首页> 外文期刊>Spine >Anterior or Posterior Approach of Full-Endoscopic Cervical Discectomy for Cervical Intervertebral Disc Herniation?-A Comparative Cohort Study
【24h】

Anterior or Posterior Approach of Full-Endoscopic Cervical Discectomy for Cervical Intervertebral Disc Herniation?-A Comparative Cohort Study

机译:全内镜宫颈椎间盘突出术治疗宫颈椎间盘突出术的前近方法 - 一种比较队列研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Summary of Background Data. The optimal FECD surgical approach for CIVDH remains controversial. Methods. From March 2010 to July 2012, a total of 84 consecutive patients with symptomatic single-level CIVDH who underwent FECD using the anterior approach (42 patients) or the posterior approach (42 patients) were enrolled. Patients were assessed neurologically before surgery and followed up at regular outpatient visits. The clinical outcomes were evaluated using the visual analogue scale and the modified MacNab criteria. Radiographical follow-up included the static and dynamic cervical plain radiographs, computed tomographic scans, and magnetic resonance images. Results. In both groups, shorter mean operative time (63.5 min vs. 78.5 min), increased mean volume of disc removal (0.6 g vs. 0.3 g), larger mean decrease in the final postoperative mean intervertebral vertical height (1.0 mm vs. 0.5 mm), and longer mean hospital stay (4.9 d vs. 4.5 d) were observed in the anterior full-endoscopic cervical discectomy group. Postoperatively, the clinical outcomes of the 2 approaches were significantly improved, but the differences between the 2 approaches were not significant (P = 0.211 and P = 0.257, respectively). Four surgery-related complications were observed among all enrolled patients (complications in each group were 2; overall 4 of 84, 4.8%). Conclusion. In our study, the clinical outcomes between the 2 approaches did not differ significantly. Nevertheless, posterior full-endoscopic cervical discectomy may be preferable when considering the volume of disc removal, length of hospital stay, and the postoperative radiographical changes. As an efficacious supplement to traditional open surgery, FECD is a reliable alternative treatment of CiVDH and its optimal approach remains open to discussion.
机译:背景数据摘要。 Civdh的最佳FECD手术方法仍然存在争议。方法。 2010年3月至2012年7月,共有84名连续84名患有使用前方法(42名患者)或后方法(42名患者)的FECD的症状单级CIVDH的患者。患者在手术前神经学评估,并在常规门诊访问之前进行。使用视觉模拟标准和改进的麦克纳布标准评估临床结果。射线照相随访包括静态和动态颈椎型X线片,计算机断层扫描和磁共振图像。结果。在两组中,较短的平均手术时间(63.5分钟与78.5分钟),圆盘去除的平均体积增加(0.6g vs.0.3g),最终术后平均椎间垂直高度的平均平均减少(1.0mm与0.5 mm。 )在前端镜宫颈椎间盘切除术中观察到更长的平均医院住宿(4.9d与4.5d)。术后,2种方法的临床结果得到了显着改善,但2个方法之间的差异不显着(P = 0.211和P = 0.257)。在所有注册的患者中观察到四种与手术相关的并发症(每组并发症为2;总共4个,共84%,4.8%)。结论。在我们的研究中,2条方法之间的临床结果没有显着差异。然而,在考虑椎间盘去除量,住院时间的长度和术后放射线图时,可以优选后全内镜宫颈椎间盘切除术。作为传统公开手术的有效补充,FECD是CIVDH的可靠替代处理,其最佳方法仍然开放讨论。

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