期刊文献+

探讨ProDisc-C人工颈椎间盘置换术与颈前路椎间盘切除融合治疗颈椎病的临床疗效 被引量:5

To evaluate clinical outcomes of ProDisc-C cervical disc replacement versus fusion for cervical spondylosis
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的 探讨ProDisc-C人工颈椎间盘置换术与颈前路椎间盘切除融合(ACDF)治疗单节段椎间盘退变引起的脊髓或神经根颈椎病的临床疗效。方法 自2010年10月至2012年年8月武汉大学人民医院收治的46例颈椎病病例,随机进行分组,其中实验组:24例行ProDisc-C置换术,对照组:22例行ACDF。评价指标主要如下:两组手术时间及术中出血量;两组术前、术后3、12月VAS评分,JOA评分,手术邻近节段活动度,颈椎活动度(ROM)以及术后并发症。结果 46例患者全部获得平均12个月(8~18个月)随访。两组手术时间及术中出血量无统计学差异(P〉0.05)。两组术后VAS评分,JOA评分均较术前明显提高(P〈0.05),两组差异无统计学意义(P〉0.05)。试验组整个下颈椎的活动度及邻近节段活动度各个随访时段与术前相比无变化(P〉0.05);对照组在术后3个月整个下颈椎活动度较术前相比有统计学差异(P〈0.05),术后12个月时逐渐恢复正常,术后12个月邻近节段活动度较术前有统计学差异(P〈0.05)。其中对照组术后出现3例吞咽困难。结论ProDisc-C人工颈椎间盘置换术与颈前路椎间盘切除融合(ACDF)治疗单节段椎间盘退变引起的脊髓或神经根颈椎病在中短期随访中临床效果满意,人工颈椎间盘置换术能有效保留颈椎活动度,减少临近节段的退变,并且术后吞咽困难发生率较低。 Objective To prospectively compare the clinical effects of ProDisc-C cervical disc replacement with those of anterior cervi-cal discectomy and fusion ( ACDF) in the treatment of single-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy or radiculopathy.Methods From the Department of Orthopaedics in Renmin Hospital of wuhan University within the period of October 2010 to August 2012,A total of 46 patients with single-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy or radiculopathy were enrolled in this study .They were randomly assigned to ProDisc-C artificial cervical disc replacement group ( arthroplasty group:24 patients) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion group (fusion group:22 patients).Operation time,blood loss were compared between the 2 groups.Visual analogue scale(VAS),Japanese Orthopedics Association( JOA) score,Range-of-motion of cervical overall and adjacent intervertebral area near the intervertebral space were evaluated preoperatively and 3,12,months postoperatively.Results A total of 46 patients(100%) were followed up for an aver-age 12 months(range,6~24).No difference was found in the operation time,intraoperative blood loss between 2 groups(P〉0.05). VAS and JOA scores were apparently improved after surgery compared with before surgery in each group(P〈0.05).The improvement in the VAS and JOA scores were equivalent at each follow-up point between the two groups (P〉0.05).In ProDisc-C group,pre-and postoperative motion of cervical overall and adjacent intervertebral area near the intervertebral space are remained unchanged at any of the follow-up time (P〉0.05).In ACDF group,motion of cervical overall decreased in 3 months after operation but gradually recovered to preoperative level in12 months after operation.Motion of adjacent intervertebral area increased in 12 months (P〈0.05).There are 3 cases with dysphagia after operation in ACDF group.Conclusion ProDisc-C artificial cervical disc replacement can achieve similar clinical improvement compared with traditional ACDF for treatment of single segment disc degeneration in Mid term follow up.Artificial cervical disc replacement can effectively retain the cervical range of motion,reduce the degeneration of adjacent segments and the inci-dence of postoperative dysphagia.
出处 《安徽医药》 CAS 2015年第9期1686-1690,共5页 Anhui Medical and Pharmaceutical Journal
基金 卫生部医药卫生科技发展研究项目(No W2014ZT165) 芜湖市科技计划项目(No 2014Z16)
关键词 颈椎病 人工颈椎间盘置换 脊柱融合术 颈椎活动度 cervical spondyloss cervical disc arthroplasty spinal fusion ROM
  • 相关文献

