颈前路联合减压融合术与ACDF治疗多节段脊髓型颈椎病的比较研究
DOI:
作者:
作者单位:

福建省立医院

作者简介:

通讯作者:

中图分类号:

基金项目:

福建省卫计委中青年骨干人才培养项目(编号:2017-ZQN-8);福建省立医院“创 双高 ”火石基金项目(编号:2019HSJJ02)


A comparative study on the clinical and radiological effect of HDF and ACDF in the treatment of multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy
Author:
Affiliation:

Fujian Provincial Hospital,

Fund Project:

  • 摘要
  • |
  • 图/表
  • |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献
  • |
  • 相似文献
  • |
  • 引证文献
  • |
  • 资源附件
  • |
  • 文章评论
    摘要:

    目的:与传统的ACDF手术比较,评估颈前路联合减压植骨融合术治疗多节段脊髓型颈椎病的安全性及有效性。方法:回顾分析并提取2015年8月-2019年8月期间分别在本单位接受颈前路联合减压植骨融合术(单节段ACDF+单节段ACCF)和3节段ACDF的患者资料,对临床及影像结果进行比较。结果:共纳入86例患者(ACDF组65例,联合手术组21例)。联合手术组患者除了术中失血量比ACDF组多之外(p<0.01),其余手术时长、围手术期主要并发症(吞咽困难、声音嘶哑、C5神经根麻痹)发生率,住院日等方面并没有差别。末次随访时两组术后VAS和NDI评分均较术前显著改善(均p<0.01),但两组之间的VAS评分改善率(p=0.438)和NDI改善率(p=0.954)没有差别。末次随访时两组CL和OL均明显改善(p<0.01);但两组之间的CL改善率(p=0.704)和OL改善率(p=0.697)同样没有差别;至末次随访时,ACDF组融合成功率为89.23%(58/65),联合手术组融合成功率为71.43%(15/21),两组融合率没有差别(p=0.561)。结论:对于部分长节段的ACDF手术无法获得充分减压的多节段CSM患者,选择联合减压植骨融合术是一个安全而又有效替代方法,可避免长节段ACCF的潜在并发症。

    Abstract:

    Objective: To study the safety and efficacy of anterior cervical HDF (hybrid compression and fusion) in the treatment of patients with multi-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Methods: Patients who treated with either HDF(single level ACDF + single level ACCF) or 3-levles ACDF for multi-level cervical spondylosis were enrolled and analyzed retrospectively. The data with regarding perioperative, pre- and post-operative imaging and clinical outcome were extracted for further comparison. Results: We evaluated 86 consecutive patients who underwent surgery for the treatment of multi-level cervical spondylosis at our institution from Aug. 2015 to Aug. 2019. In this series, 65 patients underwent 3-level ACDF and 21 patients underwent HDF. The blood loss significantly higher in HDF group(p<0.01); there was no significantly difference in the operation time and the incidence of major complications (dysphagia, hoarseness and C5 nerve root palsy) during perioperative period (p<0.05). At the final follow up, patients in both groups had equivalent significant improvement in their VAS value and NDI(both p<0.01); however, there was no group difference in VAS score (p=0.438) and NDI (p=0.954) improvement rate between the two groups. At the last follow-up, CL and OL were significantly improved in both groups after surgery (both p<0.01); also, no group difference was observed in both CL improvement (p=0.704) and OL improvement (p=0.697) between the two groups. In addition, there was no difference in the improvement of C2-7 SVA in both groups, and the improvement of C2-7 SVA after operation was no significant difference between the two groups (p>0.05). At the last follow-up, the success rate of fusion was 89.23% (58/65) in ACDF group and 71.43% (15/21) in HDF group. There was no difference between the two groups (p= 0.561). Conclusions: The procedure of HDF is a safe and effective alternative for multi-levels CSM patients who are not suitable for 3-levels ACDF.

    参考文献
    相似文献
    引证文献
引用本文
分享
文章指标
  • 点击次数:
  • 下载次数:
  • HTML阅读次数:
  • 引用次数:
历史
  • 收稿日期:2020-07-14
  • 最后修改日期:2020-09-28
  • 录用日期:2020-10-20
  • 在线发布日期:
  • 出版日期: