.449; 术后3 个月: t=0.407、1.537，P=0.685、0.128)，而椎体前缘高度明显高于 PVP 组、Cobb 角明显小于 PVP 组 (术后 7 d: t = 3.305、2.873，P= 0.001、0.005; 术后 3 个月: t = 3.054、4.367，P= 0.003、P<0.001)。结论 PKP 与 PVP 均能有效减轻骨质疏松性胸腰椎压缩性骨折患者疼痛程度，改善患者椎体功能，但 PVP 操作更简单、价格更低廉，PKP 更有利于纠正患者脊柱后凸畸形，恢复脊柱解剖结构。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| 【Abstract】 Objective To compare the clinical efficacy of percutaneous kyphoplasty ( PKP) and percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) in the treatment of osteoporotic thoracolumbar compression fracture. Methods 84 patients with osteoporotic thoracolumbar compression fracture, admitted to The Second Affiliated Hospital of Henan University of Science and Technology from June 2020 to June 2022, were enrolled as research subjects and were divided into PKP group (n = 42) and PVP group (n = 42) based on the different treatments they received. Patients in the PKP group were treated with PKP, whereas patients in the PVP group were treated with PVP. The perioperative indicators, pain degree, vertebral structure and function of patients were compared between the two groups. Results The operation time was significantly longer and the treatment cost was markedly higher in the PKP group compared with the PVP group (t = 2.837 and 8.176, P= 0.006, P<0.001). There was no significant difference in bone cement volume and the length of stay between the two groups (t = 0.572 and 0.389, P= 0.569 and 0.698). Respectively at seven days and three months after surgery, no significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of visual analogue scale (VAS) scores and modified Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores (7 days postoperatively: t = 1.449 and 0.761, P = 0.151 and 0.449; 3 months postoperatively: t = 0.407 and 1.537, P= 0.685 and 0.128). However, the anterior vertebral body height in the PKP group was significantly higher than that in the PVP group, and the Cobb angle in the PKP group was significantly smaller than that in the PVP group (7 days postoperatively: t = 3.305 and 2.873, P= 0.001 and 0.005; 3 months postoperatively: t = 3.054 and 4.367, P =0.003, P < 0.001). Conclusion Both PKP and PVP can effectively alleviate pain and improve vertebral function of patients with osteoporotic thoracolumbar compression fracture. However, PVP is much easier-to-operate and more cost-effective, while PKP is more beneficial in correcting patients’ spinal kyphosis deformity and restoring spinal anatomical structure. |
|
|
|
|
