术中过度牵引对颈椎前路椎间盘切除和融合术后下沉的影响

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Clinical Spine Surgery Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-03 DOI:10.1097/BSD.0000000000001643
Akiro H Duey, Christopher Gonzalez, Timothy Hoang, Eric A Geng, Pierce J Ferriter, Ashley M Rosenberg, Bashar Zaidat, Ivan J Zapolsky, Jun S Kim, Samuel K Cho
{"title":"术中过度牵引对颈椎前路椎间盘切除和融合术后下沉的影响","authors":"Akiro H Duey, Christopher Gonzalez, Timothy Hoang, Eric A Geng, Pierce J Ferriter, Ashley M Rosenberg, Bashar Zaidat, Ivan J Zapolsky, Jun S Kim, Samuel K Cho","doi":"10.1097/BSD.0000000000001643","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective cohort.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of overdistraction on interbody cage subsidence.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Vertebral overdistraction due to the use of large intervertebral cage sizes may increase the risk of postoperative subsidence.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients who underwent anterior cervical discectomy and fusion between 2016 and 2021 were included. All measurements were performed using lateral cervical radiographs at 3 time points - preoperative, immediate postoperative, and final follow-up >6 months postoperatively. Anterior and posterior distraction were calculated by subtracting the preoperative disc height from the immediate postoperative disc height. Cage subsidence was calculated by subtracting the final follow-up postoperative disc height from the immediate postoperative disc height. Associations between anterior and posterior subsidence and distraction were determined using multivariable linear regression models. The analyses controlled for cage type, cervical level, sex, age, smoking status, and osteopenia.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixty-eight patients and 125 fused levels were included in the study. Of the 68 fusions, 22 were single-level fusions, 35 were 2-level, and 11 were 3-level. The median final follow-up interval was 368 days (range: 181-1257 d). Anterior disc space subsidence was positively associated with anterior distraction (beta = 0.23; 95% CI: 0.08, 0.38; P = 0.004), and posterior disc space subsidence was positively associated with posterior distraction (beta = 0.29; 95% CI: 0.13, 0.45; P < 0.001). No significant associations between anterior distraction and posterior subsidence (beta = 0.07; 95% CI: -0.06, 0.20; P = 0.270) or posterior distraction and anterior subsidence (beta = 0.06; 95% CI: -0.14, 0.27; P = 0.541) were observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We found that overdistraction of the disc space was associated with increased postoperative subsidence after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Surgeons should consider choosing a smaller cage size to avoid overdistraction and minimize postoperative subsidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":10457,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Spine Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"E488-E493"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Effect of Intraoperative Overdistraction on Subsidence Following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.\",\"authors\":\"Akiro H Duey, Christopher Gonzalez, Timothy Hoang, Eric A Geng, Pierce J Ferriter, Ashley M Rosenberg, Bashar Zaidat, Ivan J Zapolsky, Jun S Kim, Samuel K Cho\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/BSD.0000000000001643\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective cohort.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of overdistraction on interbody cage subsidence.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Vertebral overdistraction due to the use of large intervertebral cage sizes may increase the risk of postoperative subsidence.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients who underwent anterior cervical discectomy and fusion between 2016 and 2021 were included. All measurements were performed using lateral cervical radiographs at 3 time points - preoperative, immediate postoperative, and final follow-up >6 months postoperatively. Anterior and posterior distraction were calculated by subtracting the preoperative disc height from the immediate postoperative disc height. Cage subsidence was calculated by subtracting the final follow-up postoperative disc height from the immediate postoperative disc height. Associations between anterior and posterior subsidence and distraction were determined using multivariable linear regression models. The analyses controlled for cage type, cervical level, sex, age, smoking status, and osteopenia.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixty-eight patients and 125 fused levels were included in the study. Of the 68 fusions, 22 were single-level fusions, 35 were 2-level, and 11 were 3-level. The median final follow-up interval was 368 days (range: 181-1257 d). Anterior disc space subsidence was positively associated with anterior distraction (beta = 0.23; 95% CI: 0.08, 0.38; P = 0.004), and posterior disc space subsidence was positively associated with posterior distraction (beta = 0.29; 95% CI: 0.13, 0.45; P < 0.001). No significant associations between anterior distraction and posterior subsidence (beta = 0.07; 95% CI: -0.06, 0.20; P = 0.270) or posterior distraction and anterior subsidence (beta = 0.06; 95% CI: -0.14, 0.27; P = 0.541) were observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We found that overdistraction of the disc space was associated with increased postoperative subsidence after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Surgeons should consider choosing a smaller cage size to avoid overdistraction and minimize postoperative subsidence.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10457,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Spine Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"E488-E493\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Spine Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000001643\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/3 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Spine Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000001643","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究设计回顾性队列研究:本研究旨在评估过度牵引对椎间笼下沉的影响:背景:使用大尺寸椎间笼导致的椎体过度牵引可能会增加术后下沉的风险:方法:纳入2016年至2021年间接受颈椎椎间盘前路切除术和融合术的患者。所有测量均在术前、术后即刻和术后 6 个月以上的最终随访 3 个时间点使用颈椎侧位片进行。前方和后方牵张的计算方法是将术前的椎间盘高度减去术后即刻的椎间盘高度。通过用术后即刻的椎间盘高度减去术后最终随访的椎间盘高度来计算Cage下沉。使用多变量线性回归模型确定前后下沉与牵引力之间的关系。分析控制了椎体笼类型、颈椎级别、性别、年龄、吸烟状况和骨质疏松症:研究共纳入 68 名患者和 125 个融合水平。在 68 例融合术中,22 例为单水平融合术,35 例为 2 水平融合术,11 例为 3 水平融合术。最终随访间隔中位数为 368 天(范围:181-1257 天)。椎间盘前间隙下陷与前路牵引呈正相关(beta = 0.23; 95% CI: 0.08, 0.38; P = 0.004),椎间盘后间隙下陷与后路牵引呈正相关(beta = 0.29; 95% CI: 0.13, 0.45; P < 0.001)。前方牵引与后方下陷(beta = 0.07;95% CI:-0.06,0.20;P = 0.270)或后方牵引与前方下陷(beta = 0.06;95% CI:-0.14,0.27;P = 0.541)之间无明显关联:我们发现,椎间盘间隙过度牵拉与颈椎椎间盘前路切除术和融合术后下沉增加有关。外科医生应考虑选择较小尺寸的椎间盘笼,以避免过度牵引并尽量减少术后下沉。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The Effect of Intraoperative Overdistraction on Subsidence Following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.

