颈椎关节置换术与ACDF的吞咽困难发生率比较

Brad Segebarth MD , Jason C. Datta MD , Bruce Darden MD , Michael E. Janssen DO , Daniel B. Murrey MD , Alfred Rhyne MD , Ruth Beckham RN , Caroline Ponce
{"title":"颈椎关节置换术与ACDF的吞咽困难发生率比较","authors":"Brad Segebarth MD ,&nbsp;Jason C. Datta MD ,&nbsp;Bruce Darden MD ,&nbsp;Michael E. Janssen DO ,&nbsp;Daniel B. Murrey MD ,&nbsp;Alfred Rhyne MD ,&nbsp;Ruth Beckham RN ,&nbsp;Caroline Ponce","doi":"10.1016/j.esas.2009.12.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Study design</h3><p>Retrospective cohort from randomized prospective clinical trial.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Evaluate incidence of dysphagia between instrumented ACDF and a no-profile cervical disc arthroplasty.</p></div><div><h3>Summary of background data</h3><p>Dysphagia is a well-known complication following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and the etiology is multifactorial. One potential source for postoperative dysphagia involves the anterior profile of the implant used. Hence, a no-profile cervical disc arthroplasty could theoretically have fewer soft tissue adhesions and a lower incidence of dysphagia. The purpose of this study is to compare the incidence of dysphagia at least 1 year postoperatively following ACDF with anterior plating and a no-profile cervical disc arthroplasty.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A cohort of 87 patients meeting the inclusion criteria for the prospective, randomized, multicenter IDE trial of ProDisc-C versus ACDF were evaluated for dysphagia. Forty-five patients were randomized to receive cervical arthroplasty and 42 patients were randomized to the ACDF and plate group. The Bazaz-Yoo dysphagia questionnaire was administered in a blinded fashion after completion of at least 12 months follow-up.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Follow-up averaged 18.2 months and included 76 (87%) of the 87 enrolled, with 38 of the original 45 in the arthroplasty group and 38 of the original 42 in the ACDF group. Six of 38 (15.8%) in the arthroplasty group versus 16 of 38 (42.1%) in the ACDF group reported ongoing dysphagia complaints. This was found to be statistically significant (<em>P</em> = .03).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>This study suggests a significantly lower rate of dysphagia with a no-profile cervical disc arthroplasty compared to instrumented ACDF for single level disc disease between C3-7. Though there are many potential etiologies, we hypothesize this is related to the lack of anterior hardware in the retropharyngeal space. Operative technique, operating time, and significant midline retraction did not seem to result in more dysphagia complaints. Future studies comparing cervical disc arthroplasty and no-profile fusion devices may help delineate the effect that anterior instrumentation profile has on postoperative dysphagia.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":88695,"journal":{"name":"SAS journal","volume":"4 1","pages":"Pages 3-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.esas.2009.12.001","citationCount":"38","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Incidence of dysphagia comparing cervical arthroplasty and ACDF\",\"authors\":\"Brad Segebarth MD ,&nbsp;Jason C. Datta MD ,&nbsp;Bruce Darden MD ,&nbsp;Michael E. Janssen DO ,&nbsp;Daniel B. Murrey MD ,&nbsp;Alfred Rhyne MD ,&nbsp;Ruth Beckham RN ,&nbsp;Caroline Ponce\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.esas.2009.12.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Study design</h3><p>Retrospective cohort from randomized prospective clinical trial.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Evaluate incidence of dysphagia between instrumented ACDF and a no-profile cervical disc arthroplasty.</p></div><div><h3>Summary of background data</h3><p>Dysphagia is a well-known complication following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and the etiology is multifactorial. One potential source for postoperative dysphagia involves the anterior profile of the implant used. Hence, a no-profile cervical disc arthroplasty could theoretically have fewer soft tissue adhesions and a lower incidence of dysphagia. The purpose of this study is to compare the incidence of dysphagia at least 1 year postoperatively following ACDF with anterior plating and a no-profile cervical disc arthroplasty.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A cohort of 87 patients meeting the inclusion criteria for the prospective, randomized, multicenter IDE trial of ProDisc-C versus ACDF were evaluated for dysphagia. Forty-five patients were randomized to receive cervical arthroplasty and 42 patients were randomized to the ACDF and plate group. The Bazaz-Yoo dysphagia questionnaire was administered in a blinded fashion after completion of at least 12 months follow-up.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Follow-up averaged 18.2 months and included 76 (87%) of the 87 enrolled, with 38 of the original 45 in the arthroplasty group and 38 of the original 42 in the ACDF group. Six of 38 (15.8%) in the arthroplasty group versus 16 of 38 (42.1%) in the ACDF group reported ongoing dysphagia complaints. This was found to be statistically significant (<em>P</em> = .03).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>This study suggests a significantly lower rate of dysphagia with a no-profile cervical disc arthroplasty compared to instrumented ACDF for single level disc disease between C3-7. Though there are many potential etiologies, we hypothesize this is related to the lack of anterior hardware in the retropharyngeal space. Operative technique, operating time, and significant midline retraction did not seem to result in more dysphagia complaints. Future studies comparing cervical disc arthroplasty and no-profile fusion devices may help delineate the effect that anterior instrumentation profile has on postoperative dysphagia.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":88695,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"SAS journal\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"Pages 3-8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.esas.2009.12.001\",\"citationCount\":\"38\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"SAS journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1935981009000383\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SAS journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1935981009000383","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 38

