Suppr超能文献

比较颈椎间盘置换术与颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术的5年健康状态效用值。

Comparing the 5-Year Health State Utility Value of Cervical Disc Replacement and Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.

作者信息

McAnany Steven J, Merrill Robert K, Brochin Robert L, Overley Samuel C, Kim Jun S, Qureshi Sheeraz A

机构信息

Washington University Orthopedics-St Louis, MO, USA.

Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.

出版信息

Global Spine J. 2018 Feb;8(1):6-10. doi: 10.1177/2192568217721893. Epub 2017 Jul 28.

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN

Health utility analysis.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the health state utility (HSU) of 1- and 2-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and cervical disc replacement (CDR).

METHODS

Data from the Medtronic Prestige Cervical Disc investigational device exemption studies was used. Four groups were defined: 1-level ACDF, 1-level CDR, 2-level ACDF, and 2-level CDR. The 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) was collected at baseline, 12 months, 24 months, 36 months, and 60 months postoperatively and converted into utility scores for each time point. A repeated-measures 1-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to detect differences among groups. Tukey's method for multiple comparisons was used to determine which means within the groups were statistically different ( < .05).

RESULTS

We found a statistically significant difference in HSU among groups as determined by repeated-measures 1-way ANOVA ( = .0008). Post hoc analysis indicated that 1-level ACDF had a statistically lower utility score compared with 1- and 2-level CDR ( = .04 and = .02, respectively). Similarly, 2-level ACDF had lower utility values compared with 2-level CDR ( = .010). One-level ACDF utility values were not different from 2-level ACDF values ( = .55). Similarly, 1-level CDR and 2-level CDR did not have different utility values ( = .67).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, CDR had higher health state utility scores for 1- and 2-level procedures at every time point. This study indicates that CDR results in a higher postoperative health utility state than ACDF, and may therefore be an effective alternative to ACDF for treating degenerative conditions of the cervical spine.

摘要

研究设计

健康效用分析。

目的

确定1级和2级颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术(ACDF)及颈椎间盘置换术(CDR)的健康状态效用(HSU)。

方法

使用美敦力Prestige颈椎间盘研究性器械豁免研究的数据。定义了四组:1级ACDF、1级CDR、2级ACDF和2级CDR。在术后基线、12个月、24个月、36个月和60个月收集36项简短健康调查问卷(SF - 36),并将每个时间点的数据转换为效用得分。采用重复测量单因素方差分析(ANOVA)检测组间差异。使用Tukey多重比较法确定组内哪些均值具有统计学差异(P <.05)。

结果

通过重复测量单因素方差分析确定,组间HSU存在统计学显著差异(P =.0008)。事后分析表明,与1级和2级CDR相比,1级ACDF的效用得分在统计学上较低(分别为P =.04和P =.02)。同样,与2级CDR相比,2级ACDF的效用值较低(P =.010)。1级ACDF的效用值与2级ACDF的值无差异(P =.55)。同样,1级CDR和2级CDR的效用值也无差异(P =.67)。

结论

总体而言,在每个时间点,CDR在1级和2级手术中的健康状态效用得分更高。本研究表明,CDR术后的健康效用状态高于ACDF,因此可能是治疗颈椎退行性疾病的ACDF的有效替代方法。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4d0c/5810897/df1562ee9245/10.1177_2192568217721893-fig1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验