Wu Penghuan, Yang Sifan, Wang Yu, Wu Qiang, Zhang Yingze
The School of Medicine, Nankai University, Tianjin, China.
Department of Orthopaedics, Shao Guan First People's Hospital, Affiliated Southern Medical University, Guangdong, China.
Front Surg. 2024 Jun 3;11:1392725. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2024.1392725. eCollection 2024.
This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of Zero-P and ROI-C devices applied to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgery of cervical degenerative disc disease (CDDD).
From January 2020 and December 2020, 56 patients with CDDD who underwent ACDF using Zero-P or ROI-C were included in this retrospective study. The outcomes included visual analogue scale (VAS) score, Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score, neck disability index (NDI) score, Cobb angle, dysphagia, and bone fusion rate. Dysphagia was assessed using the Bazaz grading system. The comparison of outcomes between the two groups was based on the 2-year follow-up time point, which was defined as the last follow-up visit.
The Zero-P group included 16 males and 14 females, with a mean age of 56.2 (range, 35-65) years. The ROI-C group included 11 males and 15 females, with a mean age of 57.4 (range, 36-67) years. There was no significant difference in gender and mean age between the two groups. There were no significant differences in VAS score, JOA score, NDI score, Cobb angle, dysphagia, and bone fusion rate between two groups at the last follow up visit. In the Zero-P group, the duration of surgeries involving C3-4 or C6-7 segments was significantly longer than those including C4-5 or C5-6 segments (135.0 ± 19.0 vs. 105.6 ± 17.5 min, < 0.05). In surgeries involving C3-4 or C6-7 segments, the operation time of ROI-C was significantly shorter than that of Zero-P (106.5 ± 19.5 vs.112.2 ± 20.5 min, < 0.05). There were no significant differences in the dysphagia or cage subsidence rates between the Zero-P and ROI-C groups ( > 0.05). The Cobb angle in the last follow-up visit in the Zero-P group (24.4 ± 4.5°) was significantly higher than that in the ROI-C group (18.1 ± 2.3°) ( < 0.05).
ACDF using ROI-C device showed an efficacy similar to the Zero-P device, as well as a shorter operation time for surgeries involving C3-4 or C6-7 segments. However, ROI-C could cause more loss of Cobb angle over time, which could lead to uncomfortable symptoms.
本研究旨在比较Zero-P和ROI-C装置应用于颈椎间盘退变疾病(CDDD)的颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术(ACDF)的临床效果。
2020年1月至2020年12月,本回顾性研究纳入了56例行ACDF手术且使用Zero-P或ROI-C的CDDD患者。观察指标包括视觉模拟评分(VAS)、日本骨科协会(JOA)评分、颈部功能障碍指数(NDI)评分、Cobb角、吞咽困难及骨融合率。吞咽困难采用Bazaz分级系统进行评估。两组观察指标的比较基于2年随访时间点,即最后一次随访。
Zero-P组包括16例男性和14例女性,平均年龄56.2岁(范围35 - 65岁)。ROI-C组包括11例男性和15例女性,平均年龄57.4岁(范围36 - 67岁)。两组间性别和平均年龄无显著差异。末次随访时,两组间VAS评分、JOA评分、NDI评分、Cobb角、吞咽困难及骨融合率均无显著差异。在Zero-P组中,涉及C3 - 4或C6 - 7节段的手术时间显著长于涉及C4 - 5或C5 - 6节段的手术时间(135.0 ± 19.0 vs. 105.6 ± 17.5分钟,P < 0.05)。在涉及C3 - 4或C6 - 7节段的手术中,ROI-C的手术时间显著短于Zero-P(106.5 ± 19.5 vs. 112.2 ± 20.5分钟,P < 0.05)。Zero-P组和ROI-C组之间吞咽困难或椎间融合器下沉率无显著差异(P > 0.05)。Zero-P组末次随访时的Cobb角(24.4 ± 4.5°)显著高于ROI-C组(18.1 ± 2.3°)(P < 0.05)。
使用ROI-C装置的ACDF手术显示出与Zero-P装置相似的疗效,且在涉及C3 - 4或C6 - 7节段的手术中手术时间更短。然而,随着时间推移,ROI-C可能导致更多的Cobb角丢失,从而可能引发不适症状。