前路颈椎椎间盘切除术融合治疗脊髓型颈椎病独立椎笼与传统椎笼钢板的比较:一项双镜研究

Abhishek Vijayan, P. Goswami, Sanu Vijayan, Arun Sathyababu, A. Peethambaran, Jyothish Laila Sivananda Panicker, Sunil Kumar Balakrishnan Sreemathy Amma
{"title":"前路颈椎椎间盘切除术融合治疗脊髓型颈椎病独立椎笼与传统椎笼钢板的比较:一项双镜研究","authors":"Abhishek Vijayan, P. Goswami, Sanu Vijayan, Arun Sathyababu, A. Peethambaran, Jyothish Laila Sivananda Panicker, Sunil Kumar Balakrishnan Sreemathy Amma","doi":"10.21608/esj.2022.102741.1200","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Data: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is accepted as a standard surgical treatment for cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). The options for instrumentation in fusion include standalone cage (SC) and conventional cage and plate (CCP). However, there is no clear consensus regarding the superiority of the technique. Purpose: To compare the radiologic and clinical outcomes between SC and CCP in ACDF for the treatment of CSM. Study Design: Ambispective clinical case study. Patients and Methods: The patients who underwent ACDF for CSM using SC or CCP between January 2014 and December 2018 were included in the study. Forty-six patients out of 230 eligible patients were included in the study. Twenty-six patients underwent CCP, while 20 underwent SC. They were subjected to detailed neurologic and radiologic examination. Neurologic outcome was measured using the Nurick and mJOA scores and dysphagia using the Bazaz score. Fusion was assessed by the presence of bridging trabeculae and absence of movement between the spinous processes of the fused segments with lordosis by Cobbs’ angle. We also reported cage subsidence, adjacent segment degeneration (ASD), and implant complications. Results: Mean follow-up was for four years. The most common level operated was C5/C6. Neurologic status improved significantly in both groups following surgery. The rate of dysphagia was not different between the groups. Fusion was achieved in 92.3% of the CCP group and 90% of the SC group (p > 0.05). The rate of subsidence was higher in the SC group (p = .026). ASD changes were present in 57% of the CCP group and 80% of the SC group at final follow-up but were insignificant. In both groups, improved DOI: 10.21608/ESJ.2022.102741.1200","PeriodicalId":11610,"journal":{"name":"Egyptian Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparison between Standalone Cage and Conventional Cage and Plate in Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion for the Treatment of Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: An Ambispective Study\",\"authors\":\"Abhishek Vijayan, P. Goswami, Sanu Vijayan, Arun Sathyababu, A. Peethambaran, Jyothish Laila Sivananda Panicker, Sunil Kumar Balakrishnan Sreemathy Amma\",\"doi\":\"10.21608/esj.2022.102741.1200\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background Data: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is accepted as a standard surgical treatment for cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). The options for instrumentation in fusion include standalone cage (SC) and conventional cage and plate (CCP). However, there is no clear consensus regarding the superiority of the technique. Purpose: To compare the radiologic and clinical outcomes between SC and CCP in ACDF for the treatment of CSM. Study Design: Ambispective clinical case study. Patients and Methods: The patients who underwent ACDF for CSM using SC or CCP between January 2014 and December 2018 were included in the study. Forty-six patients out of 230 eligible patients were included in the study. Twenty-six patients underwent CCP, while 20 underwent SC. They were subjected to detailed neurologic and radiologic examination. Neurologic outcome was measured using the Nurick and mJOA scores and dysphagia using the Bazaz score. Fusion was assessed by the presence of bridging trabeculae and absence of movement between the spinous processes of the fused segments with lordosis by Cobbs’ angle. We also reported cage subsidence, adjacent segment degeneration (ASD), and implant complications. Results: Mean follow-up was for four years. The most common level operated was C5/C6. Neurologic status improved significantly in both