European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2016
A prospective randomized trial comparing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus plate-only open-door laminoplasty for the treatment of spinal stenosis in degenerative diseases.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание 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.
Jiang Yun-Qi, Li Xi-Lei, Zhou Xiao-Gang, Bian Chong, Wang Han-Ming, Huang Jian-Ming, Dong Jian
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: For three or more involved cervical levels, there is a debate over which approach yields the best outcomes for the treatment of multilevel cervical degenerative disease. Our objective is to compare the radiological and clinical outcomes of two treatments for multilevel cervical degenerative disease: anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) versus plate-only open-door laminoplasty (laminoplasty).
METHODS: Patients were randomized on a 1:1 randomization schedule with 17 patients in the ACDF group and 17 patients in the laminoplasty group. Clinical outcomes were assessed by a visual analog scale (VAS), Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scores, operative time, blood loss, rates of complications, drainage volume, discharge days after surgery, and complications. The cervical spine curvature index (CI) and range of motion (ROM) were assessed with radiographs.
RESULTS: The mean VAS score, the mean JOA score, and the rate of complications did not differ significantly between groups. The laminoplasty group had greater blood loss, a longer operative time, more drainage volume, and a longer hospital stay than the ACDF group. There were no significant differences in the CI and ROM between the two groups at baseline and at each follow-up time point. ROM in both groups decreased significantly after surgery.
CONCLUSIONS: Both ACDF and laminoplasty are effective and safe treatments for multilevel cervical degenerative disease. ACDF causes fewer traumas than laminoplasty.
METHODS: Patients were randomized on a 1:1 randomization schedule with 17 patients in the ACDF group and 17 patients in the laminoplasty group. Clinical outcomes were assessed by a visual analog scale (VAS), Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scores, operative time, blood loss, rates of complications, drainage volume, discharge days after surgery, and complications. The cervical spine curvature index (CI) and range of motion (ROM) were assessed with radiographs.
RESULTS: The mean VAS score, the mean JOA score, and the rate of complications did not differ significantly between groups. The laminoplasty group had greater blood loss, a longer operative time, more drainage volume, and a longer hospital stay than the ACDF group. There were no significant differences in the CI and ROM between the two groups at baseline and at each follow-up time point. ROM in both groups decreased significantly after surgery.
CONCLUSIONS: Both ACDF and laminoplasty are effective and safe treatments for multilevel cervical degenerative disease. ACDF causes fewer traumas than laminoplasty.