Suppr超能文献

比较前后入路治疗四节段脊髓型颈椎病。

Comparison of the anterior and posterior approach in treating four-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

机构信息

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Science and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100730, China.

Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University Hospital of Wales Cardiff, UK.

出版信息

Chin Med J (Engl). 2020 Dec 5;133(23):2816-2821. doi: 10.1097/CM9.0000000000001146.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The optimal surgical approach for four-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to compare clinical and radiological outcomes and complications between the anterior and posterior approaches for four-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

METHODS

A total of 19 patients underwent anterior decompression and fusion and 25 patients underwent posterior laminoplasty and instrumentation in this study. Perioperative information, intraoperative blood loss, clinical and radiological outcomes, and complications were recorded. Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score, 36-item short form survey (SF-36) score and cervical alignment were assessed.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in JOA scores between the anterior and posterior group preoperatively (11.6 ± 1.6 vs. 12.1 ± 1.5), immediately postoperatively (14.4 ± 1.1 vs. 13.8 ± 1.3), or at the last follow-up (14.6 ± 1.0 vs. 14.2 ± 1.1) (P > 0.05). The JOA scores significantly improved immediately postoperatively and at the last follow-up in both groups compared with their preoperative values. The recovery rate was significantly higher in the anterior group both immediately postoperatively and at the last follow-up. The SF-36 score was significantly higher in the anterior group at the last follow-up compared with the preoperative value (69.4 vs. 61.7). Imaging revealed that there was no significant difference in the Cobb angle at C2-C7 between the two groups preoperatively (-2.0° ± 7.3° vs. -1.4° ± 7.5°). The Cobb angle significantly improved immediately postoperatively (12.3° ± 4.2° vs. 9.2° ± 3.6°) and at the last follow-up (12.4° ± 3.5° vs. 9.0° ± 2.6°) in both groups compared with their preoperative values (P = 0.00). Three patients had temporary dysphagia in the anterior group and four patients had persistent axial symptoms in the posterior group.

CONCLUSIONS

Both the anterior and posterior approaches were effective in treating four-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy in terms of neurological clinical outcomes and radiological features. However, the JOA score recovery rate and SF-36 score in the anterior group were significantly higher. Persistent axial pain could be a major concern when undertaking the posterior approach.

摘要

背景

对于四节段颈椎病,最佳的手术入路仍存在争议。本研究旨在比较前路与后路治疗四节段颈椎病的临床和影像学结果及并发症。

方法

本研究共纳入 19 例行前路减压融合术和 25 例行后路椎板成形术和内固定术的患者。记录围手术期资料、术中出血量、临床和影像学结果以及并发症。采用日本骨科协会(JOA)评分、36 项简明健康状况调查问卷(SF-36)评分和颈椎曲度评估。

结果

术前前路组和后路组的 JOA 评分无显著差异(11.6±1.6 与 12.1±1.5),术后即刻(14.4±1.1 与 13.8±1.3)和末次随访(14.6±1.0 与 14.2±1.1)时亦无显著差异(均 P>0.05)。两组患者术后即刻和末次随访时的 JOA 评分均较术前显著改善。术后即刻和末次随访时,前路组的 JOA 评分恢复率均显著高于后路组。末次随访时,前路组的 SF-36 评分显著高于术前(69.4 与 61.7)。影像学检查显示,两组患者术前 C2-C7 的 Cobb 角无显著差异(-2.0°±7.3°与-1.4°±7.5°)。两组患者术后即刻(12.3°±4.2°与 9.2°±3.6°)和末次随访(12.4°±3.5°与 9.0°±2.6°)时的 Cobb 角均较术前显著改善(均 P=0.00)。前路组有 3 例患者出现暂时性吞咽困难,后路组有 4 例患者出现持续性轴性症状。

结论

前路和后路在治疗四节段颈椎病的神经临床结果和影像学特征方面均有效。然而,前路组的 JOA 评分恢复率和 SF-36 评分更高。后路手术可能会引起持续性轴性疼痛。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4668/10631575/d92bd5962724/cm9-133-2816-g001.jpg

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