Multicentre comparative study of Z-shape elevating-pulling reduction and skull traction reduction for treatment of lower cervical locked facets.
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess the clinical efficacy and safety of Z-shape elevating-pulling reduction as compared to that of conventional skull traction in the treatment of lower cervical locked facet.
METHODS
Patients with cervical locked facet (n = 63) were retrospectively enrolled from four medical centers and divided into two groups according to the pre-operative reduction method used: Z-shape elevating-pulling reduction (Z-shape elevating group; n = 20) or traditional skull traction reduction (skull traction group; n = 43).
RESULTS
The success rates, efficacy of reduction, and safety were compared between the two groups. The success rates were significantly better in the Z-shape elevating group than in the skull traction group: 87.5% (7/8) vs. 35.3% (6/17) for unilateral locked facet reduction (P = 0.03) and 100% (12/12) vs. 69.2% (18/26) for bilateral locked facet reduction (P = 0.04). There was no obvious change in American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) grade after the reduction in either group. Combined surgery was necessary in 5% in the Z-shape elevating group vs. 27.9% in the skull traction group. Imaging showed that the segment angle and horizontal displacement were significantly improved after surgery in both groups, with no significant difference between the groups. Follow-up with radiography showed good recovery of the cervical spine sequence; all internal fixation sites were stable, with no loosening, prolapse, or breakage of internal fixators.
CONCLUSIONS
Halo vest-assisted Z-shape elevating-pulling reduction appears to be a simple, safe, and effective technique for pre-operative reduction of lower cervical locked facets.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
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.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.