Suppr超能文献

两种两平面前路颈椎间盘切除融合术式中,单独使用锁定型椎间融合器与前路钢板内固定系统的临床效果比较:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析。

Clinical outcomes of locking stand-alone cage versus anterior plate construct in two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

机构信息

Prince of Wales Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.

NeuroSpine Surgery Research Group (NSURG), Prince of Wales Private Hospital, Sydney, Australia.

出版信息

Eur Spine J. 2019 Jan;28(1):199-208. doi: 10.1007/s00586-018-5811-x. Epub 2018 Nov 2.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Two-level cervical degenerative disc disease (cDDD) can be effectively treated by anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) similarly to single-level cDDD. Traditionally an anterior plate construct (APC) approach has been utilized, but ACDF without plate with a locking stand-alone cage (LSC) approach has emerged as an alternative option. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcome of LSC and APC in contiguous two-level ACDF used to treat cDDD the current literature.

METHODS

Searches of seven electronic databases from inception to March 2018 were conducted following preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Extracted data were analysed using meta-analysis of proportions.

RESULTS

The nine observational studies that satisfied all criteria described a pooled cohort of 687 contiguous two-level cDDD cases managed by ACDF, with 302 (44%) and 385 (56%) managed by LSC and APC approaches, respectively. When compared with APC, LSC was associated with significantly increased subsidence likelihood (OR 2.75; p < 0.001), greater disc height (MD 0.60 mm; p = 0.04) and reduced cervical lordosis (MD - 2.52°; p = 0.04) at last follow-up. Operative outcomes, fusion rates, functional scores and postoperative dysphagia rates were comparable.

CONCLUSION

Although significant radiological differences were most evident, the comparability between LSC and APC in contiguous two-level ACDF with respect to all other clinical outcomes does not implicate one approach as clearly superior to the other in two-level ACDF. Larger, randomized studies with longer follow-up are required to delineate outcomes further to validate the findings of this study. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

摘要

背景

与单节段颈椎退行性疾病(cDDD)一样,两节段颈椎退行性疾病也可以通过前路颈椎间盘切除融合术(ACDF)有效治疗。传统上采用前路钢板结构(APC)方法,但无需钢板的锁定独立 cage(LSC)方法已成为一种替代方法。本研究的目的是比较连续两节段 ACDF 中 LSC 和 APC 治疗 cDDD 的临床效果。

方法

根据系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南,对七个电子数据库进行了从建立到 2018 年 3 月的检索。使用比例荟萃分析分析提取的数据。

结果

符合所有标准的 9 项观察性研究描述了一个由 ACDF 治疗的 687 例连续两节段 cDDD 病例的汇总队列,其中 302 例(44%)和 385 例(56%)分别采用 LSC 和 APC 方法治疗。与 APC 相比,LSC 与明显增加的下沉可能性相关(OR 2.75;p<0.001),末次随访时椎间盘高度增加(MD 0.60mm;p=0.04),颈椎前凸减少(MD-2.52°;p=0.04)。手术结果、融合率、功能评分和术后吞咽困难率相当。

结论

尽管最明显的影像学差异,但 LSC 和 APC 在连续两节段 ACDF 中的所有其他临床结果的可比性并不意味着在两节段 ACDF 中一种方法明显优于另一种方法。需要更大、随机、随访时间更长的研究来进一步阐明结果,以验证本研究的发现。这些幻灯片可以在电子补充材料中检索到。

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