中国人适应性腰椎微创通道:基于CT影像学测量下的解剖数据分析

doi:10.6040/j.issn.1671-7554.0.2022.1217

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的测量正常中国人群中腰椎相关影像学数据,为国人腰椎经皮置钉微创减压手术通道的设计提供解剖学数据。方法回顾性分析2018年至2020年行腰椎CT平扫,既往无腰椎相关疾病的门诊患者88例,其中男40例,女48例,18~38岁,平均(28.6±5.6)岁。于腰椎CT三维重建下测量微创减压手术通道相关参数包括:L1~L5关节突关节宽度、下位上关节突外缘到上位棘突根部的距离、上位椎弓根下缘与下位椎弓根上缘距离、上位椎体下缘至下位椎弓根上缘距离、上位椎弓根上缘至下一椎弓根下缘距离以及上位椎弓根下缘至下一椎弓根下缘距离等。结果关节突关节宽度在L4/5和L5/S1最大,为17.6 mm;下位上关节突外缘到上位棘突根部的距离在L5/S1为最大值24.9 mm;上位椎弓根下缘与下位椎弓根上缘距离在L2/3和L3/4为最大值19.5 mm;上位椎体下缘至下位椎弓根上缘距离在L2/3、L3/4为最大值11.1 mm;上位椎弓根上缘至下位椎弓根下缘距离在L1/2与L2/3为最大值48.5 mm;上位椎弓根下缘至下位椎弓根下缘之间距离在L1/2和L2/3为最大值34.0 mm。结论目前常用于腰椎微创减压手术的固定通道在各参数上缺乏统计学支持,可能会造成不必要的损伤,对中国青年腰椎解剖学参数的统计和研究对设计更加符合中国人的微创手术通道有重要意义。

关键词: 腰椎, 手术通道, 中国人, 影像学, 测量

Abstract: Objective To measure the imaging data of lumbar spine of Chinses, so as to provide anatomical data for the designing of a minimally invasive decompression surgery channel of lumbar vertebrae. Methods Imaging data of 88 consecutive Chinese without related diseases were evaluated, including 40 male and 48 female. Average age was(28.6±5.6)years. The related parameters measured included the width of facet joint from L1 to L5, distance from lateral edge of superior articular process of the inferior vertebra to the root of superior spinous process of the superior vertebra, distance between the lower edge of pedicle of the superior vertebra and the upper edge of pedicle of the inferior vertebra, distance between lower edge of the interverbal disc and the upper edge of pedicle of the inferior vertebra, distance between the upper edge of pedicle of the superior vertebra and the lower edge of pedicle of the inferior vertebra and distance between the lower edge of pedicle of the superior vertebra and the lower edge of pedicle of the inferior vertebra. Results The width of facet joint reached the maximum of 17.6 mm in L4/5 and L5/S1. The distance from the lateral edge of superior articular process of the inferior vertebra to the root of superior spinous process of the superior vertebra reached the maximum of 24.9 mm in L5/S1. The distance between the lower edge of the vertebra of the superior vertebra and the upper edge of pedicle of the inferior vertebra reached the maximum of 19.5 mm in L2/3 and L3/4. The distance between upper edge of the interverbal disc and the upper edge of pedicle of the inferior vertebra reached the maximum of 11.1 mm in L2/3 and L3/4. The distance between the upper edge of pedicle of the superior vertebra and the lower edge of pedicle of the inferior vertebra reached the maximum of 48.5 mm in L1/2 and L2/3. The distance between the lower edge of pedicle of the superior vertebra and the lower edge of pedicle of the inferior vertebra reached the maximum of 34.0 mm in L1/2 and L2/3. Conclusion The surgery channel for minimally invasive decompression of lumbar vertebrae for Chinses lacks statistical support in various parameters, which might cause unnecessary damage during surgery. The research of the anatomical parameters of the lumbar spine has great significance for the design of more suitable minimally invasive surgical channels for Chinese.

Key words: Lumbar, Surgical channel, Chinese, Imaging, Measurement

中图分类号:

R681.5

赵赓,买若鹏,赵景才,刘新宇. 中国人适应性腰椎微创通道:基于CT影像学测量下的解剖数据分析[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2023, 61(3): 90-96.

ZHAO Geng, MAI Ruopeng, ZHAO Jingcai, LIU Xinyu. Minimally invasive channel of the lumbar spine surgery for Chinese: anatomical data based on CT imaging measurements[J]. Journal of Shandong University (Health Sciences), 2023, 61(3): 90-96.

