• Türkçe
    • English
  • English 
    • Türkçe
    • English
  • Login
View Item 
  •   DSpace@İSÜ
  • Araştırma Çıktıları | TR-Dizin | WoS | Scopus | PubMed | DergiPark
  • WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
  • View Item
  •   DSpace@İSÜ
  • Araştırma Çıktıları | TR-Dizin | WoS | Scopus | PubMed | DergiPark
  • WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Palliative posterior instrumentation versus corpectomy with cage reconstruction treatment for thoracolumbar pathological fracture

Thumbnail

View/Open

Tam Metin / Full Text (800.1Kb)

Date

2019

Author

Bayram, Serkan
Akgul, Turgut
Altan, Murat
Pehlivanoglu, Tuna
Kaya, Ozcan
Ozdemir, Mustafa Abdullah
Sar, Cuneyt

Metadata

Show full item record

Citation

Bayram, S., Akgul, T., Altan, M., Pehlivanoglu, T., Kaya, O., Ozdemir, M. A., & Sar, C. (2019). Palliative Posterior Instrumentation versus Corpectomy with Cage Reconstruction Treatment for Thoracolumbar Pathological Fracture. ASIAN SPINE JOURNAL, 13(2), 318–324. https://doi.org/10.31616/asj.2018.0153

Abstract

Study Design: Single-center, retrospective cohort study. Purpose: We aimed to evaluate and compare the clinical outcomes in patients who underwent palliative posterior instrumentation (PPI) versus those who underwent corpectomy with cage reconstruction (CCR) for thoracolumbar pathological fracture. Overview of Literature: The requirement for anterior support after corpectomy has been emphasized in the treatment of pathological fractures of the vertebrae. However, for patients with a relatively short life expectancy, anterior reconstruction may not be required and posterior instrumentation alone may provide adequate stabilization. Methods: A total of 43 patients with metastases of the thoracolumbar spine underwent surgery in the department of orthopaedic and traumatology of Istanbul University Faculty of Medicine from 2003 to 2016. Surgical outcomes were assessed on the basis of survival status, pre- and postoperative pain, complication rate, and operation time. Results: PPI was performed for 22 patients and CCR was performed for 21 patients. In the PPI group, the follow-up period of the five surviving patients was 32 months. The remaining 17 patients died with a mean survival duration of 12.3 months postoperatively. In the CCR group, the five surviving patients were followed up for an average of 14.1 months. The remaining 16 patients died with a mean survival duration of 18.7 months postoperatively. No statistically significant difference (p=0.812) was noted in the survival duration. The Visual Analog Scale scores of the patients were significantly reduced after both procedures, with no significant difference noted on the basis of the type of surgical intervention (p>0.05). The complication rate in the CCR group (33.3%) was higher compared with that in the PPI group (22.7%); however, this difference was not noted to be statistically significant (p=0.379). The average operation time in the PPI group (149 minutes) was significantly shorter (p=0.04) than that in the CCR group (192 minutes). Conclusions: The PPI technique can decompress the tumor for functional improvement and can stabilize the spinal structure to provide pain relief.

Source

Asian Spine Journal

Volume

13

Issue

2

URI

https://doi.org/10.31616/asj.2018.0153
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12713/644

Collections

  • Makale Koleksiyonu [149]
  • PubMed İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu [922]
  • Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu [1424]
  • WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu [1485]



DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
Contact Us | Send Feedback
Theme by 
@mire NV
 

 




| Instruction | Guide | Contact |

DSpace@İSÜ

by OpenAIRE
Advanced Search

sherpa/romeo

Browse

All of DSpaceCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsTypeLanguageDepartmentCategoryPublisherAccess TypeInstitution AuthorThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsTypeLanguageDepartmentCategoryPublisherAccess TypeInstitution Author

My Account

LoginRegister

Statistics

View Google Analytics Statistics

DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
Contact Us | Send Feedback
Theme by 
@mire NV
 

 


|| Guide|| Instruction || Library || İstinye University || OAI-PMH ||

İstinye University, İstanbul, Turkey
If you find any errors in content, please contact:

Creative Commons License
İstinye University Institutional Repository is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 Unported License..

DSpace@İSÜ:


DSpace 6.2

tarafından İdeal DSpace hizmetleri çerçevesinde özelleştirilerek kurulmuştur.