• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

全椎间盘置换术与颈椎前路椎间融合术:利用脊柱探戈注册研究补充随机对照试验的证据

Total disc arthroplasty versus anterior cervical interbody fusion: use of the Spine Tango registry to supplement the evidence from randomized control trials.

作者信息

Staub Lukas P, Ryser Christoph, Röder Christoph, Mannion Anne F, Jarvik Jeffrey G, Aebi Max, Aghayev Emin

机构信息

Institute for Evaluative Research in Medicine, Stauffacherstrasse 78, 3014 Bern, Switzerland.

Spine Centre Division, Department of Teaching, Research and Development, Schulthess Klinik, Lengghalde 2, CH-8008 Zurich, Switzerland.

出版信息

Spine J. 2016 Feb;16(2):136-45. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.11.056. Epub 2015 Dec 7.

DOI:10.1016/j.spinee.2015.11.056
PMID:26674445
Abstract

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have compared patient outcomes of anterior (cervical) interbody fusion (AIF) with those of total disc arthroplasty (TDA). Because RCTs have known limitations with regard to their external validity, the comparative effectiveness of the two therapies in daily practice remains unknown.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare patient-reported outcomes after TDA versus AIF based on data from an international spine registry.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

A retrospective analysis of registry data was carried out.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Inclusion criteria were degenerative disc or disc herniation of the cervical spine treated by single-level TDA or AIF, no previous surgery, and a Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) completed at baseline and at least 3 months' follow-up. Overall, 987 patients were identified.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Neck and arm pain relief and COMI score improvement were the outcome measures.

METHODS

Three separate analyses were performed to compare TDA and AIF surgical outcomes: (1) mimicking an RCT setting, with admission criteria typical of those in published RCTs, a 1:1 matched analysis was carried out in 739 patients; (2) an analysis was performed on 248 patients outside the classic RCT spectrum, that is, with one or more typical RCT exclusion criteria; (3) a subgroup analysis of all patients with additional follow-up longer than 2 years (n=149).

RESULTS

Matching resulted in 190 pairs with an average follow-up of 17 months that had no residual significant differences for any patient characteristics. Small but statistically significant differences in outcome were observed in favor of TDA, which are potentially clinically relevant. Subgroup analyses of atypical patients and of patients with longer-term follow-up showed no significant differences in outcome between the treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this observational study were in accordance with those of the published RCTs, suggesting substantial pain reduction both after AIF and TDA, with slightly greater benefit after arthroplasty. The analysis of atypical patients suggested that, in patients outside the spectrum of clinical trials, both surgical interventions appeared to work to a similar extent to that shown for the cohort in the matched study. Also, in the longer-term perspective, both therapies resulted in similar benefits to the patients.

摘要

背景

多项随机对照试验(RCT)比较了前路(颈椎)椎间融合术(AIF)与全椎间盘置换术(TDA)的患者预后。由于RCT在外部有效性方面存在已知局限性,这两种疗法在日常实践中的相对有效性仍不明确。

目的

本研究旨在根据国际脊柱注册中心的数据,比较TDA与AIF术后患者报告的预后情况。

研究设计与设置

对注册中心数据进行回顾性分析。

患者样本

纳入标准为经单节段TDA或AIF治疗的颈椎间盘退变或椎间盘突出症患者,既往无手术史,且在基线及至少3个月随访时完成核心结局指标指数(COMI)评估。共纳入987例患者。

结局指标

颈部和手臂疼痛缓解情况以及COMI评分改善情况作为结局指标。

方法

进行了三项独立分析以比较TDA和AIF的手术结局:(1)模拟RCT设置,采用已发表RCT中的典型纳入标准,对739例患者进行1:1匹配分析;(2)对248例不符合经典RCT范围的患者进行分析,即具有一项或多项典型RCT排除标准的患者;(3)对所有额外随访时间超过2年的患者(n = 149)进行亚组分析。

结果

匹配后得到190对患者,平均随访17个月,任何患者特征均无残留显著差异。观察到有利于TDA的微小但具有统计学意义的结局差异,这可能具有临床相关性。对非典型患者和长期随访患者的亚组分析显示,两种治疗方法在结局上无显著差异。

