...
首页> 外文期刊>Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery. >Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion for multilevel cervical spondylosis: A systematic review
【24h】

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion for multilevel cervical spondylosis: A systematic review

机译:颈椎前路椎间盘切除术和融合术与颈椎前路椎体切除术和融合术治疗多级颈椎病

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Introduction: There is considerable controversy as to which technique is best option for reconstruction after multilevel anterior decompression for cervical spondylosis. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and radiographic results and complications of anterior cervical discectomy fusion (ACDF) and anterior cervical corpectomy fusion (ACCF) in the treatment of multi-level cervical spondylosis. Method: We reviewed and analyzed papers published from Jan 1969 to Dec 2010 regarding the comparison of ACDF and ACCF for multilevel cervical spondylosis. Statistical comparisons were made when appropriate. Results: Twelve studies were included in this systematic review. Blood loss was greater for ACCF compared with ACDF. Similarly, the rate of graft dislodgement in ACCF was higher than that in ACDF. Nonunion rates were 18.4% for 2-level ACDF and 37.3% for 3-level ACDF, whereas nonfusion rates were 5.1% for single-level ACCF and 15.2% for 2-level ACCF. In addition, nonunion rates for three disc levels fused were much higher than that for two disc levels fused, regardless of discectomy or corpectomy. Clinical outcome was compared between ACDF and ACCF in nine studies. Of these, similar outcome was found between ACDF and ACCF in six studies, whereas three studies reported better outcome in ACCF compared with ACDF. Conclusion: Nonunion rates of ACDF are higher than those of ACCF for multilevel cervical spondylosis. Sometimes, clinical outcome of ACCF was better than ACDF for multilevel cervical spondylosis.
机译:简介:关于哪种技术是颈椎病多级前减压后重建的最佳选择存在争议。这项研究的目的是比较颈椎前路椎间盘切除术融合术(ACDF)和颈前路椎体切除术融合术(ACCF)在多级颈椎病治疗中的临床和影像学结果以及并发症。方法:我们回顾并分析了1969年1月至2010年12月发表的有关ACDF和ACCF治疗多发性颈椎病的文章。适当时进行统计比较。结果:12项研究被纳入该系统评价。与ACDF相比,ACCF的失血量更大。同样,ACCF的移植物移位率高于ACDF。 2级ACDF的不愈合率为18.4%,三级ACDF的为37.3%,而单级ACCF的不融合率为5.1%,2级ACCF的为15.2%。此外,无论椎间盘切除术或尸体切除术如何,三种椎间盘融合术的不愈合率均远高于两种椎间盘融合术的不愈合率。在九项研究中比较了ACDF和ACCF的临床结局。其中,有六项研究在ACDF和ACCF之间发现了相似的结果,而三项研究表明ACCF的结果优于ACDF。结论:对于多发性颈椎病,ACDF的不愈合率高于ACCF。有时,ACCF的多发性颈椎病的临床疗效优于ACDF。

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