对比性分析两种后路内固定技术治疗胸腰椎爆裂性骨折的三维有限元分析与临床评价.pdfVIP

英文摘要 对比性研究两种后路内固定技术治疗胸腰椎爆裂性骨折的三维有限元分析及临床评价 T12-L1segments.And test and verify it ’s validity. 2.Both internal fixation approach can gain valid stability in reconstruction of L1 segment burst fuacture.. The posterior pedicle fixation with the Pillar implants fixation is superior than posterior pedicle fixation. Under the pressure of axial ,flexion , extension and lateral bending., the maximum stress, maximum displacement distance on T12 segment is significantly different , and the difference was statistically significant (p 0.05). Clinical case follow-up Two groups of operation time and blood loss were no statistical difference VAS score, ODI n index have obvious difference between preoperative and postoperative. VHI,RKA,VKA were statistically different between preoperative and postoperative. With pillar implant group had better radiological effect in maintaining vertebral height, correct kyphosis and Cobb Angle. Conclusion Both internal fixations can gain valid stability in construction of L 1 burst fracture with finite element analysis. The posterior pedicle fixation with the Pillar implants fixation is superior than posterior pedicle fixation. Under the pressure of axial ,flexion , extension and lateral bending., the maximum stress, maximum displacement distance on T12 segment is significantly different. With Pillar implantation approach is less pressure on screws than without Pillar implantation. In theory, the new procedure can be proved to reduce posterior screw failure risk, and make sure the safety of surgery. In short-term follow-up ,the clinical effect of implantation of Pillar is good, the Pillar can maintain the original height of vertebral body, avert vertebral body collapse.This n