Lee Sang-Bok, Cho Kyoung-Suok
Department of Neurosurgery, Uijeongbu St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Department of Neurosurgery, Uijeongbu St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2017 Nov;162:59-66. doi: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2017.08.001. Epub 2017 Aug 4.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and cervical total disc replacement (CTDR) as revision surgeries for symptomatic adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) in cases with previous ACDF. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 2010 and 2014, 41 patients with previous cervical fusion surgery underwent ACDF or CTDR for symptomatic ASD. Twenty-two patients in the ACDF group underwent 26 ACDFs, and 19 patients in the CTDR group underwent 25 arthroplasties for symptomatic ASD. Clinical outcomes were assessed by a visual analogue scale (VAS) for arm pain, the neck disability index (NDI) and Odom's criteria. Radiological evaluations were performed preoperatively and postoperatively to measure changes in the range of motion (ROM) of the cervical spine and adjacent segments and arthroplasty level. The radiological change of ASD was assessed in radiographs. RESULTS: Clinical outcomes as assessed with VAS for arm pain and Odom's criteria were significantly improved in both groups. The CTDR group showed better NDI improvement after surgery (P<0.05). The mean C2-7 ROM of the CTDR group revealed faster recovery than did that of the ACDF group and the preoperative values were recovered at the last follow-up visit. There was a significant difference in the ROM of the inferior adjacent segment between the ACDF and CTDR groups (P<0.05). The ACDF group had a higher incidence of radiological changes in the adjacent segment compared with the CTDR group (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The 2-year clinical results of CTDR for symptomatic ASD are safe and are comparable to the outcomes of ACDF in terms of arm pain relief and functional recovery. The CTDR group showed better NDI improvement, faster C2-7 ROM recovery, less of an increase in ROM in the inferior adjacent segment, and a lower incidence of adjacent segment degeneration than did the ACDF group.
目的:本研究旨在比较前路颈椎间盘切除融合术(ACDF)和颈椎全椎间盘置换术(CTDR)作为翻修手术治疗既往接受ACDF术后出现症状性相邻节段退变(ASD)的疗效和安全性。 患者与方法:2010年至2014年期间,41例既往接受颈椎融合手术的患者因症状性ASD接受了ACDF或CTDR手术。ACDF组的22例患者接受了26次ACDF手术,CTDR组的19例患者因症状性ASD接受了25次关节置换术。通过手臂疼痛视觉模拟量表(VAS)、颈部功能障碍指数(NDI)和奥多姆标准评估临床结局。术前和术后进行影像学评估,以测量颈椎和相邻节段以及关节置换节段的活动范围(ROM)变化。在X线片上评估ASD的影像学变化。 结果:两组患者手臂疼痛VAS评分及奥多姆标准评估的临床结局均有显著改善。CTDR组术后NDI改善情况更好(P<0.05)。CTDR组C2-7平均ROM恢复速度比ACDF组快,且在最后一次随访时恢复到术前值。ACDF组和CTDR组在下相邻节段的ROM存在显著差异(P<0.05)。与CTDR组相比,ACDF组相邻节段影像学改变的发生率更高(P<0.05)。 结论:CTDR治疗症状性ASD的2年临床结果是安全的,在缓解手臂疼痛和功能恢复方面与ACDF的结果相当。与ACDF组相比,CTDR组NDI改善更好,C2-7 ROM恢复更快,下相邻节段ROM增加更少,相邻节段退变发生率更低。
Neurosurg Focus. 2017-2
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009-5-15
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2023-3-14
J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2020-11