The usage of ventral decompressive-stabilizing operations at patients with lumbar radicular compressive syndrome because of combination of spondylarthrosis and diskal hernia

Objective: to compare the surgical effectiveness of ventral and dorsal decompressive-stabilizing operations for treatment of lumbar radicular compressive syndrome because of combination of spondylarthrosis and diskal hernia. Material and methods. We performed 170 decompressive-stabilizing operations on lumbar spine in Kemerovo Regional Clinical Hospital (Kemerovo, RF) from September 2008 till March 2012. All patients were divided into two groups: the first group included 83 patients underwent dorsal approach for diskal hernia removal with following stabilization of vertebral movement segment with the usage of transpedicular fixation and interbody cages; the second group consists of 87 patients underwent decompression and vertebral stabilization via ventral (anterolateral retroperitoneal) approach with the usage of implants from porous titanium nickelide (Ni-Ti). Results. The good and excellent treatment outcomes were comparable in both groups. We analyzed the treatment outcomes at 51 (61,4%) patients in the first group and at 69 (83,1%) patients in the second group. The good and excellent treatment outcomes were 86,1% and 84,0% consequently. Conclusion. Thus the ventral decompressive-stabilizing operations with the usage of porous Ni-Ti are not only as effective as posterior decompressive-stabilizing operations for surgical treatment of compressive spondylarthrosis combined with diskal hernias, but also have some advantages due to less expensive.

грыжа диска, спондилоартроз, переднебоковой забрюшинный доступ, имплантаты из никелида-титана, diskal hernia, spondylarthrosis, anterolateral retroperitoneal approach, implants from titanium nickelide

1. Луцик А.А., Шмидт И.Р., Колотов Е.Б. Спондилоартроз. Новосибирск, 2003. С. 290.

2. Михайловский М.В. Этапы развития вертебральной хирургии: исторический экскурс / М.В. Михайловский // Хирургия позвоночника. - 2004. - № 1. - С. 10-24.

3. Продан А.И., Перепечай О.А., Колесниченко В.А. и др. Осложнения хирургического лечения поясничного спинального стеноза. // Хирургия позвоночника. - 2009. - № 1. - С. 31-37.

4. Радченко В.А., Скиданов А.Г., Карпинская Е.Д., Мощенко В.Л. Особенности строения позвоночного канала в поясничном отделе, обусловливающие развитие латерального дегенеративного артрогенного стеноза. // Ортопедия, травматология и протезирование. - 2008. - № 1. - С. 5-9.

5. Фомичев Н.Г., Гюнтер В.Э., Корнилов Н.В. и др. Новые технологии в хирургии позвоночника с использованием пористых имплантатов с памятью формы // - Томск, 2002. С. 128.

6. Agazzi S., Reverdin А., May D. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion with cages: an independent review of 71 cases // J. Neurosurg. Spine. - 1999. - vol. 91. - Р. 186-192.

7. Jackson R.P. // Clin. Orthop. 1992. Vol. 279. P. 110-121.

8. Brantigan J.W., Steffee A.D., Lewis M.L. et al. Lumbar interbody fusion using the Brantigan I/F cage for posterior lumbar interbody fusion and the variable pedicle screw placement system: two-yeas results from a Food and Administration investigational device exemption clinical trial // Spine. - 2000. - vol. 25. - Р. 1437-1446.

9. Matge G. Rationale for interbody fusion with threaded titanium cages at cervical and lumbar levels. Results on 357 cages / G. Matge, T.A. Leclercq // Acta Neurochir. (Wien). - 2000. - vol. 142. - Р. 425-433.

10. Niggemeyer O., Strauss J.M., Schulitz K.P. Comparison of surgical procedures for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: a meta-analysis of the literature from 1975 to 1995 // Eur. Spine J. 1997. Vol. 6. - Р. 423-429.

11. Thome C., Zevgaridis D., Leheta O. et al. Outcome after less-invasive decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomized comparison of unilateral laminotomy, bilateral laminotomy and laminectomy // J. Neurosurg. Spine. 2005. Vol. 3. P. 389-394.