Comparison of intra-operative skull fixation techniques on cervical sagittal parameters.

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Journal of neurosurgical sciences Pub Date : 2024-11-19 DOI:10.23736/S0390-5616.24.06255-6
Connor C Jacob, Ryan G Eaton, Andrew J Grossbach, Asad Akhter, Nathaniel Toop, Joshua Wang, Joravar Dhaliwal, Stephanus V Viljoen
{"title":"Comparison of intra-operative skull fixation techniques on cervical sagittal parameters.","authors":"Connor C Jacob, Ryan G Eaton, Andrew J Grossbach, Asad Akhter, Nathaniel Toop, Joshua Wang, Joravar Dhaliwal, Stephanus V Viljoen","doi":"10.23736/S0390-5616.24.06255-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is limited literature concerning the use of bi-vector traction to a Mayfield following posterior cervical fusion with respect to cervical alignment parameters. The objective of this study was to determine how variability of intra-operative fixation methods for posterior cervical fusion affects post-operative cervical sagittal alignment parameters.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>After institutional review board (IRB) approval, retrospective chart review of a total of 54 patients who underwent posterior cervical fusion from July 2017 to December 2019 was conducted. The patients were divided into two cohorts based on their intra-operative positioning, those who were affixed to a three-point fixation system, and those who were placed in bi-vector traction. Pre- and post-operative cervical alignment parameters were measured.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no difference in post-operative sagittal parameters between the two groups. Each group showed a statistically significant difference in T1-slope when comparing pre- and post-operative measurements.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In our study we did not find that any of our techniques including bi-vector traction, static Mayfield positioning, or dynamic Mayfield positioning were very effective in adding lordosis during posterior cervical fusion surgeries. Interestingly, we also found a statistically significant increase in T1 slope and resulting trend towards increased cervical SVA.</p>","PeriodicalId":16504,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neurosurgical sciences","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of neurosurgical sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S0390-5616.24.06255-6","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: There is limited literature concerning the use of bi-vector traction to a Mayfield following posterior cervical fusion with respect to cervical alignment parameters. The objective of this study was to determine how variability of intra-operative fixation methods for posterior cervical fusion affects post-operative cervical sagittal alignment parameters.

Methods: After institutional review board (IRB) approval, retrospective chart review of a total of 54 patients who underwent posterior cervical fusion from July 2017 to December 2019 was conducted. The patients were divided into two cohorts based on their intra-operative positioning, those who were affixed to a three-point fixation system, and those who were placed in bi-vector traction. Pre- and post-operative cervical alignment parameters were measured.

Results: There was no difference in post-operative sagittal parameters between the two groups. Each group showed a statistically significant difference in T1-slope when comparing pre- and post-operative measurements.

Conclusions: In our study we did not find that any of our techniques including bi-vector traction, static Mayfield positioning, or dynamic Mayfield positioning were very effective in adding lordosis during posterior cervical fusion surgeries. Interestingly, we also found a statistically significant increase in T1 slope and resulting trend towards increased cervical SVA.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
术中颅骨固定技术对颈椎矢状面参数的影响比较。
背景:关于颈椎后路融合术后对 Mayfield 使用双矢量牵引对颈椎对位参数的影响,相关文献十分有限。本研究旨在确定颈椎后路融合术术中固定方法的变化如何影响术后颈椎矢状位对齐参数:经机构审查委员会(IRB)批准后,对2017年7月至2019年12月期间接受颈椎后路融合术的共54名患者进行了回顾性病历审查。根据术中定位将患者分为两组,分别是三点固定系统固定患者和双矢量牵引患者。对术前和术后的颈椎排列参数进行了测量:结果:两组患者术后矢状面参数无差异。结果:两组患者术后矢状面参数无差异,术前和术后测量的T1-斜度差异有统计学意义:在我们的研究中,我们没有发现任何一种技术,包括双矢量牵引、静态梅菲尔德定位或动态梅菲尔德定位,在颈椎后路融合手术中对增加前凸非常有效。有趣的是,我们还发现 T1 斜度在统计学上有显著增加,从而导致颈椎 SVA 有增加的趋势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of neurosurgical sciences
Journal of neurosurgical sciences CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-SURGERY
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
5.30%
发文量
202
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Neurosurgical Sciences publishes scientific papers on neurosurgery and related subjects (electroencephalography, neurophysiology, neurochemistry, neuropathology, stereotaxy, neuroanatomy, neuroradiology, etc.). Manuscripts may be submitted in the form of ditorials, original articles, review articles, special articles, letters to the Editor and guidelines. The journal aims to provide its readers with papers of the highest quality and impact through a process of careful peer review and editorial work.
期刊最新文献
Comparison of intra-operative skull fixation techniques on cervical sagittal parameters. Normal pressure hydrocephalus treatment: is it time to rethink? Roxadustat protects oxidative stress and tissue injury in the brain induced by ischemic stroke via the HIF-1α/NRF2 axis. Follow-up neuroimaging after non-perimesencephalic, angiogram-negative subarachnoid hemorrhage. Tuberculum sellae meningiomas: surgical outcomes in 65 patients, review of the literature and proposal for an anatomical and radiological classification.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1