Study design: Retrospective cohort.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of overdistraction on interbody cage subsidence.

Background: Vertebral overdistraction due to the use of large intervertebral cage sizes may increase the risk of postoperative subsidence.

Methods: Patients who underwent anterior cervical discectomy and fusion between 2016 and 2021 were included. All measurements were performed using lateral cervical radiographs at 3 time points - preoperative, immediate postoperative, and final follow-up >6 months postoperatively. Anterior and posterior distraction were calculated by subtracting the preoperative disc height from the immediate postoperative disc height. Cage subsidence was calculated by subtracting the final follow-up postoperative disc height from the immediate postoperative disc height. Associations between anterior and posterior subsidence and distraction were determined using multivariable linear regression models. The analyses controlled for cage type, cervical level, sex, age, smoking status, and osteopenia.

Results: Sixty-eight patients and 125 fused levels were included in the study. Of the 68 fusions, 22 were single-level fusions, 35 were 2-level, and 11 were 3-level. The median final follow-up interval was 368 days (range: 181-1257 d). Anterior disc space subsidence was positively associated with anterior distraction (beta = 0.23; 95% CI: 0.08, 0.38; P = 0.004), and posterior disc space subsidence was positively associated with posterior distraction (beta = 0.29; 95% CI: 0.13, 0.45; P < 0.001). No significant associations between anterior distraction and posterior subsidence (beta = 0.07; 95% CI: -0.06, 0.20; P = 0.270) or posterior distraction and anterior subsidence (beta = 0.06; 95% CI: -0.14, 0.27; P = 0.541) were observed.

Conclusions: We found that overdistraction of the disc space was associated with increased postoperative subsidence after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Surgeons should consider choosing a smaller cage size to avoid overdistraction and minimize postoperative subsidence.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Spine Surgery
Clinical Spine Surgery Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
5.30%
发文量
236
期刊介绍: Clinical Spine Surgery is the ideal journal for the busy practicing spine surgeon or trainee, as it is the only journal necessary to keep up to date with new clinical research and surgical techniques. Readers get to watch leaders in the field debate controversial topics in a new controversies section, and gain access to evidence-based reviews of important pathologies in the systematic reviews section. The journal features a surgical technique complete with a video, and a tips and tricks section that allows surgeons to review the important steps prior to a complex procedure. Clinical Spine Surgery provides readers with primary research studies, specifically level 1, 2 and 3 studies, ensuring that articles that may actually change a surgeon’s practice will be read and published. Each issue includes a brief article that will help a surgeon better understand the business of healthcare, as well as an article that will help a surgeon understand how to interpret increasingly complex research methodology. Clinical Spine Surgery is your single source for up-to-date, evidence-based recommendations for spine care.
期刊最新文献
ChatGPT as a Source of Patient Information for Lumbar Spinal Fusion and Laminectomy: A Comparative Analysis Against Google Web Search. Restoration of Spinopelvic Alignment After Reduction of High-grade Spondylolisthesis: Myth or Reality? A Systematic Review of the Literature and Meta-analysis. Timelines for Return to Different Sports Types After Eight Cervical Spine Fractures in Recreational and Elite Athletes: A Survey of the Association for Collaborative Spine Research. Feasibility of Using Intraoperative Neurophysiological Monitoring for Detecting Bone Layer of Cervical Spine Surgery. Lower Hounsfield Units at the Planned Lowest Instrumented Vertebra Is an Independent Risk Factor for Complications Following Adult Cervical Deformity Surgery.
×
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