前路、后路和联合手术入路对颈椎下轴型损伤患者预后的比较。

Hamid Rezaee, Ehsan Keykhosravi, Mojtaba Mashhadinejad, Masoud Pishjoo
{"title":"前路、后路和联合手术入路对颈椎下轴型损伤患者预后的比较。","authors":"Hamid Rezaee,&nbsp;Ehsan Keykhosravi,&nbsp;Mojtaba Mashhadinejad,&nbsp;Masoud Pishjoo","doi":"10.30476/BEAT.2021.90865.1266","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate the radiological and clinical outcomes of different surgical approaches in cervical spinal trauma in northeastern of Iran.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The present study was conducted retrospectively from January 2011 to December 2017 in Mashhad, Iran. The demographic characteristics, hospitalization duration, and patient's surgery detail data were extracted from the patients' medical records. The follow-up period was at least six months after surgery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This study was conducted on 72 patients and the majority (n=51; 70.8 %) of them were male. Moreover, the participants; mean age was determined at 40.7±16.5 years. In total, 33 (45.8%), 13(18.1%), and 11 patients (15.3%) were operated using the anterior, posterior, and combined approaches in one round, respectively. It should be mentioned that 15 (20.8%) patients underwent the combined approach in two rounds. Early mortality was observed in 22 (30.6%) patients in the admission period. According to the follow-up X-ray results, the type of approach showed no relationship with non-fusion, malalignment, cage subside, and adjacent disk narrowing (<i>p</i>>0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>According to the obtained results, there was no significant association between neurological and radiological outcomes among approaches. A high mortality rate was noted in combined surgery at one round, and the posterior approach is the best option when our goal is to correct lordosis.</p>","PeriodicalId":9333,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of emergency and trauma","volume":"9 3","pages":"133-137"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8286651/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Anterior, Posterior, and Combined Surgical Approaches on the Outcomes of Patients Suffering from Subaxial Cervical Spine Injuries.\",\"authors\":\"Hamid Rezaee,&nbsp;Ehsan Keykhosravi,&nbsp;Mojtaba Mashhadinejad,&nbsp;Masoud Pishjoo\",\"doi\":\"10.30476/BEAT.2021.90865.1266\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate the radiological and clinical outcomes of different surgical approaches in cervical spinal trauma in northeastern of Iran.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The present study was conducted retrospectively from January 2011 to December 2017 in Mashhad, Iran. The demographic characteristics, hospitalization duration, and patient's surgery detail data were extracted from the patients' medical records. The follow-up period was at least six months after surgery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This study was conducted on 72 patients and the majority (n=51; 70.8 %) of them were male. Moreover, the participants; mean age was determined at 40.7±16.5 years. In total, 33 (45.8%), 13(18.1%), and 11 patients (15.3%) were operated using the anterior, posterior, and combined approaches in one round, respectively. It should be mentioned that 15 (20.8%) patients underwent the combined approach in two rounds. Early mortality was observed in 22 (30.6%) patients in the admission period. According to the follow-up X-ray results, the type of approach showed no relationship with non-fusion, malalignment, cage subside, and adjacent disk narrowing (<i>p</i>>0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>According to the obtained results, there was no significant association between neurological and radiological outcomes among approaches. A high mortality rate was noted in combined surgery at one round, and the posterior approach is the best option when our goal is to correct lordosis.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9333,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bulletin of emergency and trauma\",\"volume\":\"9 3\",\"pages\":\"133-137\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8286651/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bulletin of emergency and trauma\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.30476/BEAT.2021.90865.1266\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bulletin of emergency and trauma","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30476/BEAT.2021.90865.1266","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:探讨伊朗东北部地区不同手术入路治疗颈椎外伤的影像学和临床效果。方法:本研究于2011年1月至2017年12月在伊朗马什哈德回顾性进行。从患者的医疗记录中提取人口统计学特征、住院时间和患者的手术细节数据。术后随访时间至少为6个月。结果:本研究共纳入72例患者,多数(n=51;70.8%)。此外,参与者;平均年龄40.7±16.5岁。共33例(45.8%)、13例(18.1%)和11例(15.3%)患者分别在一轮手术中采用前路、后路和联合入路。值得注意的是,15例(20.8%)患者在两轮内接受了联合入路。入院期早期死亡22例(30.6%)。根据随访x线结果,入路类型与不融合、不对准、cage沉降和相邻椎间盘狭窄无关(p>0.05)。结论:根据所获得的结果,不同入路的神经学和影像学预后无显著相关性。一期联合手术死亡率高,当我们的目标是矫正前凸时,后路入路是最佳选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Comparison of Anterior, Posterior, and Combined Surgical Approaches on the Outcomes of Patients Suffering from Subaxial Cervical Spine Injuries.

Comparison of Anterior, Posterior, and Combined Surgical Approaches on the Outcomes of Patients Suffering from Subaxial Cervical Spine Injuries.

Comparison of Anterior, Posterior, and Combined Surgical Approaches on the Outcomes of Patients Suffering from Subaxial Cervical Spine Injuries.

Objective: To investigate the radiological and clinical outcomes of different surgical approaches in cervical spinal trauma in northeastern of Iran.

Methods: The present study was conducted retrospectively from January 2011 to December 2017 in Mashhad, Iran. The demographic characteristics, hospitalization duration, and patient's surgery detail data were extracted from the patients' medical records. The follow-up period was at least six months after surgery.

Results: This study was conducted on 72 patients and the majority (n=51; 70.8 %) of them were male. Moreover, the participants; mean age was determined at 40.7±16.5 years. In total, 33 (45.8%), 13(18.1%), and 11 patients (15.3%) were operated using the anterior, posterior, and combined approaches in one round, respectively. It should be mentioned that 15 (20.8%) patients underwent the combined approach in two rounds. Early mortality was observed in 22 (30.6%) patients in the admission period. According to the follow-up X-ray results, the type of approach showed no relationship with non-fusion, malalignment, cage subside, and adjacent disk narrowing (p>0.05).

Conclusion: According to the obtained results, there was no significant association between neurological and radiological outcomes among approaches. A high mortality rate was noted in combined surgery at one round, and the posterior approach is the best option when our goal is to correct lordosis.

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
49
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: BEAT: Bulletin of Emergency And Trauma is an international, peer-reviewed, quarterly journal coping with original research contributing to the field of emergency medicine and trauma. BEAT is the official journal of the Trauma Research Center (TRC) of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences (SUMS), Hungarian Trauma Society (HTS) and Lusitanian Association for Trauma and Emergency Surgery (ALTEC/LATES) aiming to be a publication of international repute that serves as a medium for dissemination and exchange of scientific knowledge in the emergency medicine and trauma. The aim of BEAT is to publish original research focusing on practicing and training of emergency medicine and trauma to publish peer-reviewed articles of current international interest in the form of original articles, brief communications, reviews, case reports, clinical images, and letters.
×
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