结论

本观察性研究结果与已发表的RCT结果一致,表明AIF和TDA术后疼痛均显著减轻,置换术后获益略大。对非典型患者的分析表明,在临床试验范围之外的患者中,两种手术干预的效果似乎与匹配研究中的队列相似。此外,从长期来看,两种疗法对患者的益处相似。

相似文献

1
Total disc arthroplasty versus anterior cervical interbody fusion: use of the Spine Tango registry to supplement the evidence from randomized control trials.全椎间盘置换术与颈椎前路椎间融合术:利用脊柱探戈注册研究补充随机对照试验的证据
Spine J. 2016 Feb;16(2):136-45. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.11.056. Epub 2015 Dec 7.
2
A comparison of outcomes of cervical disc arthroplasty and fusion in everyday clinical practice: surgical and methodological aspects.在日常临床实践中比较颈椎间盘置换与融合的结果:手术和方法学方面。
Eur Spine J. 2010 Feb;19(2):297-306. doi: 10.1007/s00586-009-1194-3. Epub 2009 Oct 31.
3
Polyurethane on titanium unconstrained disc arthroplasty versus anterior discectomy and fusion for the treatment of cervical disc disease: a review of level I-II randomized clinical trials including clinical outcomes.钛制非约束性聚氨酯椎间盘置换术与前路椎间盘切除融合术治疗颈椎间盘疾病:一项包括临床结果的I-II级随机临床试验综述
Eur Spine J. 2015 Dec;24(12):2735-45. doi: 10.1007/s00586-015-4228-z. Epub 2015 Sep 12.
4
Clinical and radiographic analysis of an artificial cervical disc: 7-year follow-up from the Prestige prospective randomized controlled clinical trial: Clinical article.人工颈椎间盘的临床和影像学分析:Prestige 前瞻性随机对照临床试验 7 年随访:临床文章。
J Neurosurg Spine. 2014 Oct;21(4):516-28. doi: 10.3171/2014.6.SPINE13996. Epub 2014 Jul 18.
5
Prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of lumbar total disc replacement with the CHARITE artificial disc versus lumbar fusion: five-year follow-up.前瞻性、随机、多中心食品药品监督管理局关于CHARITE人工椎间盘与腰椎融合术治疗腰椎间盘置换的研究性器械豁免研究:五年随访
Spine J. 2009 May;9(5):374-86. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2008.08.007. Epub 2008 Sep 19.
6
Results of cervical arthroplasty compared with anterior discectomy and fusion: four-year clinical outcomes in a prospective, randomized controlled trial.颈椎关节置换术与前路椎间盘切除融合术的比较结果:一项前瞻性、随机对照临床试验的四年临床结果。
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011 Sep 21;93(18):1684-92. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.J.00476.
7
A RCT comparing 7-year clinical outcomes of one level symptomatic cervical disc disease (SCDD) following ProDisc-C total disc arthroplasty (TDA) versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).一项随机对照试验,比较了ProDisc-C全椎间盘置换术(TDA)与颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术(ACDF)治疗单节段症状性颈椎间盘疾病(SCDD)的7年临床疗效。
Eur Spine J. 2016 Jul;25(7):2263-70. doi: 10.1007/s00586-016-4431-6. Epub 2016 Feb 11.
8
Is the use of minimally invasive fusion technologies associated with improved outcomes after elective interbody lumbar fusion? Analysis of a nationwide prospective patient-reported outcomes registry.选择性腰椎椎间融合术后使用微创融合技术是否与更好的疗效相关?一项全国性前瞻性患者报告结局登记研究的分析。
Spine J. 2017 Jul;17(7):922-932. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2017.02.003. Epub 2017 Feb 27.
9
Comparison of BRYAN cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical decompression and fusion: clinical and radiographic results of a randomized, controlled, clinical trial.BRYAN人工颈椎间盘置换术与颈椎前路减压融合术的比较:一项随机对照临床试验的临床和影像学结果
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009 Jan 15;34(2):101-7. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31818ee263.
10
The Effect of Workers' Compensation Status on Outcomes of Cervical Disc Arthroplasty: A Prospective, Comparative, Observational Study.工伤赔偿状况对颈椎间盘置换术预后的影响:一项前瞻性、比较性观察研究。
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016 Jan 20;98(2):93-9. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.O.00324.

