Chen Xiao, Fan Yuanhe, Chen Jie, Tu Hongliang
Department of Orthopedics, The First People's Hospital of Neijiang, Neijiang, Sichuan, China.
J Orthop Surg Res. 2025 Jun 7;20(1):576. doi: 10.1186/s13018-025-05878-x.
The optimal surgical techniques for cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL) remain controversial due to insufficient high-level evidence. We investigated the following surgical approaches for cervical OPLL: anterior decompression and fusion (ADF), anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF), anterior controllable antedisplacement fusion (ACAF), anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), posterior decompression with instrumented fusion (PDIF), posterior decompression and fusion (PDF), laminectomy (LC), laminoplasty (LP), laminectomy with fusion (LF), and vertebral body sliding osteotomy (VBSO).
We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Ovid, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science from database inception through October 30, 2024. Our search identified both randomized and non-randomized controlled trials compar ing the following surgical interventions: ACDF, ADF, ACCF, ACAF, PDIF, PDF, LC, LP, LF, and VBSO. The extracted data were subjected to network meta-analysis. Our analysis included the following outcome measures: Patient demographic characteristics, Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores, JOA improvement rates, overall complication rates, excellent/good recovery rates, cervical lordosis characteristics, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores, Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores, surgical duration and intraoperative blood loss.
In our analysis of 50 studies involving 8705 patients, ACAF demonstrated the most significant improvements in JOA scores, cervical lordosis, VAS scores, and NDI scores. ADF showed the greatest increase in JOA improvement rate, while VBSO had the highest rate of excellent and good postoperative recovery. ACDF was associated with the fewest total complications and the shortest surgical duration. Finally, LC resulted in the lowest intraoperative blood loss.
This studies demonstrate that ACAF significantly improves JOA scores and cervical lordosis while reducing VAS and NDI scores. Additionally, it achieves higher postoperative JOA improvement rates and excellent/good recovery rates, with fewer total complications and reduced intraoperative blood loss. Based on these findings, ACAF can be one of the preferred options for clinicians treating cervical OPLL, but it requires high surgical experience and strict indication selection. Additionally, the surgical team need to develop the best surgical plan based on imaging features and patient functional needs.
由于缺乏足够的高级别证据,颈椎后纵韧带骨化症(OPLL)的最佳手术技术仍存在争议。我们研究了以下治疗颈椎OPLL的手术方法:前路减压融合术(ADF)、颈椎椎体次全切除融合术(ACCF)、前路可控前移融合术(ACAF)、颈椎间盘切除融合术(ACDF)、后路减压内固定融合术(PDIF)、后路减压融合术(PDF)、椎板切除术(LC)、椎板成形术(LP)、椎板切除融合术(LF)以及椎体滑移截骨术(VBSO)。
我们系统检索了从数据库建立至2024年10月30日的PubMed、Embase、Ovid、Cochrane图书馆和Web of Science。我们的检索确定了比较以下手术干预措施的随机和非随机对照试验:ACDF、ADF、ACCF、ACAF、PDIF、PDF、LC、LP、LF和VBSO。提取的数据进行网络荟萃分析。我们的分析包括以下结局指标:患者人口统计学特征、日本骨科协会(JOA)评分、JOA改善率、总体并发症发生率、优/良恢复率、颈椎前凸特征、视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分、颈部功能障碍指数(NDI)评分、手术时长和术中失血量。
在我们对涉及8705例患者的50项研究的分析中,ACAF在JOA评分、颈椎前凸、VAS评分和NDI评分方面显示出最显著的改善。ADF的JOA改善率增幅最大,而VBSO的术后优、良恢复率最高。ACDF的总并发症最少,手术时长最短。最后,LC的术中失血量最少。
本研究表明,ACAF可显著提高JOA评分和颈椎前凸,同时降低VAS和NDI评分。此外,它实现了更高的术后JOA改善率和优/良恢复率,总并发症更少,术中失血量减少。基于这些发现,ACAF可以成为临床医生治疗颈椎OPLL的首选方案之一,但它需要较高的手术经验和严格的适应症选择。此外,手术团队需要根据影像学特征和患者功能需求制定最佳手术方案。