Ratnasamy Philip P, Gouzoulis Michael J, Jabbouri Sahir S, Varthi Arya G, Grauer Jonathan N
Department of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2025 Apr 15;50(8):548-554. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000005131. Epub 2024 Aug 27.
Retrospective cohort study.
To evaluate postoperative adverse events, readmissions, and 5-year survival to reoperation for 2-level cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) relative to 2-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).
CDA and ACDF are both treatment options for degenerative cervical spine pathology. Relative to ACDF, CDA is a relatively novel treatment option, and limited research exists comparing outcomes between 2-level CDA and 2-level ACDF.
Patients undergoing 2-level CDA or 2-level ACDF were isolated from the PearlDiver M165Ortho database. These 2 cohorts were matched 1:1 based on patient age, sex, and Elixhauser Comorbidity Index scores. The odds of 90-day postoperative adverse events were compared between the two groups by multivariable analysis. Overall cost-of-care for the first 90 days postoperatively and 5-year survival to cervical spine reoperation were then assessed.
Of the 2-level cases identified, only 3.9% had CDA, and the rest had ACDF. After matching, there were 4224 patients in each of the study groups. With controlling for patient age, sex, and Elixhauser Comorbidity Index on multivariable analysis, patients undergoing 2-level CDA had significantly lower odds of experiencing 90-day dysphagia [odds ratio (OR): 0.60, P < 0.0001 driving aggregated any adverse event (OR: 0.65, P < 0.0001)] and readmission (OR: 0.69, P = 0.0002). The median 90-day cost of care was greater for patients undergoing 2-level ACDF ($4776.00 vs . $3191.00, P < 0.0001). No significant difference in 5-year survival to cervical spine reoperation was identified ( P = 0.7).
Relative to patients undergoing 2-level ACDF, patients undergoing 2-level CDA were found to have significantly lower odds of 90-day readmissions and minor adverse events (dysphagia), while rates of major adverse events (pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, sepsis, etc .) were comparable between the groups. Further, patients undergoing CDA had lower cost of overall care, but no difference in 5-year survival to cervical spine reoperation. Thus, it may be appropriate to further consider CDA when 2-level surgery is pursued.
回顾性队列研究。
评估双节段颈椎间盘置换术(CDA)与双节段颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术(ACDF)相比的术后不良事件、再入院情况以及再次手术的5年生存率。
CDA和ACDF都是治疗退行性颈椎疾病的选择。相对于ACDF,CDA是一种相对较新的治疗选择,比较双节段CDA和双节段ACDF疗效的研究有限。
从PearlDiver M165Ortho数据库中筛选出接受双节段CDA或双节段ACDF的患者。根据患者年龄、性别和Elixhauser合并症指数评分,将这两组患者进行1:1匹配。通过多变量分析比较两组术后90天不良事件的发生率。然后评估术后前90天的总体护理费用以及颈椎再次手术的5年生存率。
在确定的双节段病例中,只有3.9%接受了CDA,其余接受了ACDF。匹配后,每个研究组有4224名患者。在多变量分析中控制患者年龄、性别和Elixhauser合并症指数后,接受双节段CDA的患者发生90天吞咽困难的几率显著降低[比值比(OR):0.60,P < 0.0001;引发任何不良事件的几率(OR):0.65,P < 0.0001]以及再入院几率(OR:0.69,P = 0.0002)。接受双节段ACDF的患者术后90天护理费用中位数更高(4776.00美元对3191.00美元,P < 0.0001)。颈椎再次手术的5年生存率未发现显著差异(P = 0.7)。
与接受双节段ACDF的患者相比,接受双节段CDA的患者术后90天再入院和轻微不良事件(吞咽困难)的几率显著降低,而两组间严重不良事件(肺栓塞、深静脉血栓形成、败血症等)的发生率相当。此外,接受CDA的患者总体护理费用较低,但颈椎再次手术的5年生存率无差异。因此,在进行双节段手术时,可能适合进一步考虑CDA。