首页> 外文期刊>Interdisciplinary Neurosurgery >Skip laminectomy versus cervical laminectomy, an analysis of patient reported outcomes, spinal alignment and re-operation rates: The Leeds spinal unit experience (2008–2016)
【24h】

Skip laminectomy versus cervical laminectomy, an analysis of patient reported outcomes, spinal alignment and re-operation rates: The Leeds spinal unit experience (2008–2016)

机译:跳过椎板切除术与宫颈椎板切除术,对患者报告的结局,脊柱排列和再手术率的分析:利兹脊柱单元手术的经验(2008-2016年)

获取原文
       

摘要

The two leading techniques in the UK utilised in the posterior decompression of the cervical spinal cord for cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) are skip laminectomy (Skip LAMT) and open cervical laminectomy (LAMT). To the authors' knowledge no studies have directly compared effectiveness of skip laminectomy versus cervical laminectomy. This study assessed for differences in neck disability index, sagittal alignment and re-operation rates between both treatment options. A retrospective single institution cohort study was performed. Subjects underwent skip- or cervical laminectomy between 2008 and 2016. Patients whom had undergone previous cervical spinal surgery were excluded. Statistical analysis compared radiological differences in sagittal alignment of the vertebral bodies between C2-7 pre- and post-operatively in static lateral cervical spine radiographs using the Cobb method. A description of the surgical technique of skip laminectomy is also provided. In total 42 patients and 29 patients had skip and cervical laminectomy respectively. Both groups were matched pre-operatively in terms of cervical sagittal alignment (p?=?0.17), age and gender. Median follow up time was 32?±?23.1 (Range: 1–325) weeks. Post-operatively there was no difference in patient reported outcomes namely Visual Analogue Scale and Neck Disability Index between treatment groups compared to pre-operatively (p?=?0.64 andp?=?0.75). There was suggestion of difference in median length of hospital stay between treatment groups, however this was not statistically significant. There was no difference in sagittal alignment between groups following surgery (p?=?0.65). Three patients (7.1%) in the skip laminectomy group and two patients (6.9%) in the cervical laminectomy group required revision surgery. No patients needed instrumentation. Skip laminectomy and cervical laminectomy deliver similar patient reported outcomes, sagittal alignment preservation and re-operation rates over this follow-up period.
机译:在英国用于颈椎病脊髓病(CSM)的颈脊髓后减压中的两种领先技术是跳过椎板切除术(Skip LAMT)和开放式颈椎切除术(LAMT)。据作者所知,没有研究直接比较跳过椎板切除术和宫颈椎板切除术的有效性。这项研究评估了两种治疗方案之间的颈部残疾指数,矢状位和再手术率的差异。进行了回顾性单机构队列研究。受试者在2008年至2016年间进行了跳过或宫颈椎板切除术。先前接受过颈椎手术的患者被排除在外。统计分析使用Cobb方法比较了静态颈椎侧位X线片在手术前后C2-7之间椎体矢状位的放射学差异。还提供了跳过椎板切除术的手术技术的描述。共有42例患者和29例患者分别进行了跳过和宫颈椎板切除术。术前两组在颈椎矢状位(p = 0.17),年龄和性别方面均匹配。中位随访时间为32±23.1周(范围:1-325)。手术后与治疗前相比,患者报告的治疗结果之间无显着差异,即视觉模拟量表和颈部残疾指数(p = 0.64,p = 0.75)。有人认为治疗组之间的中位住院时间有差异,但这在统计学上没有统计学意义。手术后两组之间的矢状面对齐没有差异(p = 0.65)。跳过椎板切除术组中有3例(7.1%),而颈椎椎板切除术组中有2例(6.9%)需要翻修手术。没有患者需要仪器。跳过椎板切除术和颈椎椎板切除术在此随访期间可提供类似的患者报告的结局,矢状面保持和再手术率。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号