Suppr超能文献

独立椎间融合器与锚定椎间融合器用于颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术的比较:临床和影像学结果的对比分析

Standalone cage versus anchored cage for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a comparative analysis of clinical and radiological outcomes.

作者信息

Virkar Niharika, Bhilare Pramod, Hadgaonkar Shailesh, Kothari Ajay, Sancheti Parag, Aiyer Siddharth

机构信息

Department of Orhtopaedic, Sancheti institute for Orthopaedics and Rehabiliation, Pune, India.

出版信息

Int Orthop. 2022 Oct;46(10):2339-2345. doi: 10.1007/s00264-022-05493-z. Epub 2022 Jul 5.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The use of standalone cages (SAC) and anchored cages (AC) in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion surgery (ACDF) has shown advantage of reduced operative time and lower incidence of dysphagia. However, there is limited literature available comparing the clinical and radiological outcomes of SAC and AC.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective study for patients undergoing ACDF for cervical radiculopathy or myelopathy. Patient were classified based on the cage used into SAC group and the AC group. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the modified Japanese Orthopedic Association (mJOA) for myelopathy and Neck Disability Index (NDI) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for radiculopathy. Dysphagia was graded as per Bazaz score. Radiologically, global cervical lordosis, segmental lordosis, cage subsidence, and migration were assessed.

RESULTS

We analyzed 31 patients in each group with a minimum two year follow-up. The mean VAS improved from 7.9 to 4.56, mean NDI score improved from 27.6 to 19.8, and mean mJOA improved from 10.8 to 11.7 which were statistically significant (p < 0.05); however, no significant difference was noted between the SAC and AC groups. Mean global lordosis improved from 14.4 to 20.3° and mean segmental lordosis improved from 6 to 10.1° at six months and plateaued to 6.9° at final follow up without any significant difference between the groups. The subsidence was statistically more in 12.9% (4/31) in SAC than 6.4% (2/31) in AC.

CONCLUSION

AC showed of lower rates of subsidence while both SAC and AC had comparable clinical outcomes and radiological alignment outcomes.

摘要

目的

在颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术(ACDF)中使用独立椎间融合器(SAC)和锚定式椎间融合器(AC)已显示出手术时间缩短和吞咽困难发生率降低的优势。然而,比较SAC和AC的临床及影像学结果的文献有限。

方法

我们对因神经根型颈椎病或脊髓型颈椎病接受ACDF的患者进行了一项前瞻性研究。根据所使用的椎间融合器将患者分为SAC组和AC组。使用改良日本骨科协会(mJOA)评分评估脊髓型颈椎病的临床结果,使用颈部功能障碍指数(NDI)和视觉模拟量表(VAS)评估神经根型颈椎病的临床结果。根据巴扎兹评分对吞咽困难进行分级。在影像学方面,评估颈椎整体前凸、节段性前凸、椎间融合器下沉和移位情况。

结果

我们分析了每组31例患者,随访时间至少为两年。平均VAS评分从7.9改善至4.56,平均NDI评分从27.6改善至19.8,平均mJOA评分从10.8改善至11.7,差异具有统计学意义(p < 0.05);然而,SAC组和AC组之间未观察到显著差异。平均颈椎整体前凸在6个月时从14.4°改善至20.3°,平均节段性前凸从6°改善至10.1°,在最终随访时稳定在6.9°,两组之间无显著差异。SAC组的下沉发生率为12.9%(4/31),高于AC组的6.4%(2/31),差异具有统计学意义。

结论

AC的下沉率较低,而SAC和AC的临床结果及影像学对线结果相当。

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