{"title":"气动凿刀与标准髂骨采收方法之比较。","authors":"R W Duncan, R A McGuire, E F Meydrech","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Fifty consecutive patients undergoing posterior lumbar fusion by a single surgeon were prospectively randomized in a study designed to evaluate the efficacy of using a pneumatic oscillating gouge to obtain posterior outer table iliac crest bone graft versus the standard method of using osteotomes and gouges. Variables analyzed included graft harvesting time, blood loss, weight of graft obtained, and graft site morbidity. Mean graft harvesting time with the pneumatic gouge was 1 minute 44 seconds (range, 1 min 5 sec to 3 min 15 sec) compared with the standard method time of 4 minutes 4 seconds (range, 2 min 15 sec to 8 min 56 sec) (P = 0.0001). Blood loss was also less, with a mean of 25.4 cc for the pneumatic gouge compared with 65.2 cc using the standard method (P = 0.0001). There were no complications with the graft site in either group. We conclude that the pneumatic gouge is a viable alternative to standard bone graft harvesting techniques. Benefits include shorter operative time and decreased blood loss without an increased morbidity.</p>","PeriodicalId":19637,"journal":{"name":"Orthopaedic review","volume":"23 8","pages":"672-5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1994-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pneumatic gouge versus standard method for iliac crest harvesting.\",\"authors\":\"R W Duncan, R A McGuire, E F Meydrech\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Fifty consecutive patients undergoing posterior lumbar fusion by a single surgeon were prospectively randomized in a study designed to evaluate the efficacy of using a pneumatic oscillating gouge to obtain posterior outer table iliac crest bone graft versus the standard method of using osteotomes and gouges. Variables analyzed included graft harvesting time, blood loss, weight of graft obtained, and graft site morbidity. Mean graft harvesting time with the pneumatic gouge was 1 minute 44 seconds (range, 1 min 5 sec to 3 min 15 sec) compared with the standard method time of 4 minutes 4 seconds (range, 2 min 15 sec to 8 min 56 sec) (P = 0.0001). Blood loss was also less, with a mean of 25.4 cc for the pneumatic gouge compared with 65.2 cc using the standard method (P = 0.0001). There were no complications with the graft site in either group. We conclude that the pneumatic gouge is a viable alternative to standard bone graft harvesting techniques. Benefits include shorter operative time and decreased blood loss without an increased morbidity.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19637,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Orthopaedic review\",\"volume\":\"23 8\",\"pages\":\"672-5\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1994-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Orthopaedic review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthopaedic review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
在一项前瞻性随机研究中,连续50例患者接受了同一位外科医生的后路腰椎融合术,旨在评估使用气动振荡凿槽获得后外表髂骨移植物与使用截骨和凿槽的标准方法的疗效。分析的变量包括移植物收获时间、出血量、获得的移植物重量和移植物部位发病率。与标准方法的4分4秒(2分15秒至8分56秒)相比,气动凿取移植物的平均时间为1分44秒(范围,1分5秒至3分15秒)(P = 0.0001)。失血量也更少,气动凿法的平均失血量为25.4 cc,而标准方法为65.2 cc (P = 0.0001)。两组均无移植部位并发症发生。我们的结论是,气动凿是一个可行的替代标准骨移植采收技术。其优点包括缩短手术时间和减少出血量而不增加发病率。
Pneumatic gouge versus standard method for iliac crest harvesting.
Fifty consecutive patients undergoing posterior lumbar fusion by a single surgeon were prospectively randomized in a study designed to evaluate the efficacy of using a pneumatic oscillating gouge to obtain posterior outer table iliac crest bone graft versus the standard method of using osteotomes and gouges. Variables analyzed included graft harvesting time, blood loss, weight of graft obtained, and graft site morbidity. Mean graft harvesting time with the pneumatic gouge was 1 minute 44 seconds (range, 1 min 5 sec to 3 min 15 sec) compared with the standard method time of 4 minutes 4 seconds (range, 2 min 15 sec to 8 min 56 sec) (P = 0.0001). Blood loss was also less, with a mean of 25.4 cc for the pneumatic gouge compared with 65.2 cc using the standard method (P = 0.0001). There were no complications with the graft site in either group. We conclude that the pneumatic gouge is a viable alternative to standard bone graft harvesting techniques. Benefits include shorter operative time and decreased blood loss without an increased morbidity.