椎间盘高度对颈椎椎间盘置换术后疗效的影响:系统回顾

IF 2.6 2区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Spine Pub Date : 2024-11-08 DOI:10.1097/BRS.0000000000005211
Gregory S Kazarian, Robert Cecere, Michelle A Zabat, Mihir S Dekhne, Even Sheha, James Dowdell, Sravisht Iyer, Sheeraz Qureshi
{"title":"椎间盘高度对颈椎椎间盘置换术后疗效的影响:系统回顾","authors":"Gregory S Kazarian, Robert Cecere, Michelle A Zabat, Mihir S Dekhne, Even Sheha, James Dowdell, Sravisht Iyer, Sheeraz Qureshi","doi":"10.1097/BRS.0000000000005211","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Systematic review.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Describe the impact of disc height on outcomes following cervical disc replacement (CDR).</p><p><strong>Summary of background data: </strong>Implant sizing and positioning may impact outcomes following CDR.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines using the EMBASE and PubMed databases. The goal of this review was to assess the impact of postoperative \"disc height\" on clinical and radiologic outcomes following CDR.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 12 studies were included in the systematic review. In the literature. \"disc height\" was assessed using multiple different measures: postoperative disc height (DH; n=4), disc height change (DHC; n=4), degree of disc distraction (DDD; n=2), prosthesis height (PH; n=2), functional spinal unit height (FSUH; n=2), and facet distraction (FD; n=1). DH and DHC were the most common measures studied. DHC was associated with statistically and clinically significant differences in several patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs). However, DH was not associated with any statistically or clinically significant differences in PROMs. With respect to cervical range of motion (ROM), DHC appeared to demonstrate statistically and clinically relevant differences in some of the studies included in this review, while DH was associated with statistically, but not clinically, significant differences. The majority of studies identified DHC <2 mm as an important cutoff to optimize outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>\"Disc height,\" especially as measured by DHC, may be an important intraoperative consideration when selecting implant size during CDR. Maintaining DHC <2 mm may optimize PROMs and ROM. Improving technique and implant sizing may aid in translating ex vivo advantages in implant mobility to in vivo improvements in ROM and PROMs.</p>","PeriodicalId":22193,"journal":{"name":"Spine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Impact of Disc Height on Outcomes Following Cervical Disc Replacement: A Systematic Review.\",\"authors\":\"Gregory S Kazarian, Robert Cecere, Michelle A Zabat, Mihir S Dekhne, Even Sheha, James Dowdell, Sravisht Iyer, Sheeraz Qureshi\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/BRS.0000000000005211\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Systematic review.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Describe the impact of disc height on outcomes following cervical disc replacement (CDR).</p><p><strong>Summary of background data: </strong>Implant sizing and positioning may impact outcomes following CDR.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines using the EMBASE and PubMed databases. The goal of this review was to assess the impact of postoperative \\\"disc height\\\" on clinical and radiologic outcomes following CDR.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 12 studies were included in the systematic review. In the literature. \\\"disc height\\\" was assessed using multiple different measures: postoperative disc height (DH; n=4), disc height change (DHC; n=4), degree of disc distraction (DDD; n=2), prosthesis height (PH; n=2), functional spinal unit height (FSUH; n=2), and facet distraction (FD; n=1). DH and DHC were the most common measures studied. DHC was associated with statistically and clinically significant differences in several patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs). However, DH was not associated with any statistically or clinically significant differences in PROMs. With respect to cervical range of motion (ROM), DHC appeared to demonstrate statistically and clinically relevant differences in some of the studies included in this review, while DH was associated with statistically, but not clinically, significant differences. The majority of studies identified DHC <2 mm as an important cutoff to optimize outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>\\\"Disc height,\\\" especially as measured by DHC, may be an important intraoperative consideration when selecting implant size during CDR. Maintaining DHC <2 mm may optimize PROMs and ROM. Improving technique and implant sizing may aid in translating ex vivo advantages in implant mobility to in vivo improvements in ROM and PROMs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22193,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Spine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Spine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000005211\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000005211","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究设计目的:描述椎间盘高度对颈椎间盘置换术(CDR)后疗效的影响:描述椎间盘高度对颈椎间盘置换术(CDR)后疗效的影响:植入物的大小和位置可能会影响颈椎间盘置换术后的疗效:根据《系统综述和元分析首选报告项目》(Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses,PRISMA)指南,使用 EMBASE 和 PubMed 数据库进行了系统综述。综述的目的是评估术后 "椎间盘高度 "对 CDR 后临床和放射学结果的影响:结果:共有 12 项研究被纳入系统性综述。在文献中。"椎间盘高度 "采用多种不同的方法进行评估:术后椎间盘高度(DH;n=4)、椎间盘高度变化(DHC;n=4)、椎间盘牵张程度(DDD;n=2)、假体高度(PH;n=2)、功能性脊柱单位高度(FSUH;n=2)和面牵张(FD;n=1)。DH和DHC是最常见的研究指标。DHC 与几项患者报告结果指标 (PROM) 在统计学和临床上的显著差异有关。然而,DH 在 PROMs 方面没有任何统计学或临床显著差异。在颈椎活动范围(ROM)方面,DHC似乎在本综述所包含的一些研究中显示出统计学和临床相关性差异,而DH则与统计学差异相关,但无临床显著性差异。大多数研究确定了 DHC 结论:"椎间盘高度",尤其是通过 DHC 测量的高度,可能是 CDR 术中选择植入物大小的一个重要考虑因素。保持 DHC
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Impact of Disc Height on Outcomes Following Cervical Disc Replacement: A Systematic Review.

Study design: Systematic review.

Objective: Describe the impact of disc height on outcomes following cervical disc replacement (CDR).

Summary of background data: Implant sizing and positioning may impact outcomes following CDR.

Methods: A systematic review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines using the EMBASE and PubMed databases. The goal of this review was to assess the impact of postoperative "disc height" on clinical and radiologic outcomes following CDR.

Results: A total of 12 studies were included in the systematic review. In the literature. "disc height" was assessed using multiple different measures: postoperative disc height (DH; n=4), disc height change (DHC; n=4), degree of disc distraction (DDD; n=2), prosthesis height (PH; n=2), functional spinal unit height (FSUH; n=2), and facet distraction (FD; n=1). DH and DHC were the most common measures studied. DHC was associated with statistically and clinically significant differences in several patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs). However, DH was not associated with any statistically or clinically significant differences in PROMs. With respect to cervical range of motion (ROM), DHC appeared to demonstrate statistically and clinically relevant differences in some of the studies included in this review, while DH was associated with statistically, but not clinically, significant differences. The majority of studies identified DHC <2 mm as an important cutoff to optimize outcomes.

Conclusions: "Disc height," especially as measured by DHC, may be an important intraoperative consideration when selecting implant size during CDR. Maintaining DHC <2 mm may optimize PROMs and ROM. Improving technique and implant sizing may aid in translating ex vivo advantages in implant mobility to in vivo improvements in ROM and PROMs.

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
Spine
Spine 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
361
审稿时长
6.0 months
期刊介绍: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins is a leading international publisher of professional health information for physicians, nurses, specialized clinicians and students. For a complete listing of titles currently published by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins and detailed information about print, online, and other offerings, please visit the LWW Online Store. Recognized internationally as the leading journal in its field, Spine is an international, peer-reviewed, bi-weekly periodical that considers for publication original articles in the field of Spine. It is the leading subspecialty journal for the treatment of spinal disorders. Only original papers are considered for publication with the understanding that they are contributed solely to Spine. The Journal does not publish articles reporting material that has been reported at length elsewhere.
×
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