Feldborg Nielsen C, Annertz M, Persson L, Wingstrand H, Säveland H, Brandt L
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.
Eur Spine J. 1997;6(3):197-202. doi: 10.1007/BF01301436.
Long-term pain problems and residual restricted mobility were evaluated for patients sustaining acute distractive flexion injuries to the cervical spine. To assess which of two alternative surgical approaches gives better long-term outcomes, 58 patients were studied, 29 in each group. The results of posterior wire stabilization without fusion according to Brandt were contrasted with those of the Cloward technique. We found significantly more late pain problems and restricted neck mobility in the group treated with wiring without fusion than in those managed with anterior fusion. We conclude that this continuing pain may be due to residual mobility in the damaged degenerated non-fused motion segment, and that the difference between the two groups may reflect the difference in the quality and rate of fusion achieved by the two surgical approaches.
对颈椎急性牵张性屈曲损伤患者的长期疼痛问题和残留活动受限情况进行了评估。为了评估两种替代手术方法中哪种能带来更好的长期效果,对58例患者进行了研究,每组29例。将根据布兰特方法进行的后路钢丝固定不融合的结果与克洛德技术的结果进行了对比。我们发现,未融合钢丝固定治疗组的晚期疼痛问题和颈部活动受限明显多于前路融合治疗组。我们得出结论,这种持续的疼痛可能是由于受损退变未融合运动节段的残留活动所致,两组之间的差异可能反映了两种手术方法在融合质量和融合率上的差异。