期刊文献+

颈椎间盘置换术与前路减压椎间融合术术后疼痛及残障指数比较的Meta分析 被引量:1

Comparison of postoperative pain and neck function between cervical disc replacement and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a Meta-analysis
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的收集并分析有关颈椎间盘置换术与颈前路减压椎间融合术(anterior cervical discectomy and fusion,ACDF)术后疗效比较的文献,对颈椎间盘置换术和ACDF术后疼痛及残障指数进行Meta分析。方法检索Medline(1966年1月至2008年11月)、Embase(1966年1月至2008年11月)、AMED(1985年1月至2008年11月)和Cochrane Library等数据库中关于颈椎间盘置换术和ACDF术后疗效比较的随机对照研究,纳入符合标准的文献,提取相关数据输入Review Manager4.2软件进行统计学分析。臂部疼痛及颈部疼痛的视觉模拟评分(visual analogue scale,VAS)、颈部功能残障指数(neck disability index,NDI)均采用权重均差(weighted mean difierence,WMD)进行评价。结果共4篇文献符合纳入标准,经改良Jadad评分判定均为高质量研究。共纳入213例,干预组(颈椎间盘置换组)和对照组(ACDF组)术后6周臂部疼痛VAS合并WMD为-2.91[95%置信区间(-4.19,-1.62),P〈0.05],术后6个月合并WMD值为-2.67[95%置信区间(-4.02,-1.33),P〈0.05]。干预组和对照组术后6周NDI合并WMD值为-11.93[95%置信区间(-15.66,-8.19),P〈0.05],术后6个月合并WMD值为-11.2[95%置信区间(-14.74,-7.69),P〈0.05]。结论颈椎间盘置换术后6周和6个月时患者臂部疼痛程度低于ACDF;颈椎间盘置换术后6周和6个月患者颈部功能恢复程度高于ACDF。 Objective To evaluate the postoperative pain and neck function of patients who underwent cervical disc replacement or anterior cervical diseectomy and fusion (ACDF) by Meta-analysis. Methods In Medline (1966.1-2008.11), Embase (1966.1-2008.11), AMED (1985.1-2008.11) and Cochrane Library, the randomized controlled trails about the comparison between cervical disc replacement and ACDF were collected. Then extracted the data of arm pain visual analogue scale (VAS), neck pain VAS and neck disability index (NDI) in these researches and made a Meta-analysis using Review Manager 4.2. Weighted mean difference (WMD) was selected for the evaluation of the overall effect. Results Four articles were accepted in our Meta-analysis and all of them were high quality researches identified by modified Jadad Scale. Altogether, 213 patients were included. The combined WMD of arm pain VAS was -2.91195% confidence interval (CI) (-4.19-1.62), P〈 0.05] 6 weeks after surgery and -2.67 [95%CI (-4.02,-1.33), P〈0.05] 6 months after surgery. The combined WMD of NDI was -1 1.93 [95%CI (-15.66,-8.19), P〈 0.05] 6 weeks after surgery and -11.2 [95%Cl (-14.74,-7.69), P〈 0.05] 6 months after surgery. Conclusion The arm pain VAS of treatment group (cervical disc replacement) is lower than that of control group (ACDF) both 6 weeks and 6 months after surgery. The NDI of treatment group is lower than that of control group both 6 weeks and 6 months after surgery.
出处 《中华骨科杂志》 CAS CSCD 北大核心 2009年第9期852-857,共6页 Chinese Journal of Orthopaedics
关键词 椎间盘 脊柱融合术 减压术 外科 META分析 Intervertebral disk Spinal fusion Decompression, surgical Meta-analysis
  • 相关文献

