Fan Ya-Yi, Duan Liang, Xu Hong-Hai, Liu Jun, Qi Jie, Gong Li-Qun
Orthopedic Hospital of Shaanxi People's Hospital, Xi'an 710068, Shannxi, China.
Zhongguo Gu Shang. 2021 Apr 25;34(4):354-9. doi: 10.12200/j.issn.1003-0034.2021.04.012.
To compare the clinical effects of different anterior surgical methods in treating single segment cervical disc herniation.
The clinical data of 46 patients with single-segment cervical disc herniation underwent surgical treatment from September 2013 to September 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into three groups according to different surgical methods. Among them, 23 patients in the anterior percutanousendomic cervical dissection (APECD) group, there were 8 males and 15 females, aged (47±3) years old, prominent segments were C of 1 case, C of 6 cases, and C of 16 cases;10 patients in cervical disc replacement(CDR) group, there were 4 males and 6 females, aged (46± 3) years old, prominent segments were C of 1 case, C of 6 cases, C of 3 cases;13 patients in transcervical anterior cervical disc fusion (ACDF) group, there were 8 males and 5 females, aged (53±2) years old, protruding segments were C of 1 case, C of 3 cases, C of 9 cases. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and length of hospitalization were compared among three groups;visual analogue scale (VAS) and Japanese Orthopaedic Association(JOA) score were used to evaluate the clinical efficacy.
All 46 patients were followed up for 12 to 24 (17.57±3.15)months. The follow-up time of APECD, CDR, ACDF groups were (17.30±3.25), (17.80±3.16), (17.85±2.88) months, and operation time were (95.48 ±13.85), (58.50±7.09), (76.00±15.72) min, respectively, there were no significant differences in follow-up time and operation time between two groups(>0.05). The intraoperative blood loss of APECD, CDR, ACDF groups were (80.00±20.22), (82.60±7.20), (121.54±18.75) ml, there was significant difference between CDR group and ACDF group (<0.05);and there was no significant difference between other groups (>0.05). The length of hospitalization was (6.95±1.50) days in APECD group, (6.60± 0.80) days in CDR group, (6.54±0.75) days in ACDF group, and there was no significant difference between two groups (> 0.05). At the latest follow up, VAS scores were decreasedfrom preoperative 6.78±0.83 to 2.57±0.65 in APECD group, decreased from 5.70±0.78 to 2.00±0.45 in CDR group, decreased from 6.77±0.42 to 1.38±0.49 in ACDF group. The JOA scores at final follow-up were increased from 8.91±0.97 to 13.04±1.40 in APECD group, and the improvement rate of (65±15)%;increased from 11.50±1.20 to 14.90±1.14 in CDR group, and the improvement rate of (76±19)%;increased from 8.54±0.93 to 14.00±0.96 in ACDF group, and the improvement rate of (74±8)%;there was significant difference in improvement rate between APECD group and CDR group (<0.05). At final follow-up, the activities of the responsible segment in APECD group and CDR group were well preserved and improved (<0.05). In the APECD group, the symptoms of two cases recurred during the mid-term follow-up (4 months and 6 months after surgery), one of which improved after strictly conservative treatment;the other one received ACDF surgery a second time, and the postoperative follow-up effect was satisfactory.
The three anterior surgical approaches can achieve satisfactory clinical results for the treatment of single-segment cervical disc herniation. However, the improvement rate of the CDR group and the activity of the retained responsibility segment are better than those of the other two groups. APECD surgery may have recurrence.
比较不同前路手术方法治疗单节段颈椎间盘突出症的临床效果。
回顾性分析2013年9月至2018年9月接受手术治疗的46例单节段颈椎间盘突出症患者的临床资料。根据不同手术方法将患者分为三组。其中,经皮内镜下颈椎前路减压术(APECD)组23例,男8例,女15例,年龄(47±3)岁,突出节段C₃ 1例、C₄ 6例、C₅ 16例;颈椎间盘置换术(CDR)组10例,男4例,女6例,年龄(46±3)岁,突出节段C₃ 1例、C₄ 6例、C₅ 3例;经颈前路颈椎间盘融合术(ACDF)组13例,男8例,女5例,年龄(53±2)岁,突出节段C₃ 1例、C₄ 3例、C₅ 9例。比较三组手术时间、术中出血量及住院时间;采用视觉模拟评分法(VAS)和日本骨科协会(JOA)评分评估临床疗效。
46例患者均获随访,随访时间12~24(17.57±3.15)个月。APECD组、CDR组、ACDF组随访时间分别为(17.30±3.25)、(17.80±3.16)、(17.85±2.88)个月,手术时间分别为(95.48±13.85)、(58.50±7.09)、(76.00±15.72)分钟,两组随访时间和手术时间比较差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。APECD组、CDR组、ACDF组术中出血量分别为(80.00±20.22)、(82.60±7.20)、(121.54±18.75)ml,CDR组与ACDF组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);其他组间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。APECD组住院时间为(6.95±1.50)天,CDR组为(6.60±0.80)天,ACDF组为(6.54±0.75)天,两组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。末次随访时,APECD组VAS评分由术前6.78±0.83降至2.57±0.65,CDR组由5.70±0.78降至2.00±0.45,ACDF组由6.77±0.42降至1.38±0.49。APECD组末次随访时JOA评分由8.91±0.97提高至13.04±1.40,改善率为(65±15)%;CDR组由11.50±1.20提高至14.90±1.14,改善率为(76±19)%;ACDF组由8.54±0.93提高至14.00±0.96,改善率为(74±8)%;APECD组与CDR组改善率比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。末次随访时,APECD组和CDR组责任节段活动度均得到良好保留且改善(P<0.05)。APECD组中期随访(术后4个月和6个月)有2例症状复发,其中1例经严格保守治疗后好转;另1例二次行ACDF手术,术后随访效果满意。
三种前路手术方法治疗单节段颈椎间盘突出症均可取得满意临床效果。然而,CDR组改善率及保留责任节段活动度优于其他两组。APECD手术可能出现复发。