Department of Orthopedics, Ordos Central Hospital, 23 Ekin Hollow West Street, Ordos, 017000, China.
Department of Critical Care Medicine, Ordos Central Hospital, 23 Ekin Hollow West Street, Ordos, 017000, China.
J Orthop Surg Res. 2024 Mar 7;19(1):172. doi: 10.1186/s13018-024-04661-8.
PURPOSE: The clinical outcomes of patients who received a cervical collar after anterior cervical decompression and fusion were evaluated by comparison with those of patients who did not receive a cervical collar. METHODS: All of the comparative studies published in the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Medline, Web of Science, and EMBASE databases as of 1 October 2023 were included. All outcomes were analysed using Review Manager 5.4. RESULTS: Four studies with a total of 406 patients were included, and three of the studies were randomized controlled trials. Meta-analysis of the short-form 36 results revealed that wearing a cervical collar after anterior cervical decompression and fusion was more beneficial (P < 0.05). However, it is important to note that when considering the Neck Disability Index at the final follow-up visit, not wearing a cervical collar was found to be more advantageous. There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative cervical range of motion, fusion rate, or neck disability index at 6 weeks postoperatively (all P > 0.05) between the cervical collar group and the no cervical collar group. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta-analysis revealed no significant differences in the 6-week postoperative cervical range of motion, fusion rate, or neck disability index between the cervical collar group and the no cervical collar group. However, compared to patients who did not wear a cervical collar, patients who did wear a cervical collar had better scores on the short form 36. Interestingly, at the final follow-up visit, the neck disability index scores were better in the no cervical collar group than in the cervical collar group. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42023466583.
目的:通过与未佩戴颈托患者的临床结果进行比较,评估接受颈椎前路减压融合术后佩戴颈托患者的临床结果。
方法:检索 2023 年 10 月 1 日前在 PubMed、Cochrane Library、Medline、Web of Science 和 EMBASE 数据库中发表的所有比较研究。使用 Review Manager 5.4 分析所有结局。
结果:纳入 4 项共 406 例患者的研究,其中 3 项为随机对照试验。对短期 36 结果的荟萃分析显示,颈椎前路减压融合术后佩戴颈托更有益(P<0.05)。然而,需要注意的是,在最终随访时考虑颈椎残障指数,不佩戴颈托更有利。两组间术后 6 周颈椎活动度、融合率或颈椎残障指数差异均无统计学意义(所有 P>0.05)。
结论:本系统评价和荟萃分析显示,颈椎前路减压融合术后佩戴颈托与不佩戴颈托患者在术后 6 周颈椎活动度、融合率或颈椎残障指数方面无显著差异。然而,与未佩戴颈托患者相比,佩戴颈托患者在短表 36 项上的评分更高。有趣的是,在最终随访时,不佩戴颈托患者的颈椎残障指数评分优于佩戴颈托患者。PROSPERO 注册号:CRD42023466583。
BMJ. 2018-2-22
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2018-3-15