三节段前路颈椎椎间盘切除术和融合,有或没有后路稳定系统,通过24个月评估:一项多中心随机对照试验。

IF 2.6 2区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Spine Pub Date : 2025-05-07 DOI:10.1097/BRS.0000000000005387
K Brandon Strenge, Joshua E Heller, Daniel M Williams, Alexander C Lemons, Rahul V Shah, Pierce D Nunley, Gabriel C Tender, Marcus B Stone, Bruce M McCormack, Jon E Block, Matthew B Jenkins, April E Slee, Erik M Summerside
{"title":"三节段前路颈椎椎间盘切除术和融合,有或没有后路稳定系统,通过24个月评估:一项多中心随机对照试验。","authors":"K Brandon Strenge, Joshua E Heller, Daniel M Williams, Alexander C Lemons, Rahul V Shah, Pierce D Nunley, Gabriel C Tender, Marcus B Stone, Bruce M McCormack, Jon E Block, Matthew B Jenkins, April E Slee, Erik M Summerside","doi":"10.1097/BRS.0000000000005387","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This trial was designed to understand safety and effectiveness outcomes in subjects with three-level cervical degenerative disc disease treated with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) alone or supplemented with a posterior cervical fusion (PCF) performed using an investigational posterior cervical stabilization system (PCSS).</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>ACDF remains the most common surgical treatment for cervical disc disease. Long-segment (3+ disc levels) procedures are associated with increased risk of complications including symptomatic non-union. Supplementing ACDF with PCF to form a circumferential cervical fusion (CCF) improves biomechanical stability but increases the surgical burden for the patient.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This multi-center study compared outcomes in participants with 3-level symptomatic cervical disc degeneration treated with either ACDF or CCF. The CCF procedure incorporated PCF with PCSS. The primary endpoint was 12-month fusion success, defined by bridging bone across the interbody and range of motion <2° across all treated disc levels. The 24-month secondary endpoint was a composite of fusion success, neck disability index (NDI) improvement, neurological status success, and freedom from surgical revision.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This protocol-defined interim analysis included 202 participants with 12-month outcomes and 116 participants with 24-month outcomes. Twelve-month fusion success was higher for CCF (61/100, 61%) compared to ACDF (17/102, 17%) (P<0.001). The 24-month secondary endpoint was also improved with CCF compared to ACDF (51% [30/59] vs 23% [13/57]; P=0.002). Revision rates were lower for CCF (1/59, 2%) compared to ACDF (13/57, 23%) (P<0.001), with 11 of 13 ACDF revisions addressing symptomatic non-union. Adding supplemental PCF with PCSS did not increase the rates of adverse events (ACDF=65%, CCF=46%, P=0.005).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study represents the first randomized controlled trial assessing treatment of 3-level cervical disc disease. Long-segment ACDF demonstrated low fusion rates and high rates of revision. Adding supplemental PCF with PCSS improved fusion without increasing the risk of surgical complications.</p>","PeriodicalId":22193,"journal":{"name":"Spine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Three-level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion with or without an Investigational Posterior Stabilization System Assessed through 24 Months: A Multi-Center Randomized Controlled Trial.\",\"authors\":\"K Brandon Strenge, Joshua E Heller, Daniel M Williams, Alexander C Lemons, Rahul V Shah, Pierce D Nunley, Gabriel C Tender, Marcus B Stone, Bruce M McCormack, Jon E Block, Matthew B Jenkins, April E Slee, Erik M Summerside\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/BRS.0000000000005387\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This trial was designed to understand safety and effectiveness outcomes in subjects with three-level cervical degenerative disc disease treated with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) alone or supplemented with a posterior cervical fusion (PCF) performed using an investigational posterior cervical stabilization system (PCSS).</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>ACDF remains the most common surgical treatment for cervical disc disease. Long-segment (3+ disc levels) procedures are associated with increased risk of complications including symptomatic non-union. Supplementing ACDF with PCF to form a circumferential cervical fusion (CCF) improves biomechanical stability but increases the surgical burden for the patient.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This multi-center study compared outcomes in participants with 3-level symptomatic cervical disc degeneration treated with either ACDF or CCF. The CCF procedure incorporated PCF with PCSS. The primary endpoint was 12-month fusion success, defined by bridging bone across the interbody and range of motion <2° across all treated disc levels. The 24-month secondary endpoint was a composite of fusion success, neck disability index (NDI) improvement, neurological status success, and freedom from surgical revision.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This protocol-defined interim analysis included 202 participants with 12-month outcomes and 116 participants with 24-month outcomes. Twelve-month fusion success was higher for CCF (61/100, 61%) compared to ACDF (17/102, 17%) (P<0.001). The 24-month secondary endpoint was also improved with CCF compared to ACDF (51% [30/59] vs 23% [13/57]; P=0.002). Revision rates were lower for CCF (1/59, 2%) compared to ACDF (13/57, 23%) (P<0.001), with 11 of 13 ACDF revisions addressing symptomatic non-union. Adding supplemental PCF with PCSS did not increase the rates of adverse events (ACDF=65%, CCF=46%, P=0.005).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study represents the first randomized controlled trial assessing treatment of 3-level cervical disc disease. Long-segment ACDF demonstrated low fusion rates and high rates of revision. Adding supplemental PCF with PCSS improved fusion without increasing the risk of surgical complications.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22193,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Spine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-07\",\"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.0000000000005387\",\"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.0000000000005387","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:前瞻性随机对照试验。目的:本试验旨在了解单纯前路颈椎椎间盘切除术和融合术(ACDF)或辅以后路颈椎融合术(PCF)治疗三级颈椎退行性椎间盘病患者的安全性和有效性。背景:ACDF仍然是颈椎间盘疾病最常用的手术治疗方法。长节段(3个以上椎间盘节段)手术与并发症风险增加相关,包括症状性不愈合。用PCF补充ACDF形成宫颈周向融合(CCF)可提高生物力学稳定性,但增加了患者的手术负担。方法:这项多中心研究比较了ACDF或CCF治疗的3级症状性颈椎间盘退变患者的结果。CCF程序包括PCF和PCSS。主要终点是12个月的融合成功,通过椎间骨桥接和活动范围来定义。结果:这项方案定义的中期分析包括202名12个月的结果和116名24个月的结果。CCF的12个月融合成功率(61/ 100,61%)高于ACDF(17/ 102,17%)(结论:本研究是首个评估3节段颈椎间盘病治疗的随机对照试验。长节段ACDF表现出低融合率和高翻修率。添加PCF和PCSS可以改善融合,而不会增加手术并发症的风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Three-level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion with or without an Investigational Posterior Stabilization System Assessed through 24 Months: A Multi-Center Randomized Controlled Trial.

