MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1016/j.spinee.2024.11.002

Медицинская библиотека · The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society · 2024

Comparison between atlantoaxial and occipitocervical fusion: clinical implications of restoring the atlanto-occipital joint.

Lee Dong-Ho, Cho Sung Tan, Kang Hyun Wook, Park Sehan, Hwang Chang Ju, Cho Jae Hwan

СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Cervical myelopathy originating from high cervical pathology is typically managed through stabilization constructs, with the most common options being atlantoaxial fusion (AAF) and occipitocervical fusion (OCF). However, a well-established comparison of the 2 techniques in terms of clinical and radiological outcomes has not been made.

PURPOSE: Compare the surgical outcomes of AAF and OCF with a minimum follow-up period of 2 years.

STUDY

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 64 patients who underwent AAF (n=46) and OCF (n=18) to treat cervical myelopathy were retrospectively reviewed.

OUTCOME MEASURE: Neck pain Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Neck Disability Index (NDI), Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scores and postoperative complications were assessed as clinical outcomes. For the radiological outcomes, cervical sagittal parameters including C0-2 lordosis, C2-7 lordosis, C0-7 lordosis, neck range of motion (ROM), C2-7 sagittal vertical axis, C2 sagittal tilt, T1 slope, chin brow vertical angle and McGregor slope were evaluated.

METHODS

Continuous variables between AAF and OCF were compared using either the Mann-Whitney U test or an independent T-test. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was utilized to compare variables across preoperative, 1-month postoperative, and final follow-up periods.

RESULTS

Both the AAF and OCF groups did not show any significant differences in the total NDI score, VAS for neck pain, and JOA score when comparing preoperative and postoperative evaluations. However, at 1 month postoperatively (AAF group, 2.63; OCF group, 8.00: p=.006) and final follow-ups (AAF group, 3.08; OCF group, 7.82: p=.003), the OCF group showed a significant decline in the lifting function compared to the AAF group. Furthermore, the decrease in neck ROM was significantly more severe in the OCF group compared to the AAF group (AAF group, -6.4°; OCF group, -20.1°: p=.010).

CONCLUSIONS

The OCF has the potential to limit neck movement and impede lifting capabilities after the surgery. Hence, the AAF is advisable over the OCF, especially for younger individuals or those involved in strenuous physical work.

Для цитирования: Lee Dong-Ho, Cho Sung Tan, Kang Hyun Wook, Park Sehan, Hwang Chang Ju, Cho Jae Hwan. Comparison between atlantoaxial and occipitocervical fusion: clinical implications of restoring the atlanto-occipital joint.. The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society. 2024. DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2024.11.002.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

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.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.