Suppr超能文献

与融合术相比,Discover人工椎间盘置换术后的颈椎运动学及影像学变化。

Cervical kinematics and radiological changes after Discover artificial disc replacement versus fusion.

作者信息

Hou Yang, Liu Yang, Yuan Wen, Wang Xinwei, Chen Huajiang, Yang Lili, Zhang Ying

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Changzheng Hospital, No. 415 Feng Yang Rd, Shanghai 200003, China.

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Changzheng Hospital, No. 415 Feng Yang Rd, Shanghai 200003, China.

出版信息

Spine J. 2014 Jun 1;14(6):867-77. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2013.07.432. Epub 2013 Sep 26.

Abstract

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The cervical disc arthroplasty has emerged as a promising alternative to the anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in patients with radiculopathy or myelopathy with disc degeneration disease. The advantages of this technique have been reported to preserve the cervical mobility and possibly reduce the adjacent segment degeneration. However, no studies have compared the clinical outcomes and radiological results in patients treated with Discover artificial disc replacement to those observed in matched group of patients that have undergone ACDF.

PURPOSE

We conducted this clinical study to compare the cervical kinematics and radiographic adjacent-level changes after Discover artificial disc replacement with ACDF.

STUDY DESIGN

Analysis and evaluation of data acquired in a comparative clinical study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

The number of patients in the Discover and ACDF group were 149 and 196, respectively.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The Neck Disability Index (NDI) and visual analog scale (VAS) pain score were evaluated. The range of movement (ROM) by the shell angle, the functional segment unit and global angles were measured, and the postoperative radiological changes at adjacents levels were observed.

METHODS

A total of 149 patients with symptomatic single or two-level cervical degenerative diseases received the Discover cervical artificial disc replacement from November 2008 to February 2010. During the same period, there were a total of 196 patients undergoing one or two-level ACDF. The average follow-up periods of the Discover disc group and ACDF group were 22.1 months and 22.5 months, respectively. Before surgery, patients were evaluated using static and dynamic cervical spine radiographs in addition to computerized tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. Static and dynamic cervical spine radiographs were obtained after surgery and then at 3- and 6-month follow-up. Then, the subsequent follow-up examinations were performed at every 6-month interval. The clinical results in terms of NDI and VAS scores, the parameters of cervical kinematics, postoperative radiological changes at adjacent levels, and complications in the two groups were statistically analyzed and compared. No funding was received for this study, and the authors report no potential conflict of interest-associated biases in the text.

RESULTS

Although the clinical improvements in terms of NDI and VAS scores were achieved in both the Discover and ACDF group, no significant difference was found between the two groups for both single- (VAS p=.13, NDI p=.49) and double-level surgeries (VAS p=.28, NDI p=.21). Significant differences of cervcial kinematics occurred between the Discover and the ACDF group for both the single- and double-level surgeries at the operative segments (p<.001). Except the upper adjacent levels for the single-level Discover and ACDF groups (p=.33), significant increases in adjacent segment motion were observed in the ACDF group compared with the minimal ROM changes in adjacent segment motion noted in the Discover group, and the differences between the two groups for both single and double-level procedures were statistically significant (p<.05). There were significant differences in the postoperative radiological changes at adjacent levels between the Discover and ACDF groups for the single-level surgery (p<.001, χ(2)=18.18) and the double-level surgery (p=.007, χ2=7.2). No significant difference of complications was found between the Discover and ACDF groups in both single (p=.25, χ2=1.32) and double-level cases (p=.4, χ2=0.69).

CONCLUSIONS

The adjacent segment ROM and the incidence of radiographic adjacent-level changes in patients undergoing ACDF were higher than those undergoing Discover artificial disc replacement. The cervical mobility was relatively well maintained in the Discover group compared with the ACDF group, and the Discover cervical disc arthroplasty can be an effective alternative to the fusion technique.

摘要

背景

颈椎间盘置换术已成为患有神经根病或脊髓病伴椎间盘退变疾病患者的一种有前景的替代前路颈椎间盘切除融合术(ACDF)的方法。据报道,该技术的优点是保留颈椎活动度并可能减少相邻节段退变。然而,尚无研究比较接受Discover人工椎间盘置换术治疗的患者与接受ACDF治疗的匹配患者组的临床结果和影像学结果。

目的

我们进行这项临床研究以比较Discover人工椎间盘置换术与ACDF术后的颈椎运动学和影像学相邻节段变化。

研究设计

对在一项比较临床研究中获取的数据进行分析和评估。

患者样本

Discover组和ACDF组的患者数量分别为149例和196例。

观察指标

评估颈部功能障碍指数(NDI)和视觉模拟量表(VAS)疼痛评分。测量壳角、功能节段单元和整体角度的活动范围(ROM),并观察相邻节段的术后影像学变化。

方法

2008年11月至2010年2月,共有149例有症状的单节段或双节段颈椎退行性疾病患者接受了Discover颈椎人工椎间盘置换术。同期,共有196例患者接受了单节段或双节段ACDF。Discover椎间盘组和ACDF组的平均随访期分别为22.1个月和22.5个月。术前,除了计算机断层扫描和磁共振成像外,还使用静态和动态颈椎X线片对患者进行评估。术后以及术后3个月和6个月随访时获取静态和动态颈椎X线片。随后,每隔6个月进行一次随访检查。对两组患者在NDI和VAS评分方面的临床结果、颈椎运动学参数、相邻节段的术后影像学变化以及并发症进行统计学分析和比较。本研究未获得资金支持,作者在文中报告无潜在利益冲突相关的偏倚。

结果

尽管Discover组和ACDF组在NDI和VAS评分方面均取得了临床改善,但单节段手术(VAS p = 0.13,NDI p = 0.49)和双节段手术(VAS p = 0.28,NDI p = 0.21)两组之间均未发现显著差异。在单节段和双节段手术的手术节段,Discover组和ACDF组之间的颈椎运动学存在显著差异(p < 0.001)。除了单节段Discover组和ACDF组的上相邻节段(p = 0.33)外,与Discover组相邻节段运动ROM变化极小相比,ACDF组相邻节段运动有显著增加,并且单节段和双节段手术两组之间的差异均具有统计学意义(p < 0.05)。单节段手术(p < 0.001,χ² = 18.18)和双节段手术(p = 0.007,χ² = 7.2)中,Discover组和ACDF组在相邻节段的术后影像学变化存在显著差异。单节段(p = 0.25,χ² = 1.32)和双节段病例(p = 0.4,χ² = 0.69)中,Discover组和ACDF组之间并发症无显著差异。

结论

接受ACDF治疗的患者相邻节段ROM和影像学相邻节段变化的发生率高于接受Discover人工椎间盘置换术的患者。与ACDF组相比,Discover组颈椎活动度得到了较好的维持,并且Discover颈椎间盘置换术可以成为融合技术的一种有效替代方法。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验