参考文献25

  • 1Hilibrand AS, Carlson GD, Palumbo MA, et al. Radiculopathy and myelopathy at segments adjacent to the site of a previous anterior cervical arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg (Am), 1999, 81(4): 519-528.
  • 2Wigfield C, Gill S, Nelson R, et al. Influence of an artificial cervical joint compared witb fusion on adjacent-level motion in the treatment of degenerative cervical disc disease. J Neurosurg, 2002, 96(1 Suppl): S17-21.
  • 3Wilke HJ, Kettler A, Goetz C, et al. Subsidence resulting from simulated postoperative neck movements: an in vitro investigation with a new cervical fusion cage. Spine, 2000 25(21): 2762-2770.
  • 4Goffin J, Van Calenbergh F, van Loon J, et al. Intermediate follow-up after treatment of degenerative disc disease with the Bryan Cervical Disc Prosthesis: single-level and bi-level. Spine, 2003, 28(24): 2673-2678.
  • 5Parkinson JF, Sekhon LH. Cervical arthroplasty complicated by delayed spontaneous fusion. Case report. J Neurosurg Spine, 2005, 2(3): 377-380.
  • 6Sekhon LH. Cervical arthroplasty in the management of spondylotic myelopathy: 18-month results. Neurosurg Focus, 2004, 17 (3): E8.
  • 7Bryan VE Jr. Cervical motion segment replacement. Eur Spine J, 2002, 11( Suppl 2): S92-97.
  • 8Vernon H, Mior S. The Neck Disability Index: a study of reliability and validity. J Manipulative Physiol Ther, 1991, 14 (7): 409- 415.
  • 9Gay RE, Madson TJ, Cieslak KR. Comparison of the Neck Disability Index and the Neck Bournemouth Questionnaire in a sample of patients with chronic uncomplicated neck pain. J Manipulative Physiol Ther, 2007, 30(4): 259-262.
  • 10Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials, 1996, 17(1): 1-12.

同被引文献30

  • 1Matsunloto M, Okada E, ichihara D, et al. Anterior cervical de- compression and fusion accelerates adjacent segment degenera- tion: comparison with asymptomatic volunteers in a ten-year mag- netic resonance imaging follow- up study [J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2010, 35(1): 36-43.
  • 2Boselie TF, Willems PC, van Mamercn H, et al. Arthroplasty ver- sus fusion in single-level cervical degenerative disc disease: a Co- chrane review [J].Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2013, 38(17): ElO96- Ell07.
  • 3Sasso RC, Anderson PA, Riew KD, et al. Results of cervical ar- throplasty compared with anterior discectomy and fusion: four-year clinical outcomes in a prospective, randomized controlled tri- al[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2011, 93(18): 1684-1692.
  • 4Zigler JE, Delamarter R, Murrey D, et al. ProDisc-C and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion as surgical treatment for single- level cervical symptomatic degenerative disc disease: five-year re- suits of a food and drug administration study [J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2013, 38(3): 203-209.
  • 5Coric D, Kim PK, Clemente JD, et al. Prospective randomized study of cervical arthroplasty and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with long-term follow-up: results in 74 patients from a single site[J]. J Neurosurg Spine, 2013, 18(1): 36-42.
  • 6Leung C, Casey AT, Coffin J, et al. Clinical significance of betero- topic ossification in cervical disc replacement: a prospective mul- ticenter clinical trial[ J ]. Neurosurgery, 2005, 57(4): 759-763.
  • 7Parkinson JF, Sekhon LH. Cervical arthroplasty complicated by delayed spontaneous fusion. Case report [J]. J Neurosurg Spine, 2005, 2(3): 377-380.
  • 8Hacker FM, Babcock RM, Hacker RJ. Very late complications of cervical arthroplasty: results of 2 controlled randomized prospec- tive studies from a single investigator site [J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2013, 38(26): 2223-2226.
  • 9Iorio R, Healy WL. Heterotopic ossification after hip and knee ar- throplasty: risk factors, prevention, and treatment [J]. J Am Acad Orthop Surg, 2002, 10(6): 409-416.
  • 10Lee JH, Jung TG, Kim HS, et al. Analysis of the incidence and clinical effect of the heterotopic ossification in a single-level cervi- cal artificial disc replacement[J]. Spine J, 2010, 10(8): 676-682.

引证文献1

二级引证文献9

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部