引用本文的文献

1
The Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) comes of age: 18 years of efficient and effective patient-reported outcome measurement in the field of spinal disorders. Part 1. Development of the COMI, interpretation of scores, and use in research.核心结局指标指数(COMI)步入成年:脊柱疾病领域18年高效且有效的患者报告结局测量。第1部分。COMI的发展、分数解读及在研究中的应用。
Eur Spine J. 2025 May 21. doi: 10.1007/s00586-025-08835-8.
2
Real-world data and evidence in pain research: a qualitative systematic review of methods in current practice.疼痛研究中的真实世界数据与证据:对当前实践中方法的定性系统评价
Pain Rep. 2023 Feb 1;8(2):e1057. doi: 10.1097/PR9.0000000000001057. eCollection 2023 Mar-Apr.
3
Long-Term Clinical Results of Percutaneous Cervical Nucleoplasty for Cervical Radicular Pain: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
经皮颈椎间盘成形术治疗神经根型颈椎病的长期临床疗效:一项回顾性队列研究
J Pain Res. 2022 May 17;15:1433-1441. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S359512. eCollection 2022.
4
Effectiveness of an annular closure device in a "real-world" population: stratification of registry data using screening criteria from a randomized controlled trial.环形闭合装置在“真实世界”人群中的有效性:使用随机对照试验的筛查标准对登记数据进行分层
Med Devices (Auckl). 2018 Jun 7;11:193-200. doi: 10.2147/MDER.S167381. eCollection 2018.
5
National outcomes following single-level cervical disc arthroplasty versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.单节段颈椎间盘置换术与颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术的全国性疗效对比
J Spine Surg. 2017 Dec;3(4):641-649. doi: 10.21037/jss.2017.12.04.
6
The Oswestry Disability Index, confirmatory factor analysis in a sample of 35,263 verifies a one-factor structure but practicality issues remain.奥斯威斯利残疾指数在35263名样本中的验证性因素分析证实了单因素结构,但实用性问题依然存在。
Eur Spine J. 2017 Aug;26(8):2007-2013. doi: 10.1007/s00586-017-5179-3. Epub 2017 Jun 23.
7
Incidental durotomy in decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: incidence, risk factors and effect on outcomes in the Spine Tango registry.减压治疗腰椎管狭窄症时偶然发生的硬脊膜切开术:Spine Tango 注册研究中的发生率、危险因素及对结局的影响。
Eur Spine J. 2017 Oct;26(10):2483-2495. doi: 10.1007/s00586-017-5197-1. Epub 2017 Jun 20.
8
Editorial on "Long-term clinical outcomes of cervical disc arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial" by Sasso .关于萨索所著《颈椎间盘置换术的长期临床结果:一项前瞻性、随机、对照试验》的社论
J Spine Surg. 2016 Dec;2(4):353-356. doi: 10.21037/jss.2016.12.10.
9
The Norwegian Cervical Arthroplasty Trial (NORCAT): 2-year clinical outcome after single-level cervical arthroplasty versus fusion-a prospective, single-blinded, randomized, controlled multicenter study.挪威颈椎置换试验(NORCAT):单节段颈椎置换与融合术后2年临床结果——一项前瞻性、单盲、随机、对照多中心研究。
Eur Spine J. 2017 Apr;26(4):1225-1235. doi: 10.1007/s00586-016-4922-5. Epub 2016 Dec 23.
10
Is the duration of pre-operative conservative treatment associated with the clinical outcome following surgical decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis? A study based on the Spine Tango Registry.腰椎管狭窄症手术减压术后的临床结果与术前保守治疗的持续时间有关吗?一项基于脊柱探戈注册研究。
Eur Spine J. 2017 Feb;26(2):488-500. doi: 10.1007/s00586-016-4882-9. Epub 2016 Dec 15.