Cargando…

Comparison of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion with Cervical Laminectomy and Fusion in the Treatment of 4‐Level Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy

OBJECTIVE: To assess and compare the therapeutic effects of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) and Cervical Laminectomy and Fusion (CLF) in the treatment of 4‐level cervical. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review on 39 patients with 4‐level CSM who underwent ACDF or CLF in the Thi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wang, Xian‐zheng, Liu, Huanan, Li, Jia‐qi, Sun, Yapeng, Zhang, Fei, Guo, Lei, Zhang, Peng, Dou, Chen‐hao, Zhang, Wei
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8867437/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34904370
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/os.13058
_version_ 1784656053036646400
author Wang, Xian‐zheng
Liu, Huanan
Li, Jia‐qi
Sun, Yapeng
Zhang, Fei
Guo, Lei
Zhang, Peng
Dou, Chen‐hao
Zhang, Wei
author_facet Wang, Xian‐zheng
Liu, Huanan
Li, Jia‐qi
Sun, Yapeng
Zhang, Fei
Guo, Lei
Zhang, Peng
Dou, Chen‐hao
Zhang, Wei
author_sort Wang, Xian‐zheng
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To assess and compare the therapeutic effects of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) and Cervical Laminectomy and Fusion (CLF) in the treatment of 4‐level cervical. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review on 39 patients with 4‐level CSM who underwent ACDF or CLF in the Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University from January 2010 to December 2018. The patients were divided into ACDF group and CLF group according to the treatment. The operative index was evaluated based on intraoperative blood loss and operation time. The functional outcomes including Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score and visual analogue scale (VAS) of axial pain were compared. The Cobb angle, Cobb angle improvement rate, range of motion (ROM) and ROM loss ratio were measured for radiographic evaluation. RESULTS: No major complications or deaths occurred. The average age at baseline was 55 years. There was no significant difference between the ACDF and CLF group in follow‐up time (26.29 months, 25.39 months, P > 0.05). The intraoperative blood loss was higher in the CLF group than in the ACDF group (692.67 ± 38.68 vs 392.14 ± 128.06, P < 0.05). The operation time was longer in the CLF group than in the ACDF group (206.60 ± 49.37 vs 172.64 ± 31.96, P < 0.05). Significant improvements in the VAS and JOA scores were observed in both groups (P < 0.05). No significant difference in VAS was found between the ACDF and CLF groups (P < 0.05). There was a significantly larger improvement rate of JOA score in the ACDF group than in the CLF group (60.9% ± 9.57% vs 31.5% ± 15.70%, P < 0.05). There were two (9.6%) cases with complications In the ACDF group, including one (4.8%) case of dysphagia and one (4.8%) case of pharyngodynia. In the CLF group, two patients (11.1%) developed C(5) palsy. No significant difference in the incidence of complications, ROM loss ratio and Cobb angle improvement rate was found between group ACDF and group CLF (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Both ACDF and CLF were effective in the treatment of multi‐level cervical spondylosis and ACDF is more suitable for patients with 4‐level CSM.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8867437
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88674372022-02-28 Comparison of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion with Cervical Laminectomy and Fusion in the Treatment of 4‐Level Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy Wang, Xian‐zheng Liu, Huanan Li, Jia‐qi Sun, Yapeng Zhang, Fei Guo, Lei Zhang, Peng Dou, Chen‐hao Zhang, Wei Orthop Surg Clinical Articles OBJECTIVE: To assess and compare the therapeutic effects of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) and Cervical Laminectomy and Fusion (CLF) in the treatment of 4‐level cervical. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review on 39 patients with 4‐level CSM who underwent ACDF or CLF in the Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University from January 2010 to December 2018. The patients were divided into ACDF group and CLF group according to the treatment. The operative index was evaluated based on intraoperative blood loss and operation time. The functional outcomes including Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score and visual analogue scale (VAS) of axial pain were compared. The Cobb angle, Cobb angle improvement rate, range of motion (ROM) and ROM loss ratio were measured for radiographic evaluation. RESULTS: No major complications or deaths occurred. The average age at baseline was 55 years. There was no significant difference between the ACDF and CLF group in follow‐up time (26.29 months, 25.39 months, P > 0.05). The intraoperative blood loss was higher in the CLF group than in the ACDF group (692.67 ± 38.68 vs 392.14 ± 128.06, P < 0.05). The operation time was longer in the CLF group than in the ACDF group (206.60 ± 49.37 vs 172.64 ± 31.96, P < 0.05). Significant improvements in the VAS and JOA scores were observed in both groups (P < 0.05). No significant difference in VAS was found between the ACDF and CLF groups (P < 0.05). There was a significantly larger improvement rate of JOA score in the ACDF group than in the CLF group (60.9% ± 9.57% vs 31.5% ± 15.70%, P < 0.05). There were two (9.6%) cases with complications In the ACDF group, including one (4.8%) case of dysphagia and one (4.8%) case of pharyngodynia. In the CLF group, two patients (11.1%) developed C(5) palsy. No significant difference in the incidence of complications, ROM loss ratio and Cobb angle improvement rate was found between group ACDF and group CLF (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Both ACDF and CLF were effective in the treatment of multi‐level cervical spondylosis and ACDF is more suitable for patients with 4‐level CSM. John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd 2021-12-13 /pmc/articles/PMC8867437/ /pubmed/34904370 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/os.13058 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Orthopaedic Surgery published by Chinese Orthopaedic Association and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Clinical Articles
Wang, Xian‐zheng
Liu, Huanan
Li, Jia‐qi
Sun, Yapeng
Zhang, Fei
Guo, Lei
Zhang, Peng
Dou, Chen‐hao
Zhang, Wei
Comparison of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion with Cervical Laminectomy and Fusion in the Treatment of 4‐Level Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy
title Comparison of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion with Cervical Laminectomy and Fusion in the Treatment of 4‐Level Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy
title_full Comparison of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion with Cervical Laminectomy and Fusion in the Treatment of 4‐Level Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy
title_fullStr Comparison of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion with Cervical Laminectomy and Fusion in the Treatment of 4‐Level Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion with Cervical Laminectomy and Fusion in the Treatment of 4‐Level Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy
title_short Comparison of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion with Cervical Laminectomy and Fusion in the Treatment of 4‐Level Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy
title_sort comparison of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with cervical laminectomy and fusion in the treatment of 4‐level cervical spondylotic myelopathy
topic Clinical Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8867437/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34904370
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/os.13058
work_keys_str_mv AT wangxianzheng comparisonofanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionwithcervicallaminectomyandfusioninthetreatmentof4levelcervicalspondyloticmyelopathy
AT liuhuanan comparisonofanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionwithcervicallaminectomyandfusioninthetreatmentof4levelcervicalspondyloticmyelopathy
AT lijiaqi comparisonofanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionwithcervicallaminectomyandfusioninthetreatmentof4levelcervicalspondyloticmyelopathy
AT sunyapeng comparisonofanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionwithcervicallaminectomyandfusioninthetreatmentof4levelcervicalspondyloticmyelopathy
AT zhangfei comparisonofanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionwithcervicallaminectomyandfusioninthetreatmentof4levelcervicalspondyloticmyelopathy
AT guolei comparisonofanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionwithcervicallaminectomyandfusioninthetreatmentof4levelcervicalspondyloticmyelopathy
AT zhangpeng comparisonofanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionwithcervicallaminectomyandfusioninthetreatmentof4levelcervicalspondyloticmyelopathy
AT douchenhao comparisonofanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionwithcervicallaminectomyandfusioninthetreatmentof4levelcervicalspondyloticmyelopathy
AT zhangwei comparisonofanteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionwithcervicallaminectomyandfusioninthetreatmentof4levelcervicalspondyloticmyelopathy