颈椎手术后颈圈的使用:系统回顾

IF 1.7 Q2 SURGERY
JBJS Reviews Pub Date : 2024-09-16 eCollection Date: 2024-09-01 DOI:10.2106/JBJS.RVW.24.00114
John F McKeon, Paul M Alvarez, Diego Martinez Castaneda, Uchechukwu Emili, James Kirven, Anthony D Belmonte, Varun Singh
{"title":"颈椎手术后颈圈的使用:系统回顾","authors":"John F McKeon, Paul M Alvarez, Diego Martinez Castaneda, Uchechukwu Emili, James Kirven, Anthony D Belmonte, Varun Singh","doi":"10.2106/JBJS.RVW.24.00114","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The utility and risks associated with the use of cervical collars in the postoperative period after cervical spine surgery have been of debate. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the currently available evidence on the use of cervical collars after cervical spine surgery to assess their impact on outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A literature search of the PubMed database was performed using keywords \"cervical collar,\" \"anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF),\" \"posterior cervical decompression and fusion,\" \"laminoplasty,\" \"post-operative orthotic bracing,\" \"cervical decompression,\" and \"cervical orthosis\" in all possible combinations. All English studies with the level of evidence of I to IV that were published from May 1, 1986, to December 3, 2023, were considered for inclusion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 25 articles meeting the inclusion criteria were identified and reviewed. Regarding anterior and posterior fusion procedures, cervical collar use demonstrated improved short-term patient-reported outcomes and pain control. While surgeon motivation for collar use was to increase fusion rates, this is not well drawn out in the literature with the majority of studies demonstrated no significant difference in fusion rates between patients who wore a cervical collar and those who did not. Regarding motion-preserving procedures such as cervical laminoplasty, patients with prolonged postoperative cervical collar use demonstrated increased rates of axial neck pain and decreased final range of motion (ROM).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Surgeon motivation for postoperative cervical collar immobilization after completion of fusion procedures is to increase fusion rates and improve postoperative pain and disability despite this not being fully drawn out in the literature. After completion of motion-sparing procedures, the benefits of collar immobilization diminish with their prolonged use which could lead to increased rates of axial neck pain and decreased ROM. Cervical collar immobilization in the postoperative period should be considered its own intervention, with its own associated risk-benefit profile.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":47098,"journal":{"name":"JBJS Reviews","volume":"12 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cervical Collar Use Following Cervical Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review.\",\"authors\":\"John F McKeon, Paul M Alvarez, Diego Martinez Castaneda, Uchechukwu Emili, James Kirven, Anthony D Belmonte, Varun Singh\",\"doi\":\"10.2106/JBJS.RVW.24.00114\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The utility and risks associated with the use of cervical collars in the postoperative period after cervical spine surgery have been of debate. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the currently available evidence on the use of cervical collars after cervical spine surgery to assess their impact on outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A literature search of the PubMed database was performed using keywords \\\"cervical collar,\\\" \\\"anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF),\\\" \\\"posterior cervical decompression and fusion,\\\" \\\"laminoplasty,\\\" \\\"post-operative orthotic bracing,\\\" \\\"cervical decompression,\\\" and \\\"cervical orthosis\\\" in all possible combinations. All English studies with the level of evidence of I to IV that were published from May 1, 1986, to December 3, 2023, were considered for inclusion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 25 articles meeting the inclusion criteria were identified and reviewed. Regarding anterior and posterior fusion procedures, cervical collar use demonstrated improved short-term patient-reported outcomes and pain control. While surgeon motivation for collar use was to increase fusion rates, this is not well drawn out in the literature with the majority of studies demonstrated no significant difference in fusion rates between patients who wore a cervical collar and those who did not. Regarding motion-preserving procedures such as cervical laminoplasty, patients with prolonged postoperative cervical collar use demonstrated increased rates of axial neck pain and decreased final range of motion (ROM).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Surgeon motivation for postoperative cervical collar immobilization after completion of fusion procedures is to increase fusion rates and improve postoperative pain and disability despite this not being fully drawn out in the literature. After completion of motion-sparing procedures, the benefits of collar immobilization diminish with their prolonged use which could lead to increased rates of axial neck pain and decreased ROM. Cervical collar immobilization in the postoperative period should be considered its own intervention, with its own associated risk-benefit profile.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47098,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JBJS Reviews\",\"volume\":\"12 9\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JBJS Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.RVW.24.00114\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/9/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JBJS Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.RVW.24.00114","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:颈椎手术后术后使用颈椎吊环的效用和风险一直存在争议。本研究的目的是系统回顾目前关于颈椎手术后使用颈椎吊环的证据,以评估其对疗效的影响:方法:使用关键词 "颈椎项圈"、"颈椎前路椎间盘切除与融合术(ACDF)"、"颈椎后路减压与融合术"、"椎板成形术"、"术后矫形支具"、"颈椎减压 "和 "颈椎矫形器 "的所有可能组合对 PubMed 数据库进行文献检索。所有1986年5月1日至2023年12月3日期间发表的证据等级为I至IV级的英文研究均被纳入考虑范围:结果:共发现并审查了 25 篇符合纳入标准的文章。在前路和后路融合手术中,颈椎项圈的使用改善了患者报告的短期疗效和疼痛控制。虽然外科医生使用颈圈的动机是为了提高融合率,但这一点在文献中并没有得到很好的阐述,大多数研究表明,佩戴颈圈和不佩戴颈圈的患者在融合率上没有显著差异。关于颈椎板成形术等保留活动度的手术,术后长期佩戴颈圈的患者颈部轴向疼痛的发生率增加,最终活动范围(ROM)减小:结论:外科医生在完成融合术后使用颈圈固定的动机是提高融合率,改善术后疼痛和残疾状况,尽管这一点在文献中并未得到充分阐述。在保留活动度的手术完成后,颈圈固定的益处会随着其使用时间的延长而减少,这可能会导致轴性颈部疼痛和活动度下降的发生率增加。术后颈椎项圈固定应被视为一种干预措施,有其相关的风险-收益分析:证据等级:治疗三级。有关证据级别的完整描述,请参阅 "作者须知"。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cervical Collar Use Following Cervical Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review.

