| Title |
Clinical and radiological outcomes of unilateral versus bilateral instrumentation in two-level degenerative lumbar diseases
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Spine Journal, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00586-015-4031-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Guangfei Gu, Hailong Zhang, Guoxin Fan, Shisheng He, Xiaotong Meng, Xin Gu, Ning Yan, Xiaofei Guan |
| Abstract |
To compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of unilateral versus bilateral instrumented in two-level degenerative lumbar diseases after minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MITLIF). We conducted a prospective cohort study of 74 patients, who underwent unilateral or bilateral instrumented in two-level MITLIF for degenerative lumbar diseases from May 2010 to June 2012. There were 35 patients in group A undergoing unilateral pedicle screw fixation and 39 patients in group B undergoing bilateral pedicle screw fixation. Demographic data and clinical characteristics were compared between the two groups before surgery. Perioperative data, clinical and radiological outcomes of the two groups were also compared. The mean follow-up period was 32.1 ± 7.5 months for group A and 31.7 ± 8.0 months for group B (p > 0.05). Group A required a significantly shorter operating time, lower implant costs and less intraoperative blood loss and X-ray exposure time than group B (p < 0.01). However, no statistical differences were identified in the amount of transfusion and postoperative hospital stay between the two groups (p > 0.05). Clinical outcomes assessed by visual analog scores for back and leg pain (VAS-BP and VAS-LP, respectively) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) improved significantly in both groups after surgery, and no significant differences existed between the two groups at each postoperative follow-up (p > 0.05). There were significant differences within groups for Cobb angles of the whole lumbar [Cobb (a)] and the whole lumbar lordosis at each time point before and after surgery (p < 0.05). No significant differences existed between groups in relation to Cobb (a), Cobb angle of the fused segments, lumbar lordosis and the segmental lordosis at any time point before and after surgery (p > 0.05). There were no significant differences in fusion rate and total complication rate between the two groups (p > 0.05). Unilateral instrumentation after two-level MITLIF provided similar clinical and radiological outcomes to bilateral fixation in two-level degenerative lumbar diseases. Compared with bilateral fixation, unilateral fixation shortens operation time, reduces intra-operative blood loss and X-ray exposure time, and saves medical expenses with similar postoperative hospital stay and complication rate. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 44 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 18% |
| Other | 6 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Unknown | 14 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 45% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 5% |
| Engineering | 2 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Unknown | 15 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 May 2015.
All research outputs
#20,274,720
of 22,807,037 outputs
Outputs from European Spine Journal
#3,654
of 4,629 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#224,097
of 267,813 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Spine Journal
#62
of 142 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,807,037 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,629 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 267,813 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 142 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.