参考文献

[1] Foley KT, Holly LT, Schwender JD. Minimally invasive lumbar fusion[J]. Spine(Phila Pa 1976), 2003, 28(15 Suppl): S26-S35.
[2] Wong AP, Smith ZA, Stadler JA, et al. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion(MI-TLIF): surgical technique, long-term 4-year prospective outcomes, and complications compared with an open TLIF cohort[J]. Neurosurg Clin N Am, 2014, 25(2): 279-304.
[3] Cloward RB. The treatment of ruptured lumbar intervertebral discs by vertebral body fusion. I. Indications, operative technique, after care[J]. J Neurosurg, 1953, 10(2): 154-168.
[4] Harms J, Rolinger H. A one-stager procedure in operative treatment of spondylolistheses: dorsal traction-reposition and anterior fusion(authors transl)[J]. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb, 1982, 120(3): 343-347.
[5] Foley KT, Gupta SK. Percutaneous pedicle screw fixation of the lumbar spine: preliminary clinical results[J]. J Neurosurg, 2002, 97(Suppl 1): 7-12.
[6] Seng C, Siddiqui MA, Wong KP, et al. Five-year outcomes of minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a matched-pair comparison study[J]. Spine(Phila Pa 1976), 2013, 38(23): 2049-2055.
[7] Patel AA, Zfass-Mendez M, Lebwohl NH, et al. Minimally invasive versus open lumbar fusion: a comparison of blood loss, surgical complications, and hospital course[J]. Iowa Orthop J, 2015, 35: 130-134.
[8] Parker SL, Mendenhall SK, Shau DN, et al. Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis: comparative effectiveness and cost-utility analysis[J]. World Neurosurg, 2014, 82(1/2): 230-238.
[9] Xie L, Wu WJ, Liang Y. Comparison between minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and conventional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: an updated meta-analysis[J]. Chin Med J(Engl), 2016, 129(16): 1969-1986.
[10] Barbagallo GM, Yoder E, Dettori JR, et al. Percutaneous minimally invasive versus open spine surgery in the treatment of fractures of the thoracolumbar junction: a comparative effectiveness review[J]. Evid Based Spine Care J, 2012, 3(3): 43-49.
[11] 朱友余, 邓雪飞. 腰椎微创脊柱外科研究进展[J]. 局解手术学杂志, 2017, 26(1): 69-73. ZHU Youyu, DENG Xuefei. Research progress of minimally invasive surgery for lumbar spine[J]. Journal of Regional Anatomy and Operative Surgery, 2017, 26(1): 69-73.
[12] Hu W, Tang J, Wu X, et al. Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar fusion: a systematic review of complications[J]. Int Orthop, 2016, 40(9): 1883-1890.
[13] Tabaraee E, Ahn J, Bohl DD, et al. Quantification of multifidus atrophy and fatty infiltration following a minimally invasive microdiscectomy[J]. Int J Spine Surg, 2015, 9: 25. doi:10.14444/2025.
[14] 李士学, 张为, 孙亚澎, 等. 两种通道下MIS-TLIF治疗退变性腰椎管狭窄症的对比研究[J]. 中华骨科杂志, 2019, 39(20): 1275-1284. LI Shixue, ZHANG Wei, SUN Yapeng, et al. A comparison study of two channels during MIS-TLIF in degenerative lumbar spinal Stenosis treatment[J]. Chinese Journal of Orthopaedics, 2019, 39(20): 1275-1284.
[15] Krag MH, Beynnon BD, Pope MH, et al. Depth of insertion of transpedicular vertebral screws into human vertebrae: effect upon screw-vertebra interface strength[J]. J Spinal Disord, 1988, 1(4): 287-294.
[16] Datir SP, Mitra SR. Morphometric study of the thoracic vertebral pedicle in an Indian population[J]. Spine(Phila Pa 1976), 2004, 29(11): 1174-1181.
[17] 韩华, 项燕, 韩佳栩, 等. 不同国家人群胸椎椎弓根解剖结构的对比研究[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2018, 36(3): 252-258. HAN Hua, XIANG Yan, HAN Jiaxu, et al. Comparative research of anatomical structures of human thoracic pedicle in different countries[J]. Chinese Journal of Clinical Anatomy, 2018, 36(3): 252-258.
[18] Lv Y, Chen JY, Chen JC, et al. Three-year postoperative outcomes between MIS and conventional TLIF in1-segment lumbar disc herniation[J]. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol, 2017, 26(3): 168-176.
[19] 李高峰, 郑卫东, 李光淳, 等. 成人下胸椎、腰椎椎弓根的多排螺旋CT测量与临床意义[J]. 吉林医学, 2014, 35(10): 2131-2133.
[20] 汤优, 张为, 申勇, 等. 经Quadrant通道下微创TLIF与开放TLIF治疗腰椎退变性疾病疗效的对比研究[J]. 中国矫形外科杂志, 2012, 20(21): 1935-1938. TANG You, ZHANG Wei, SHEN Yong, et al. Retrospective clinical comparison of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion via Quadrant minimally invasive system versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease[J]. Orthopedic Journal of China, 2012, 20(21): 1935-1938.
[21] Hammad A, Wirries A, Ardeshiri A, et al. Open versus minimally invasive TLIF: literature review and meta-analysis[J]. J Orthop Surg Res, 2019, 14(1): 229.
[22] Xie Q, Zhang J, Lu F, et al. Minimally invasive versus open Transforaminal lumbar Interbody fusion in obese patients: a meta-analysis[J]. BMC Musculoskelet Disord, 2018, 19(1): 15.
[23] Ryu DS, Ahn SS, Kim KH, et al. Does minimally invasive fusion technique influence surgical outcomes in isthmic spondylolisthesis?[J]. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol, 2019, 28(1): 33-40.
[24] Peng P, Chen K, Chen H, et al. Comparison of O-arm navigation and microscope-assisted minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and conventional transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis[J]. J Orthop Translat, 2019, 20:107-112. doi:10.1016/j.jot.2019.10.001.
[25] 李振宙, 侯树勋. 腰椎退行性疾病微创外科治疗概况及展望[J]. 中国骨与关节杂志, 2022, 11(9): 641-647. LI Zhenzhou, HOU Shuxun. Overview and prospect of minimally invasive surgical treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases[J]. Chinese Journal of Bone and Joint, 2022, 11(9): 641-647.
[26] Roberti F, Arsenault KL. Minimally invasive tubular laminectomies in multilevel spine surgery-an illustrative case-based review of techniques and combined approaches[J]. J Spine Surg, 2021, 7(1): 83-99.

