Clinical Curative Effect Analysis Of TLIF And PILF In Treatment Of Lumbar Intervertebral Disc

Bankground:lumbar intervertebral disc is a kind of diseases that lumbar nucleus pulposus, fiber ring, cartilage endplate and ligaments around with age turn up degenerative changes, eventually leading to lumbocrural pain, lower limb radiation pain and other clinical symptoms and signs.In recent years, the incidence of lumbar diseases in the crowd as the growth of the age and gradually to increase, its diagnosis and treatment has become the focus of clinical research. Orthopedic surgeon at home and abroad in the treatment of lumbar disc prolapse according to their own understanding of the lumbar disc disease have adopted different surgical methods, and have the following fusion after lumbar disc excision:such as the posterolateral fusion(PLF), the Posterior vertebral fusion between (PLIF), Anterior vertebral fusion (ALIF), Transforminal lumbar interboby fusion (TILF) Such as the operation.But a series of problems has not been perfect such as how to improve the stability of the spine, increase the rate of spinal fusion of bone graft, reduce trauma to the patient, shorten the patient’s recovery time, improve the quality of life,and all kinds of surgical methods have advantages and disadvantages.Objective:This study collected hole between menses due to between the lumbar intervertebral lumbar intervertebral fusion (TLIF) and posterior vertebral fusion (PLIF) between the two kinds of operation method of patient data.Discusses the two kinds of operation method of treatment the curative effect of lumbar disc disease syndrome (advantages and disadvantages. Comparative analysis and research, provide the basis for the choice of the disease treatment.Methods:Retrospective analysis 80 cases of lumbar disc prolapse hospitalized patients in October 2012 to June 2014. Get a complete 80 cases with the visitor, divides into two groups by TLIF and PILF.40 cases in each group.TLIF group was given the treatment of TLIF;PLIF group was given the treatment of PLIF.Compare two groups of operation time, intraoperative blood loss, bed time, between vertebral fusion rate and convergence time, and so on and so forth.Results:Operative time and intraoperative blood loss in TLIF group were less than in PLIF group, the difference was statistically significant (P< 0.05). At the time of postoperative follow-up Oswestry disturbance index (ODI), VAS score in TLIF group is well than in PLIF group, the difference was statistically significant (P< 0.05).TLIF group total effective rate was 90.0%, PLIF group total effective rate was 87.5%.The difference was statistically significant (P< 0.05). After 3-6 months all patients postoperative were well displayed intervertebral fusion imaging examination. One case postoperative patients in TLIF group leads to screw rod fracture as a result of a car accident. One case, the lateral crus numbness, no incision infection and cerebrospinal fluid leakage.The group of PLIF postoperative patients with nail internal fixation, without loosening and fracture.Two cases of the lateral crus numbness, one case with cerebrospinal fluid leakage.In two cases, incision infection, and recovered well after use antibiotics and dressing frequently.Conclusions:Hole between the lumbar intervertebral fusion surgery (TLIF) has the advantages of shorter operation time, less intraoperative blood loss compared with posterior vertebral fusion between method (PLIF) and is worthy of popularization and application.