Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Guoxuexiang Street #37, Chengdu, 61004 Sichuan, People's Republic of China.
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013 Mar 20;95(6):555-61. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.K.00599.
BACKGROUND: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion is a standard treatment for symptomatic cervical disc disease, but pseudarthrosis and accelerated adjacent-level disc degeneration may develop. Cervical disc arthroplasty was developed to preserve the kinematics of the functional spinal unit. Trials comparing arthroplasty with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion have shown unclear benefits in terms of clinical results, neck motion at the operated level, adverse events, and the need for secondary surgical procedures. METHODS: Only randomized clinical trials were included in this meta-analysis, and the search strategy followed the requirements of the Cochrane Library Handbook. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality of each included study and extracted the relevant data. RESULTS: Twenty-seven randomized clinical trials were included; twelve studies were Level I and fifteen were Level II. The results of the meta-analysis indicated longer operative times, more blood loss, lower neck and arm pain scores reported on a visual analog scale, better neurological success, greater motion at the operated level, fewer secondary surgical procedures, and fewer such procedures that involved supplemental fixation or revision in the arthroplasty group compared with the anterior cervical discectomy and fusion group. These differences were significant (p < 0.05). The two groups had similar lengths of hospital stay, Neck Disability Index scores, and rates of adverse events, removals, and reoperations (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The meta-analysis revealed that anterior cervical discectomy and fusion was associated with shorter operative times and less blood loss compared with arthroplasty. Other outcomes after arthroplasty (length of hospital stay, clinical indices, range of motion at the operated level, adverse events, and secondary surgical procedures) were superior or equivalent to the outcomes after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.
背景:颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术是治疗有症状的颈椎间盘疾病的标准治疗方法,但可能会出现假关节和加速相邻节段椎间盘退变。颈椎间盘置换术的发展是为了保留功能脊柱单位的运动学。与颈椎前路椎间盘切除和融合相比,比较置换术的临床试验在临床结果、手术水平的颈部运动、不良事件和需要二次手术方面的益处并不明确。
方法:本荟萃分析仅纳入随机临床试验,且搜索策略遵循 Cochrane 图书馆手册的要求。两名审查员独立评估每项纳入研究的方法学质量并提取相关数据。
结果:共纳入 27 项随机临床试验;12 项研究为一级,15 项为二级。荟萃分析的结果表明,置换组的手术时间更长、失血量更多、视觉模拟量表报告的颈部和手臂疼痛评分更低、神经功能成功更高、手术水平运动更大、二次手术更少、且涉及补充固定或翻修的手术更少。这些差异具有统计学意义(p < 0.05)。两组的住院时间、颈部残疾指数评分和不良事件、去除和再手术的发生率相似(p > 0.05)。
结论:荟萃分析显示,与置换术相比,颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术的手术时间更短,失血量更少。置换术后的其他结果(住院时间、临床指标、手术水平的活动范围、不良事件和二次手术)优于或等同于颈椎前路椎间盘切除和融合术后的结果。
J Neurosurg Spine. 2017-5
Medicine (Baltimore). 2024-7-19
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2023-10-15
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011-6