摘要

研究设计:随机前瞻性临床试验的回顾性队列。目的评价ACDF内固定与无侧位颈椎间盘置换术之间吞咽困难的发生率。摘要背景资料吞咽困难是颈椎前路椎间盘切除术融合术后常见的并发症,其病因是多因素的。术后吞咽困难的一个潜在来源涉及所使用的种植体的前轮廓。因此,无侧位颈椎间盘置换术理论上可以减少软组织粘连和降低吞咽困难的发生率。本研究的目的是比较ACDF与前路钢板和无侧位颈椎间盘置换术术后至少1年吞咽困难的发生率。方法87例患者符合ProDisc-C与ACDF的前瞻性、随机、多中心IDE试验的纳入标准,对其吞咽困难进行评估。45例患者随机分为颈椎关节置换术组,42例患者随机分为ACDF +钢板组。Bazaz-Yoo吞咽困难问卷在完成至少12个月的随访后以盲法进行。结果随访平均18.2个月,87例入组患者中有76例(87%),其中45例关节置换术组38例,42例ACDF组38例。关节置换术组38人中有6人(15.8%)报告持续的吞咽困难,而ACDF组38人中有16人(42.1%)报告持续的吞咽困难。这是有统计学意义的(P = .03)。结论:在C3-7节段的单节段椎间盘病变中,无侧位颈椎间盘置换术比有固定的ACDF明显降低了吞咽困难的发生率。虽然有许多潜在的病因,我们假设这与咽后间隙缺乏前硬体有关。手术技术、手术时间和明显的中线牵回似乎并没有导致更多的吞咽困难投诉。未来比较颈椎间盘置换术和无侧位融合装置的研究可能有助于描述前路内固定侧位对术后吞咽困难的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Incidence of dysphagia comparing cervical arthroplasty and ACDF

Incidence of dysphagia comparing cervical arthroplasty and ACDF

Study design

Retrospective cohort from randomized prospective clinical trial.

Objective

Evaluate incidence of dysphagia between instrumented ACDF and a no-profile cervical disc arthroplasty.

Summary of background data

Dysphagia is a well-known complication following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and the etiology is multifactorial. One potential source for postoperative dysphagia involves the anterior profile of the implant used. Hence, a no-profile cervical disc arthroplasty could theoretically have fewer soft tissue adhesions and a lower incidence of dysphagia. The purpose of this study is to compare the incidence of dysphagia at least 1 year postoperatively following ACDF with anterior plating and a no-profile cervical disc arthroplasty.

Methods

A cohort of 87 patients meeting the inclusion criteria for the prospective, randomized, multicenter IDE trial of ProDisc-C versus ACDF were evaluated for dysphagia. Forty-five patients were randomized to receive cervical arthroplasty and 42 patients were randomized to the ACDF and plate group. The Bazaz-Yoo dysphagia questionnaire was administered in a blinded fashion after completion of at least 12 months follow-up.

Results

Follow-up averaged 18.2 months and included 76 (87%) of the 87 enrolled, with 38 of the original 45 in the arthroplasty group and 38 of the original 42 in the ACDF group. Six of 38 (15.8%) in the arthroplasty group versus 16 of 38 (42.1%) in the ACDF group reported ongoing dysphagia complaints. This was found to be statistically significant (P = .03).

Conclusion

This study suggests a significantly lower rate of dysphagia with a no-profile cervical disc arthroplasty compared to instrumented ACDF for single level disc disease between C3-7. Though there are many potential etiologies, we hypothesize this is related to the lack of anterior hardware in the retropharyngeal space. Operative technique, operating time, and significant midline retraction did not seem to result in more dysphagia complaints. Future studies comparing cervical disc arthroplasty and no-profile fusion devices may help delineate the effect that anterior instrumentation profile has on postoperative dysphagia.

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
0
×
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