相关文章 15

[1]	中国医师协会骨科医师分会智能骨科学组,中华预防医学会脊柱疾病预防与控制专业委员会脊柱脊髓损伤疾病预防与控制学组. 人工智能脊柱退变影像学测量位点与标注专家共识(2025)[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2026, 64(2): 1-10.
[2]	机器人辅助经椎间孔腰椎椎体间融合术手术技术专家组. 机器人辅助经椎间孔腰椎椎体间融合术专家共识[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2026, 64(2): 11-21.
[3]	王建民,李晓峰,由志涛,董圣杰,赵宇驰,李占菊,邹德鑫,张剑锋,孙涛,杜伟. 基于可解释机器学习的后路腰椎椎体间融合术后慢性疼痛风险预测模型构建[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2026, 64(2): 78-88.
[4]	李鑫源,张心之,狄德润,原所茂,刘新宇,王连雷. Cobb角负重位三维自动成像与X线平片的对比分析[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2026, 64(2): 89-95.
[5]	胡冰涛,张文灿,王崇怡,林翔宇,王凯斌,冯运泽,刘郴,徐万龙,李乐,司海朋. 基于加速康复外科理念的单孔分体内镜微创技术治疗腰椎管狭窄症的临床效果分析[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2025, 63(3): 1-7.
[6]	徐荣坤,王连雷,原所茂,田永昊,刘新宇. 腰椎术中腹主动脉损伤1例并文献复习[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2023, 61(6): 121-124.
[7]	赵赓,王连雷,王宏卫,刘新宇. 不同负重方式对腰椎生物力学的影响[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2023, 61(6): 70-78.
[8]	赵迪,吕高荣,李国鹏,张云雪,王伟民,董晓玲,厉萍. 14条目和6条目弗莱堡正念调查量表在胃肠癌患者中的心理测量学评价[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2023, 61(6): 87-91.
[9]	王政,孙小刚,李超,王连雷,李冬来,原所茂,田永昊,刘新宇. 机器人辅助MIS-TLIF与徒手开放TLIF治疗腰椎退行性疾病的比较:2年随访[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2023, 61(3): 97-106.
[10]	郭永园,孙厚义,张元凯,颜廷宾,刘培来,贾玉华. 鸿鹄机器人辅助全膝关节置换的早期学习曲线[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2023, 61(3): 115-120.
[11]	朱超,孙超,刘绪昌,夏大伟,马春骋,丰荣杰. 3D打印椎间融合器在37例单节段腰椎手术中的应用[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2023, 61(3): 134-140.
[12]	冯世庆. 计算机视觉与腰椎退行性疾病[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2023, 61(3): 1-6.
[13]	林冰洁,王梅云. 深度学习在医学影像学中的研究现状及发展前景[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2023, 61(12): 21-29.
[14]	巩雨,高震,王虎清,杨晶雯,张桂莲,展淑琴,张茹,吴海琴. 4例继发性肥大性下橄榄核变性的临床及影像学特点[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2022, 60(5): 37-42.
[15]	张景良, 刘新宇, 原所茂, 王连雷. 髋关节疾病合并腰椎退行性疾病(髋腰综合征)误诊误治的原因分析[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2022, 60(5): 67-73.

多维度评价

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed