Lei Chen, Zhongyi Zhang, Ju Li, Peijian Tong, Taotao Xu
{"title":"相邻两节段颈椎脊髓病治疗方法的 Meta 分析:颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术与颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术的比较。","authors":"Lei Chen, Zhongyi Zhang, Ju Li, Peijian Tong, Taotao Xu","doi":"10.1177/21925682241297586","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the outcomes of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) vs Anterior Cervical Corpectomy and Fusion (ACCF) in treating adjacent two-segment cervical spondylotic myelopathy.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the clinical effectiveness and safety of ACDF compared to ACCF.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A literature search was conducted in Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PubMed, and Embase up to December 2023. Studies included were prospective and observational involving ACDF or ACCF for adjacent two-segment cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Data were analyzed using RevMan 5.4 software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ten studies (nine case-control and one RCT) were included. ACDF showed a shorter hospital stay (SMD = -0.29, 95% CI: -0.53 to -0.04, <i>P</i> < 0.05), better Cobb angle (SMD = 0.52, 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.74, <i>P</i> < 0.01), and improved T1S (SMD = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.80, <i>P</i> < 0.01). No significant differences were found in upper limb VAS, neck VAS, JOA scores, NDI, fusion rates, C2-7 SVA, total complications, blood loss, and operation time.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ACDF and ACCF are both effective for adjacent two-segment cervical spondylotic myelopathy, with ACDF offering advantages in hospitalization duration and cervical curvature restoration, making it the preferred surgical approach. Further research is needed to validate these findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":12680,"journal":{"name":"Global Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":"21925682241297586"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11559831/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Meta-Analysis of Treatment for Adjacent Two-Segment Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: A Comparison Between Anterior Cervical Corpectomy and Fusion and Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.\",\"authors\":\"Lei Chen, Zhongyi Zhang, Ju Li, Peijian Tong, Taotao Xu\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/21925682241297586\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the outcomes of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) vs Anterior Cervical Corpectomy and Fusion (ACCF) in treating adjacent two-segment cervical spondylotic myelopathy.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the clinical effectiveness and safety of ACDF compared to ACCF.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A literature search was conducted in Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PubMed, and Embase up to December 2023. Studies included were prospective and observational involving ACDF or ACCF for adjacent two-segment cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Data were analyzed using RevMan 5.4 software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ten studies (nine case-control and one RCT) were included. ACDF showed a shorter hospital stay (SMD = -0.29, 95% CI: -0.53 to -0.04, <i>P</i> < 0.05), better Cobb angle (SMD = 0.52, 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.74, <i>P</i> < 0.01), and improved T1S (SMD = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.80, <i>P</i> < 0.01). No significant differences were found in upper limb VAS, neck VAS, JOA scores, NDI, fusion rates, C2-7 SVA, total complications, blood loss, and operation time.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ACDF and ACCF are both effective for adjacent two-segment cervical spondylotic myelopathy, with ACDF offering advantages in hospitalization duration and cervical curvature restoration, making it the preferred surgical approach. Further research is needed to validate these findings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12680,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Spine Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"21925682241297586\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11559831/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Spine Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682241297586\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Spine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682241297586","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Meta-Analysis of Treatment for Adjacent Two-Segment Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: A Comparison Between Anterior Cervical Corpectomy and Fusion and Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.
Study design: A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the outcomes of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) vs Anterior Cervical Corpectomy and Fusion (ACCF) in treating adjacent two-segment cervical spondylotic myelopathy.
Objective: To assess the clinical effectiveness and safety of ACDF compared to ACCF.
Methods: A literature search was conducted in Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PubMed, and Embase up to December 2023. Studies included were prospective and observational involving ACDF or ACCF for adjacent two-segment cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Data were analyzed using RevMan 5.4 software.
Results: Ten studies (nine case-control and one RCT) were included. ACDF showed a shorter hospital stay (SMD = -0.29, 95% CI: -0.53 to -0.04, P < 0.05), better Cobb angle (SMD = 0.52, 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.74, P < 0.01), and improved T1S (SMD = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.80, P < 0.01). No significant differences were found in upper limb VAS, neck VAS, JOA scores, NDI, fusion rates, C2-7 SVA, total complications, blood loss, and operation time.
Conclusions: ACDF and ACCF are both effective for adjacent two-segment cervical spondylotic myelopathy, with ACDF offering advantages in hospitalization duration and cervical curvature restoration, making it the preferred surgical approach. Further research is needed to validate these findings.
期刊介绍:
Global Spine Journal (GSJ) is the official scientific publication of AOSpine. A peer-reviewed, open access journal, devoted to the study and treatment of spinal disorders, including diagnosis, operative and non-operative treatment options, surgical techniques, and emerging research and clinical developments.GSJ is indexed in PubMedCentral, SCOPUS, and Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI).