前路颈椎椎间盘切除术和融合术中独立支架与支架和钢板的放射学结果比较:回顾性队列研究

Avicenna Journal of Medicine Pub Date : 2025-01-28 eCollection Date: 2024-10-01 DOI:10.1055/s-0044-1801833
Isam Sami Moghamis, Abduljabbar Alhammoud, Amgad M Elshoeibi, Abedallah Abudalou, Jawad Derbas, Mutaz Awad Alhardallo, Salahuddeen Abdelsalam, Abdulmoeen Baco
{"title":"前路颈椎椎间盘切除术和融合术中独立支架与支架和钢板的放射学结果比较:回顾性队列研究","authors":"Isam Sami Moghamis, Abduljabbar Alhammoud, Amgad M Elshoeibi, Abedallah Abudalou, Jawad Derbas, Mutaz Awad Alhardallo, Salahuddeen Abdelsalam, Abdulmoeen Baco","doi":"10.1055/s-0044-1801833","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background</b>  Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is one of the most commonly used techniques for neural decompression in degenerative cervical radiculopathy and cervical myelopathy. Controversies regarding the superiority of cage augmentation with anterior cervical plate remain, yet several surgeons are still performing ACDF with a stand-alone cage (ACDF-SA). Our study aimed to compare the radiological outcomes between the ACDF augmented with anterior cervical plate (ACDF-CPA) and ACDF-SA in single-level cervical degenerative disc disease. <b>Methods</b>  A retrospective data review was conducted for patients who underwent ACDF between January 2011 and December 2019. All adult patients who underwent single-level ACDF for cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy with at least 12 months of follow-up were included in the study. Patients who had a systemic infection, trauma injury, history of malignancy, inadequate radiographs, and less than 12 months of follow-up were excluded from the study. Radiological outcomes, including cage subsidence, fusion rate, and adjacent segment degeneration, were assessed by two senior orthopaedic spine fellows. Adjusted risk ratios were used to compare the radiological outcomes of ACDF-SA and ACDF-CPA, adjusting for age and gender. <b>Results</b>  A total of 43 patients were included. Among them, 58% of the patients underwent a stand-alone cage ACDF, while 42% had anterior cervical plate augmentation. The overall fusion rate at 6 months was 76%. The ACDF-SA group's fusion rate was 88%, while that of the ACDF-CPA group was 61%. At 12 months, the overall fusion rate was 81% and was comparable between the two groups. Cage subsidence and adjacent segment degeneration rates were similar between the groups at 6 and 12 months. Adjusted relative risk analysis showed a 50% higher probability of fusion at 6 months in the ACDF-SA group compared with the ACDF-CPA group (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-2.22) and a 22% higher probability at 12 months, though not statistically significant (95% CI: 0.90-1.64). Female gender was associated with higher fusion rates and lower subsidence risk at 12 months. <b>Conclusion</b>  Augmentation with the anterior cervical plate in ACDF did not show superiority to the conventional stand-alone cage in mono-segmental ACDF. Our study showed similar outcomes regarding cage subsidence, adjacent segment disease, and fusion rates at 12 months. However, the stand-alone cage achieved faster fusion at 6 months than the plate group.</p>","PeriodicalId":32889,"journal":{"name":"Avicenna Journal of Medicine","volume":"14 4","pages":"216-222"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11896729/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Radiological Outcomes of Stand-alone Cage versus Cage and Plate in Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Retrospective Cohort Study.\",\"authors\":\"Isam Sami Moghamis, Abduljabbar Alhammoud, Amgad M Elshoeibi, Abedallah Abudalou, Jawad Derbas, Mutaz Awad Alhardallo, Salahuddeen Abdelsalam, Abdulmoeen Baco\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/s-0044-1801833\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background</b>  Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is one of the most commonly used techniques for neural decompression in degenerative cervical radiculopathy and cervical myelopathy. Controversies regarding the superiority of cage augmentation with anterior cervical plate remain, yet several surgeons are still performing ACDF with a stand-alone cage (ACDF-SA). Our study aimed to compare the radiological outcomes between the ACDF augmented with anterior cervical plate (ACDF-CPA) and ACDF-SA in single-level cervical degenerative disc disease. <b>Methods</b>  A retrospective data review was conducted for patients who underwent ACDF between January 2011 and December 2019. All adult patients who underwent single-level ACDF for cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy with at least 12 months of follow-up were included in the study. Patients who had a systemic infection, trauma injury, history of malignancy, inadequate radiographs, and less than 12 months of follow-up were excluded from the study. Radiological outcomes, including cage subsidence, fusion rate, and adjacent segment degeneration, were assessed by two senior orthopaedic spine fellows. Adjusted risk ratios were used to compare the radiological outcomes of ACDF-SA and ACDF-CPA, adjusting for age and gender. <b>Results</b>  A total of 43 patients were included. Among them, 58% of the patients underwent a stand-alone cage ACDF, while 42% had anterior cervical plate augmentation. The overall fusion rate at 6 months was 76%. The ACDF-SA group's fusion rate was 88%, while that of the ACDF-CPA group was 61%. At 12 months, the overall fusion rate was 81% and was comparable between the two groups. Cage subsidence and adjacent segment degeneration rates were similar between the groups at 6 and 12 months. Adjusted relative risk analysis showed a 50% higher probability of fusion at 6 months in the ACDF-SA group compared with the ACDF-CPA group (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-2.22) and a 22% higher probability at 12 months, though not statistically significant (95% CI: 0.90-1.64). Female gender was associated with higher fusion rates and lower subsidence risk at 12 months. <b>Conclusion</b>  Augmentation with the anterior cervical plate in ACDF did not show superiority to the conventional stand-alone cage in mono-segmental ACDF. Our study showed similar outcomes regarding cage subsidence, adjacent segment disease, and fusion rates at 12 months. However, the stand-alone cage achieved faster fusion at 6 months than the plate group.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":32889,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Avicenna Journal of Medicine\",\"volume\":\"14 4\",\"pages\":\"216-222\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11896729/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Avicenna Journal of Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0044-1801833\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/10/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Avicenna Journal of Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0044-1801833","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景颈椎前路椎间盘切除术和融合术(ACDF)是退行性颈椎病和脊髓型颈椎病最常用的神经减压技术之一。关于颈椎前板笼增强术的优越性仍然存在争议,但一些外科医生仍在使用独立笼(ACDF- sa)进行ACDF。我们的研究目的是比较单节段颈椎退变椎间盘病变的ACDF加前颈椎钢板(ACDF- cpa)和ACDF- sa的影像学结果。方法回顾性分析2011年1月至2019年12月间行ACDF的患者资料。所有接受单级ACDF治疗颈神经根病和脊髓病且随访至少12个月的成年患者均被纳入研究。有全身性感染、外伤、恶性肿瘤病史、x线片检查不充分、随访时间少于12个月的患者被排除在研究之外。放射学结果,包括笼沉降、融合率和邻近节段退变,由两名高级骨科脊柱研究员评估。校正风险比用于比较ACDF-SA和ACDF-CPA的放射学结果,并对年龄和性别进行校正。结果共纳入43例患者。其中,58%的患者接受了独立式cage ACDF, 42%的患者接受了颈椎前板增强术。6个月时的总融合率为76%。ACDF-SA组融合率为88%,ACDF-CPA组融合率为61%。12个月时,两组的整体融合率为81%,具有可比性。6个月和12个月时,两组鼠笼下沉率和相邻节段退变率相似。调整后的相对风险分析显示,与ACDF-CPA组相比,ACDF-SA组6个月的融合概率高50%(95%可信区间[CI]: 1.01-2.22), 12个月的融合概率高22%,但无统计学意义(95% CI: 0.90-1.64)。女性在12个月时具有较高的融合率和较低的下沉风险。结论在单节段ACDF中,颈椎前板增强术并不比传统的独立式椎笼具有优势。我们的研究显示了类似的笼沉降、邻近节段疾病和12个月融合率的结果。然而,独立笼在6个月时的融合速度比钢板组快。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Comparative Radiological Outcomes of Stand-alone Cage versus Cage and Plate in Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Comparative Radiological Outcomes of Stand-alone Cage versus Cage and Plate in Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Background  Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is one of the most commonly used techniques for neural decompression in degenerative cervical radiculopathy and cervical myelopathy. Controversies regarding the superiority of cage augmentation with anterior cervical plate remain, yet several surgeons are still performing ACDF with a stand-alone cage (ACDF-SA). Our study aimed to compare the radiological outcomes between the ACDF augmented with anterior cervical plate (ACDF-CPA) and ACDF-SA in single-level cervical degenerative disc disease. Methods  A retrospective data review was conducted for patients who underwent ACDF between January 2011 and December 2019. All adult patients who underwent single-level ACDF for cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy with at least 12 months of follow-up were included in the study. Patients who had a systemic infection, trauma injury, history of malignancy, inadequate radiographs, and less than 12 months of follow-up were excluded from the study. Radiological outcomes, including cage subsidence, fusion rate, and adjacent segment degeneration, were assessed by two senior orthopaedic spine fellows. Adjusted risk ratios were used to compare the radiological outcomes of ACDF-SA and ACDF-CPA, adjusting for age and gender. Results  A total of 43 patients were included. Among them, 58% of the patients underwent a stand-alone cage ACDF, while 42% had anterior cervical plate augmentation. The overall fusion rate at 6 months was 76%. The ACDF-SA group's fusion rate was 88%, while that of the ACDF-CPA group was 61%. At 12 months, the overall fusion rate was 81% and was comparable between the two groups. Cage subsidence and adjacent segment degeneration rates were similar between the groups at 6 and 12 months. Adjusted relative risk analysis showed a 50% higher probability of fusion at 6 months in the ACDF-SA group compared with the ACDF-CPA group (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-2.22) and a 22% higher probability at 12 months, though not statistically significant (95% CI: 0.90-1.64). Female gender was associated with higher fusion rates and lower subsidence risk at 12 months. Conclusion  Augmentation with the anterior cervical plate in ACDF did not show superiority to the conventional stand-alone cage in mono-segmental ACDF. Our study showed similar outcomes regarding cage subsidence, adjacent segment disease, and fusion rates at 12 months. However, the stand-alone cage achieved faster fusion at 6 months than the plate group.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
审稿时长
26 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信