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:全内镜下颈椎间盘切除术治疗颈椎间盘突出症的前路或后路?-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。对于CIVDH的最佳FECD手术方法仍存在争议。方法。从2010年3月至2012年7月,共纳入了84例有症状的单级CIVDH患者,这些患者采用前入路(42例)或后入路(42例)进行了FECD。在手术前对患者进行了神经学评估,并在常规门诊就诊。使用视觉模拟量表和改良的MacNab标准评估临床结局。影像学随访包括静态和动态颈椎平片,计算机断层扫描和磁共振图像。结果。两组中,平均手术时间较短(63.5分钟vs. 78.5分钟),平均椎间盘摘除量增加(0.6 g vs. 0.3 g),最终术后平均椎间垂直高度的平均减小幅度较大(1.0 mm vs. 0.5 mm) ),并且在前全内镜下颈椎间盘摘除术组中观察到更长的平均住院时间(4.9 d和4.5 d)。术后,两种方法的临床结果均得到明显改善,但两种方法之间的差异并不显着(分别为P = 0.211和P = 0.257)。在所有入组患者中观察到4种与手术相关的并发症(每组并发症2例,共84例中的4例,占4.8%)。结论。在我们的研究中,两种方法之间的临床结局没有显着差异。然而,考虑到椎间盘切除量,住院时间和术后影像学改变,后路全内镜颈椎间盘摘除术可能更可取。作为传统开放手术的有效补充,FECD是CiVDH的可靠替代疗法,其最佳方法仍有待讨论。

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