Suppr超能文献

颈椎疾病行两节段前路颈椎间盘切除融合术中颅颈交界区融合位置的选择:一项回顾性研究

Is the fusion order of the cranial and caudal levels different in two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for cervical spondylopathy? A retrospective study.

机构信息

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, No. 37 Guo Xue Xiang, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China.

West China School of Nursing, Sichuan University, No. 37 Guo Xue Xiang, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China.

出版信息

J Orthop Surg Res. 2021 Aug 16;16(1):500. doi: 10.1186/s13018-021-02657-2.

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the fusion order between the cranial and caudal levels in two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with a zero-profile device in the treatment of cervical spondylopathy. Fusion is the standard used to judge the success of ACDF. However, the fusion order in two-level ACDF remains uncertain. The mechanical environment of different levels is different, which may affect the fusion rate or fusion order.

METHODS

From 2014 to January 2019, data of consecutive patients with two-level cervical disk degenerative disease who underwent ACDF were retrospectively reviewed. Radiological assessments were based on the range of motion of the fusion level, segment slope, and disk height, and complications were assessed. Data were analyzed using the paired t, Mann-Whitney U, χ, Fisher exact, and rank-sum tests and logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 118 patients were ultimately enrolled for analysis in the study. The respective fusion rates of the cranial and caudal levels were 26.27% and 10.17% (p < 0.05) at 3 months, 58.47% and 42.37% (p < 0.05) at 6 months, 86.44% and 82.20% (1 0.05) at 1 year, and 92.37% and 89.83% (p > 0.05) at the last follow-up. Multivariate logistic regression analysis indicated that the preoperative segmental slope and cranial level were independent risk factors for non-fusion. The adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) and subsidence rates were comparable between the two levels.

CONCLUSION

The caudal level had a slower fusion process than the cranial level. A higher preoperative segment slope was a risk factor for fusion. However, the subsidence and ASD rate were comparable between the caudal and cranial levels in the two-level ACDF.

摘要

研究设计

回顾性研究。

目的

本研究旨在比较零切迹装置治疗颈椎病时,颈椎前路减压融合术(ACDF)两个节段的融合顺序。融合是判断 ACDF 成功的标准。然而,在双节段 ACDF 中,融合顺序尚不确定。不同节段的力学环境不同,这可能会影响融合率或融合顺序。

方法

回顾性分析 2014 年 1 月至 2019 年连续接受双节段颈椎间盘退行性疾病 ACDF 治疗的患者数据。影像学评估基于融合节段活动度、节段斜率和椎间盘高度,评估并发症。采用配对 t 检验、Mann-Whitney U 检验、χ²检验、Fisher 确切概率检验、秩和检验和 logistic 回归分析进行数据分析。

结果

共纳入 118 例患者进行分析。术后 3 个月,颅侧和尾侧节段的融合率分别为 26.27%和 10.17%(p<0.05);术后 6 个月,颅侧和尾侧节段的融合率分别为 58.47%和 42.37%(p<0.05);术后 1 年,颅侧和尾侧节段的融合率分别为 86.44%和 82.20%(p>0.05);末次随访时,颅侧和尾侧节段的融合率分别为 92.37%和 89.83%(p>0.05)。多因素 logistic 回归分析表明,术前节段斜率和颅侧节段是不融合的独立危险因素。颅侧节段的相邻节段退变(ASD)和下沉发生率与尾侧节段相似。

结论

尾侧节段的融合过程比颅侧节段慢。术前节段斜率较高是融合的危险因素。然而,在双节段 ACDF 中,尾侧和颅侧节段的下沉和 ASD 发生率相似。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a906/8365930/d3ee63ef3738/13018_2021_2657_Fig1_HTML.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