《iData_经皮椎体成形术治疗胸腰部多椎体压缩性骨折的临床研究_杨祚璋》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《iData_经皮椎体成形术治疗胸腰部多椎体压缩性骨折的临床研究_杨祚璋（4页珍藏版）》请在金锄头文库上搜索。
1、临床应用研究8%8 |5杨祚璋1, 谢琳1, 孙宇庆2, 黄云超1, 许建波1, 孙洪瀑1, 刘鹏杰1, 吴中雄11.云南省肿瘤医院昆明医学院第三附属医院(骨科: 杨祚璋,许建波,孙洪瀑,刘鹏杰,吴中雄;化疗中心:谢琳;心胸外科:黄云超),云南昆明6501182.北京积水潭医院骨肿瘤科,北京100035Preliminary investigationonthetreatmentof patientswithmult-i segmentalspinal fracturesby percutaneousvertebroplastyYAN G Zuo-z hang1, XIE Lin1, SUN
2、Yu-qing2, H UAN G Yun-chao1, X U Jian-bo1, SUN H ong-pu1,LI U Peng-j ie1, WU Zhong-xiong11. Tumor H ospital of Yunnan Province(Third Aff iliated H ospital of Kunming Medical College), Kunming 650118, P.R.China2. Department of Orthopedic Oncology ,Beij ing Jishuitan H osp ital, Beij ing 100035, P. R.
3、China=K1 : 探讨经皮椎体成形术( PVP)治疗胸a腰部多椎体压缩性骨折的临床疗效及不良反应bZE:在数字减影血管造影(DSA)机引导下行PVP治疗50例患者,其中骨质疏松8例,转移瘤28例,多发性骨髓瘤12例,不能明确诊断2例b受累椎体数3 10个/例b椎体压缩程度10% 85%b术前a术后观察患者视觉模拟疼痛评分( VAS)的变化,观察脊柱稳定性的变化,止痛药使用情况,X线片测量病椎前缘高度a中线高度和后缘高度的变化bT:50例患者共199个椎体实施经皮椎体成形术,其中单侧132个椎体,双侧67个椎体b骨水泥填充剂量1 8 mL,其中胸椎平均312 mL,腰椎平均410 mLb手术
4、前后VAS 评分(术前8184? 1132 ,术后2183? 0198)比较差异有统计学意义, P 云南省教育厅科研基金(5Y04320)=YTe 杨祚璋,男,云南腾冲人,硕士,讲师,主治医师,主要从事骨与软组织肿瘤方面的临床与研究工作bTel: 86- 871- 6775232 E-mail: #301#?2008M2154 CHIN J CANCER PREV TREAT,February 2008,Vol.15 No.4=1oM 脊柱骨折/外科学;胸椎;腰椎;椎体成形术/方法KEYWORDS spinal fractures/ surgery; thoracic vertebrae; l
5、umbar vertebrae; percutaneous vertebroplasty/methods=ms| R738.1 =DSM A =cI| 1673- 5269(2008) 04- 0301- 048 |5nh?h,80 |v%.e5,MS= aM?a ?%h5$Z,8( percutaneous vertebroplasty, PVP)$5bPVP,hM# B7m,Vr, a 8 |.e,9 3b%h: 8,M?28,? ?12,?2bs83 10/b810% 85%,6178V70%,O8 b?#8b1.2 mZE|,?%h,1%5yb3h5/( digital subtrac
6、tionangiongraphy,DSA)ij/,O(,215 mm 130 mma%,3. 2mm130 mm,3C3)hM8,?8=h1|_b|U8-1/3)b,75%W/4,DSA/4L/48=s,_81P,3!i8=/4b Cx(g)aA(mL)/4(mL)13 B2 B1, /0HFw,Hij/Sj,w CV,OU|Z_,P CAtzb,O5,8bQmKV38b1.3 TF501998L8,1328,678b CA41 8 mL,(43. 2 mL,%(4410 mLbLPVP 3 7(m1)bCT?C C8=avvs(m2,m3)b10548?3 C_aWW#1P,5bkVCbPV
7、P24 herq 100%(8/8),0?9716%(41/ 42)bj$E.es( visual analoguepain scale, VAS)-8184 ? 1. 32,2. 83 ?0.98,1sd9il, P 28 |,KB8./8,y?ywH536B) |,.vh,/8 |18 |11b%Sv,yN |gnbo?EN%hhfB?Z,OQvb.dSmv7,O1BHW,YHbyN,) 8 |,v SD=Bm5bPVPYVSSj/_h C,r9jb?C8CM,9C8Ba,*sa,g8QC.e,PVP,zbi,8 |,n5%K8,7 |K8bBQm?V38,59F75iakmBb,M? ?
8、,?1Z?8,Vlz5rTb=ID 1 ,R,.dM#, |)J.SS,2004,12(20):1547- 1550. 2 $,z.,f.83 J. S,2006,26(6):421- 423. 3 Belkoff S M, Mathis JM, Erbe E M, et al. Biomechanicaleval-uation of a new bonecement for use invertebroplastyJ. Spine,2000, 25(9): 1061- 1064. 4 Molloy S, Mathis J M, Belkoff S M. The effect of verte
9、bralbody percentage fill on mechanical behavior during percutaneousvertebroplastyJ. Spine, 2003, 28(14): 1549- 1554. 5 Liebschner M A, Rosenberg W S, Keaveny T M. Effects ofbone cement volume anddistribution on vertebral stiffness aftervertebroplastyJ. Spine, 2001, 26(14):1547- 1554. 6 Cotton A, Dewatre F, Cortet B, et al. Percutaneous vertebro-plasty for osteolytic metastases and myeloma: effects of the per-centage of lesion filling and the leakage of methy1 methacrylateat clinical follow-
