Cargando…

Comparison of Anterior Approach and Posterior Circumspinal Decompression in the Treatment of Giant Thoracic Discs

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES: The treatment of giant thoracic disc herniation (gTDH)remains challenging for surgeons worldwide because of its large volume and calcified or ossified nature and the limitations of the prior small-sample-size, single-center studies reporting comp...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yuan, Lei, Chen, Zhongqiang, Liu, Zhongjun, Liu, Xiaoguang, Li, Weishi, Sun, Chuiguo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9837516/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33511881
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568221989964
_version_ 1784869097010364416
author Yuan, Lei
Chen, Zhongqiang
Liu, Zhongjun
Liu, Xiaoguang
Li, Weishi
Sun, Chuiguo
author_facet Yuan, Lei
Chen, Zhongqiang
Liu, Zhongjun
Liu, Xiaoguang
Li, Weishi
Sun, Chuiguo
author_sort Yuan, Lei
collection PubMed
description STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES: The treatment of giant thoracic disc herniation (gTDH)remains challenging for surgeons worldwide because of its large volume and calcified or ossified nature and the limitations of the prior small-sample-size, single-center studies reporting comparative effectiveness. We aim to compare the anterior decompression and spinal fusion (ASF) and posterior circumspinal decompression and spinal fusion (PCDF) for patients with myelopathy due to gTDH in the largest study to date by sample size. METHODS: Preoperative and postoperative functional status, surgical details, and complication rates were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: A total of 186 patients were included: 63 (33.9%) ASF and 123(66.1%) PCDF. The PCDF group had significantly shorter operation duration (163.06 ± 53.49 min vs. 180.78 ± 52.06 min, P = 0.032) and a significant decrease in intraoperative blood loss(716.83 mL vs. 947.94 mL, P = 0.045), and also a shorter hospital length of stay (LOS) and postoperative LOS (6 vs. 7, P = 0.011). The perioperative complication rate (13.8% vs. 28.6%, P = 0.015) and surgery-associated complication rate(13.0% vs. 27.0%, P = 0.018) were significantly higher in the ASF group. A higher rate of complete decompression was achieved in the PCDF group. There were no observed significant differences in changes in functional status between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: PCDF for central or paracentral gTDHs is a highly effective and reliable technique. It can be performed safely with a low complication rate. If either procedure can adequately excise a central or paracentral gTDH, a PCDF approach may be a better option.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9837516
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98375162023-01-14 Comparison of Anterior Approach and Posterior Circumspinal Decompression in the Treatment of Giant Thoracic Discs Yuan, Lei Chen, Zhongqiang Liu, Zhongjun Liu, Xiaoguang Li, Weishi Sun, Chuiguo Global Spine J Original Articles STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES: The treatment of giant thoracic disc herniation (gTDH)remains challenging for surgeons worldwide because of its large volume and calcified or ossified nature and the limitations of the prior small-sample-size, single-center studies reporting comparative effectiveness. We aim to compare the anterior decompression and spinal fusion (ASF) and posterior circumspinal decompression and spinal fusion (PCDF) for patients with myelopathy due to gTDH in the largest study to date by sample size. METHODS: Preoperative and postoperative functional status, surgical details, and complication rates were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: A total of 186 patients were included: 63 (33.9%) ASF and 123(66.1%) PCDF. The PCDF group had significantly shorter operation duration (163.06 ± 53.49 min vs. 180.78 ± 52.06 min, P = 0.032) and a significant decrease in intraoperative blood loss(716.83 mL vs. 947.94 mL, P = 0.045), and also a shorter hospital length of stay (LOS) and postoperative LOS (6 vs. 7, P = 0.011). The perioperative complication rate (13.8% vs. 28.6%, P = 0.015) and surgery-associated complication rate(13.0% vs. 27.0%, P = 0.018) were significantly higher in the ASF group. A higher rate of complete decompression was achieved in the PCDF group. There were no observed significant differences in changes in functional status between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: PCDF for central or paracentral gTDHs is a highly effective and reliable technique. It can be performed safely with a low complication rate. If either procedure can adequately excise a central or paracentral gTDH, a PCDF approach may be a better option. SAGE Publications 2021-01-29 2023-01 /pmc/articles/PMC9837516/ /pubmed/33511881 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568221989964 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Original Articles
Yuan, Lei
Chen, Zhongqiang
Liu, Zhongjun
Liu, Xiaoguang
Li, Weishi
Sun, Chuiguo
Comparison of Anterior Approach and Posterior Circumspinal Decompression in the Treatment of Giant Thoracic Discs
title Comparison of Anterior Approach and Posterior Circumspinal Decompression in the Treatment of Giant Thoracic Discs
title_full Comparison of Anterior Approach and Posterior Circumspinal Decompression in the Treatment of Giant Thoracic Discs
title_fullStr Comparison of Anterior Approach and Posterior Circumspinal Decompression in the Treatment of Giant Thoracic Discs
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Anterior Approach and Posterior Circumspinal Decompression in the Treatment of Giant Thoracic Discs
title_short Comparison of Anterior Approach and Posterior Circumspinal Decompression in the Treatment of Giant Thoracic Discs
title_sort comparison of anterior approach and posterior circumspinal decompression in the treatment of giant thoracic discs
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9837516/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33511881
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568221989964
work_keys_str_mv AT yuanlei comparisonofanteriorapproachandposteriorcircumspinaldecompressioninthetreatmentofgiantthoracicdiscs
AT chenzhongqiang comparisonofanteriorapproachandposteriorcircumspinaldecompressioninthetreatmentofgiantthoracicdiscs
AT liuzhongjun comparisonofanteriorapproachandposteriorcircumspinaldecompressioninthetreatmentofgiantthoracicdiscs
AT liuxiaoguang comparisonofanteriorapproachandposteriorcircumspinaldecompressioninthetreatmentofgiantthoracicdiscs
AT liweishi comparisonofanteriorapproachandposteriorcircumspinaldecompressioninthetreatmentofgiantthoracicdiscs
AT sunchuiguo comparisonofanteriorapproachandposteriorcircumspinaldecompressioninthetreatmentofgiantthoracicdiscs