Background: The utility and risks associated with the use of cervical collars in the postoperative period after cervical spine surgery have been of debate. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the currently available evidence on the use of cervical collars after cervical spine surgery to assess their impact on outcomes.

Methods: A literature search of the PubMed database was performed using keywords "cervical collar," "anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF)," "posterior cervical decompression and fusion," "laminoplasty," "post-operative orthotic bracing," "cervical decompression," and "cervical orthosis" in all possible combinations. All English studies with the level of evidence of I to IV that were published from May 1, 1986, to December 3, 2023, were considered for inclusion.

Results: A total of 25 articles meeting the inclusion criteria were identified and reviewed. Regarding anterior and posterior fusion procedures, cervical collar use demonstrated improved short-term patient-reported outcomes and pain control. While surgeon motivation for collar use was to increase fusion rates, this is not well drawn out in the literature with the majority of studies demonstrated no significant difference in fusion rates between patients who wore a cervical collar and those who did not. Regarding motion-preserving procedures such as cervical laminoplasty, patients with prolonged postoperative cervical collar use demonstrated increased rates of axial neck pain and decreased final range of motion (ROM).

Conclusion: Surgeon motivation for postoperative cervical collar immobilization after completion of fusion procedures is to increase fusion rates and improve postoperative pain and disability despite this not being fully drawn out in the literature. After completion of motion-sparing procedures, the benefits of collar immobilization diminish with their prolonged use which could lead to increased rates of axial neck pain and decreased ROM. Cervical collar immobilization in the postoperative period should be considered its own intervention, with its own associated risk-benefit profile.

Level of evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
JBJS Reviews
JBJS Reviews SURGERY-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
4.30%
发文量
132
期刊介绍: JBJS Reviews is an innovative review journal from the publishers of The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery. This continuously published online journal provides comprehensive, objective, and authoritative review articles written by recognized experts in the field. Edited by Thomas A. Einhorn, MD, and a distinguished Editorial Board, each issue of JBJS Reviews, updates the orthopaedic community on important topics in a concise, time-saving manner, providing expert insights into orthopaedic research and clinical experience. Comprehensive reviews, special features, and integrated CME provide orthopaedic surgeons with valuable perspectives on surgical practice and the latest advances in the field within twelve subspecialty areas: Basic Science, Education & Training, Elbow, Ethics, Foot & Ankle, Hand & Wrist, Hip, Infection, Knee, Oncology, Pediatrics, Pain Management, Rehabilitation, Shoulder, Spine, Sports Medicine, Trauma.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信