Clinical neurology and neurosurgery · 2013
Surgical options in the treatment of subaxial cervical fractures: a retrospective cohort study.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Belirgen Muhittin, Dlouhy Brian J, Grossbach Andrew J, Torner James C, Hitchon Patrick W
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare clinical and radiographic parameters and outcomes in patients undergoing anterior vs. posterior surgery in unstable cervical subaxial spine fractures.
METHODS: We analyzed a group of 33 patients with reducible cervical subaxial fractures. Patients underwent anterior or posterior cervical instrumentation. Inpatient and outpatient records were retrospectively reviewed, and the multiple pre-operative and post-operative clinical and radiographic factors were recorded and analyzed.
RESULTS: Posterior cervical fixation was performed in 15 patients, and anterior cervical fixation in 18 patients. Operative time, blood loss, and number of levels instrumented were all significantly less in the anterior than the posterior cervical group. There was no difference in patient age, surgical complications, follow-up ASIA score, Rand SF-36 evaluation, or cost analysis between the two groups. Mean follow-up time was 11.8±7 months. All patients achieved bony fusion and good alignment at follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with reducible cervical subaxial dislocations, posterior cervical fixation entails a larger number of fused segments. Anterior surgery is associated with shorter operative times and less blood loss. Anterior instrumentation with interbody grafting can be the initial choice of treatment for stabilization for this subgroup of patients. Posterior surgery is indicated if radiographs after anterior instrumentation show failure.
METHODS: We analyzed a group of 33 patients with reducible cervical subaxial fractures. Patients underwent anterior or posterior cervical instrumentation. Inpatient and outpatient records were retrospectively reviewed, and the multiple pre-operative and post-operative clinical and radiographic factors were recorded and analyzed.
RESULTS: Posterior cervical fixation was performed in 15 patients, and anterior cervical fixation in 18 patients. Operative time, blood loss, and number of levels instrumented were all significantly less in the anterior than the posterior cervical group. There was no difference in patient age, surgical complications, follow-up ASIA score, Rand SF-36 evaluation, or cost analysis between the two groups. Mean follow-up time was 11.8±7 months. All patients achieved bony fusion and good alignment at follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with reducible cervical subaxial dislocations, posterior cervical fixation entails a larger number of fused segments. Anterior surgery is associated with shorter operative times and less blood loss. Anterior instrumentation with interbody grafting can be the initial choice of treatment for stabilization for this subgroup of patients. Posterior surgery is indicated if radiographs after anterior instrumentation show failure.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AccidentsAdolescentAdultAgedCervical VertebraeCohort StudiesCosts and Cost AnalysisExternal FixatorsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansInternal FixatorsMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedOrthopedic ProceduresPostoperative CarePreoperative CareRetrospective StudiesSpinal Cord InjuriesSpinal FracturesTomography, X-Ray ComputedTractionTreatment OutcomeYoung Adult