Study design: Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.

Objective: This trial was designed to understand safety and effectiveness outcomes in subjects with three-level cervical degenerative disc disease treated with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) alone or supplemented with a posterior cervical fusion (PCF) performed using an investigational posterior cervical stabilization system (PCSS).

Background: ACDF remains the most common surgical treatment for cervical disc disease. Long-segment (3+ disc levels) procedures are associated with increased risk of complications including symptomatic non-union. Supplementing ACDF with PCF to form a circumferential cervical fusion (CCF) improves biomechanical stability but increases the surgical burden for the patient.

Methods: This multi-center study compared outcomes in participants with 3-level symptomatic cervical disc degeneration treated with either ACDF or CCF. The CCF procedure incorporated PCF with PCSS. The primary endpoint was 12-month fusion success, defined by bridging bone across the interbody and range of motion <2° across all treated disc levels. The 24-month secondary endpoint was a composite of fusion success, neck disability index (NDI) improvement, neurological status success, and freedom from surgical revision.

Results: This protocol-defined interim analysis included 202 participants with 12-month outcomes and 116 participants with 24-month outcomes. Twelve-month fusion success was higher for CCF (61/100, 61%) compared to ACDF (17/102, 17%) (P<0.001). The 24-month secondary endpoint was also improved with CCF compared to ACDF (51% [30/59] vs 23% [13/57]; P=0.002). Revision rates were lower for CCF (1/59, 2%) compared to ACDF (13/57, 23%) (P<0.001), with 11 of 13 ACDF revisions addressing symptomatic non-union. Adding supplemental PCF with PCSS did not increase the rates of adverse events (ACDF=65%, CCF=46%, P=0.005).

Conclusions: This study represents the first randomized controlled trial assessing treatment of 3-level cervical disc disease. Long-segment ACDF demonstrated low fusion rates and high rates of revision. Adding supplemental PCF with PCSS improved fusion without increasing the risk of surgical complications.

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:604180095
Book学术官方微信