groups following surgery. The rate of dysphagia was not different between the groups. Fusion was achieved in 92.3% of the CCP group and 90% of the SC group (p > 0.05). The rate of subsidence was higher in the SC group (p = .026). ASD changes were present in 57% of the CCP group and 80% of the SC group at final follow-up but were insignificant. In both groups, improved DOI: 10.21608/ESJ.2022.102741.1200\",\"PeriodicalId\":11610,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Egyptian Spine Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Egyptian Spine Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21608/esj.2022.102741.1200\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Egyptian Spine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21608/esj.2022.102741.1200","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景资料:前路颈椎椎间盘切除术和融合术(ACDF)是公认的脊髓型颈椎病(CSM)的标准手术治疗。融合中可选择的仪器包括独立笼(SC)和常规笼和钢板(CCP)。然而,对于该技术的优越性并没有明确的共识。目的:比较ACDF中SC和CCP治疗CSM的放射学和临床结果。研究设计:双视角临床病例研究。患者和方法:2014年1月至2018年12月期间使用SC或CCP接受ACDF治疗CSM的患者纳入研究。230名符合条件的患者中有46名患者被纳入研究。26例患者行CCP, 20例行SC。他们接受了详细的神经学和放射学检查。神经系统预后采用Nurick和mJOA评分,吞咽困难采用Bazaz评分。通过桥接小梁的存在和融合节段棘突之间有无运动来评估融合,并通过Cobbs角进行前凸。我们还报道了保持器下沉、邻近节段退变(ASD)和种植体并发症。结果:平均随访4年。最常见的是C5/C6节段。两组患者术后神经功能均有明显改善。两组患者的吞咽困难发生率无显著差异。CCP组融合率为92.3%,SC组融合率为90% (p < 0.05)。SC组的沉降率更高(p = 0.026)。在最后随访时,57%的CCP组和80%的SC组存在ASD变化,但不显著。在两组中,改进了DOI: 10.21608/ESJ.2022.102741.1200
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
A Comparison between Standalone Cage and Conventional Cage and Plate in Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion for the Treatment of Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: An Ambispective Study
Background Data: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is accepted as a standard surgical treatment for cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). The options for instrumentation in fusion include standalone cage (SC) and conventional cage and plate (CCP). However, there is no clear consensus regarding the superiority of the technique. Purpose: To compare the radiologic and clinical outcomes between SC and CCP in ACDF for the treatment of CSM. Study Design: Ambispective clinical case study. Patients and Methods: The patients who underwent ACDF for CSM using SC or CCP between January 2014 and December 2018 were included in the study. Forty-six patients out of 230 eligible patients were included in the study. Twenty-six patients underwent CCP, while 20 underwent SC. They were subjected to detailed neurologic and radiologic examination. Neurologic outcome was measured using the Nurick and mJOA scores and dysphagia using the Bazaz score. Fusion was assessed by the presence of bridging trabeculae and absence of movement between the spinous processes of the fused segments with lordosis by Cobbs’ angle. We also reported cage subsidence, adjacent segment degeneration (ASD), and implant complications. Results: Mean follow-up was for four years. The most common level operated was C5/C6. Neurologic status improved significantly in both groups following surgery. The rate of dysphagia was not different between the groups. Fusion was achieved in 92.3% of the CCP group and 90% of the SC group (p > 0.05). The rate of subsidence was higher in the SC group (p = .026). ASD changes were present in 57% of the CCP group and 80% of the SC group at final follow-up but were insignificant. In both groups, improved DOI: 10.21608/ESJ.2022.102741.1200
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
3 weeks
期刊最新文献
Extremity Peripheral Nerve Injuries: Is There Any Role of Specialized Field Hospital in the Management of Low-Velocity Penetrating Peripheral Nerve Injuries? Short-Segment Posterior Fixation with Index Level Screws versus Long-Segment Posterior Fixation in Thoracolumbar Burst Fracture Awake Spine Surgery: Fad or Future? Pedicle Screw/Sublaminar Hook Fixation versus Pedicle Screw/Infraspinous Wire Fixation for Spondylolysis Repair: A Retrospective Comparative Study with MSCT Assessment Absence of the Musculocutaneous Nerve While Performing Nerve Transfer Surgery in a Patient with Brachial Plexus Injury, Rare Variant, and Review of Literature
×
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