参考文献18

  • 1Nesterenko SO, Riley LH, Skolasky RL. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus cervical disc arthroplasty: current state and trends in treatment for cervical disc pathology[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) , 2012,37(17) :1470 -1474.
  • 2Barrey C, Champain S, Campana S, et al. Sagittal alignment and kinematics at instrumented and adjacent levels after total disc replacement in the cervical spine[J]. Eur SpineJ,2012,21 (8): 1648 -1659.
  • 3Hisey MS, Bae HW, Davis RJ , et al, Prospective, Randomized Comparison of Cervical Total Disc Replacement vs. Anterior Cervical Fusion: Results at 48 Months Follow-up[J].J Spinal Disord Tech,2015,28(4) :E237 -E243.
  • 4Lund T, Oxland TR. Adjacent level disk disease-is it really a fusion disease?[J] . Orthop Clin North Am ,2011 ,42 (4) :529 - 541.
  • 5Delamarter RB , ZiglerJ. Five - year reoperation rates, cervical total disc replacement versus fusion, results of a prospective randomized clinical trial[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) ,2013,38 (9) : 711 - 717.
  • 6Chang UK, Kim DH, Lee MC, et al. Changes in adjacent-level disc pressure and facetJoint force after cervical arthroplasty compared with cervical discectomy and fusion[J].J Neurosurg Spine ,2007, 7(1) :33 -39.
  • 7Nandyala SV , Marquez - Lara A, Fineberg SJ, et al. Comparison of revision surgeries for one-to two-level cervical TDR and ACDF from 2002 to 2011[lJ. SpineJ ,2014 ,14(12) :2841 - 2846.
  • 8Moatz B, Tortolani P1. Cervical disc arthroplasty: pros and cons[J]. Surg Neurol Int ,2012,3 (Suppl 3) :S216 - S224.
  • 9Nabhan A ,Ishak B, Steudel WI, et al. Assessment of adjacent - segment mobility after cervical disc replacement versus fusion: RCT with 1 years results[J]. Eur SpineJ ,2011,20(6) :934 -941.
  • 10Hilibrand AS,CarlsonGD,Palumbo MA,et al. Radiculopathy and myelopathy at segments adjacent to the site of a previous anterior cervical arthrodesis l 1].J BoneJoint Surg Am ,1999 ,81 ( 4) :519 - 528.

二级参考文献14

  • 1McAfee PC.Cunningham BW,Devine J,et al. Classification of heterotopic ossification(HO) in artificial disk replacement[J].J Spinal Disord Tech,2003,16(4) :384-389.
  • 2White AA, Panjabi MM. The basic kinematics of the human spine:a review of past and current knowledge[J].Spine,1978,3 (1):12-20.
  • 3Pickett GE,Sekhon LHS,Sears WR.Complications with cervical arthroplasty[J].J Neurosurg Spine, 2006,4 (2) : 98-105.
  • 4Leung C,Casey AT,Goffin J,et al.Clinical significance of heterotopic ossification in cervical disc replacement:a prospective multicenter clinical trial[J].Neurosurgery,2005,57(4):759-763.
  • 5Sola S,Hebecker R,Knoop M,et al. Bryan cervical disc prosthesis:three years follow-up [J].Eur Spine J,2005,14 (Suppl 1):38.
  • 6Sasso RC,Smucker JD,Hacker RJ,et al. Artificial disc versus fusion:a prospective,randomized study with 2-year follow-up on 99 patients[J].Spine,2007,32(26) :2933-2940.
  • 7Parkinson JF,Sekhon LHS.Cervical arthroplasty complicated by delayed spontaneous fusion [J].J Neurosurg Spine,2005,2 (3): 377-380.
  • 8Pedersen NW,Kristensen SS,Schmidt SA,et al.Factors associated with heterotopic bone formation following total hip replacement[J].Arch Orthop Trauma Surg, 1989,105:92-95.
  • 9Wittenberg RH,Peschke U, Botel U. Heterotopic ossification after spinal cord injury:epidemiology and risk factors [J].J Bone Joint Surg Br,1992,74(2):215-218.
  • 10Wang MY,Leung C, Casey A. Cervical arthroplasty with the Bryan Disc[J].Neurosurgery,2005,56(Suppl 1) :58-65.

共引文献34

同被引文献80

引证文献5

二级引证文献12

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