World neurosurgery · 2018
Clinical and Radiologic Features of 3 Reconstructive Procedures for the Surgical Management of Patients with Bilevel Cervical Degenerative Disc Disease at a Minimum Follow-Up Period of 5 Years: A Comparative Study.
Сравнительное исследованиеОценочное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wang Kai-Feng, Duan Shuo, Zhu Zhen-Qi, Liu Hai-Ying, Liu Chen-Jun, Xu Shuai
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To assess the mid-long-term follow-up of the safety and efficacy of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), cervical artificial disc replacement (CADR) and hybrid surgery (HS) for bilevel cervical degenerative disc disease (cDDD).
METHODS: 77 patients who underwent ACDF, HS, and CADR were retrospectively reviewed. Clinical effects were evaluated based on Neck Disability Index (NDI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scores and the Odom criteria. Radiographic outcomes were evaluated, including cervical range of motion (ROM), ROM in the operative and adjacent segments, incidence of degeneration in the adjacent segments (ASD), and heterotopic ossification (HO).
RESULTS: NDI, VAS, and JOA scores significantly improved in all patients after surgery without significant differences between groups. The excellent-to-good ratio in the Odom scale was 28/30 for the HS group, 30/33 for the ACDF group, and 13/14 for the CADR group. No significant differences in clinical outcomes or complication were found between groups (P > 0.05). Furthermore, the HS and CADR groups had less decreased ROM in the cervical and operative segments and less compensatory ROM in adjacent segments (P < 0.05). By contrast, the ACDF group had decreased ROM in the cervical and operative segments and significantly increased ROM in adjacent segments (P < 0.05). Moreover, the incidence of ASD was higher in the ACDF group, but the difference was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). HO was found in 10 patients (33.3%) in the HS group and 5 patients (35.7%) in the CADR group.
CONCLUSION: HS was superior to ACDF with regard to equivalent clinical outcomes in the mid-long-term follow-up. Furthermore, HS was superior in the maintenance of ROM and had less impact on its adjacent segments. The efficacy of HS is similar to that of CADR.
METHODS: 77 patients who underwent ACDF, HS, and CADR were retrospectively reviewed. Clinical effects were evaluated based on Neck Disability Index (NDI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scores and the Odom criteria. Radiographic outcomes were evaluated, including cervical range of motion (ROM), ROM in the operative and adjacent segments, incidence of degeneration in the adjacent segments (ASD), and heterotopic ossification (HO).
RESULTS: NDI, VAS, and JOA scores significantly improved in all patients after surgery without significant differences between groups. The excellent-to-good ratio in the Odom scale was 28/30 for the HS group, 30/33 for the ACDF group, and 13/14 for the CADR group. No significant differences in clinical outcomes or complication were found between groups (P > 0.05). Furthermore, the HS and CADR groups had less decreased ROM in the cervical and operative segments and less compensatory ROM in adjacent segments (P < 0.05). By contrast, the ACDF group had decreased ROM in the cervical and operative segments and significantly increased ROM in adjacent segments (P < 0.05). Moreover, the incidence of ASD was higher in the ACDF group, but the difference was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). HO was found in 10 patients (33.3%) in the HS group and 5 patients (35.7%) in the CADR group.
CONCLUSION: HS was superior to ACDF with regard to equivalent clinical outcomes in the mid-long-term follow-up. Furthermore, HS was superior in the maintenance of ROM and had less impact on its adjacent segments. The efficacy of HS is similar to that of CADR.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AgedCervical VertebraeDisease ProgressionDiskectomyFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansIntervertebral Disc DegenerationMaleMiddle AgedNeck PainOssification, HeterotopicPain MeasurementPostoperative ComplicationsProstheses and ImplantsRange of Motion, ArticularRetrospective StudiesSeverity of Illness IndexSpinal FusionTotal Disc ReplacementTreatment OutcomeVisual Analog Scale