Prestige LP颈椎人工椎间盘置换术治疗单节段退行性颈椎病的远期疗效

目的 探讨Prestige LP颈椎人工椎间盘置换术（CTDR）治疗单节段退行性颈椎病的远期疗效。方法 2009年1月—2010年12月,海军军医大学长征医院采用Prestige LP CTDR治疗单节段退行性颈椎病患者31例,其中脊髓型颈椎病（CSM）13例,神经根型颈椎病（CSR）15例,混合型颈椎病3例。采用颈椎功能障碍指数（NDI）、日本骨科学会（JOA）评分和疼痛视觉模拟量表（VAS）评分评估临床疗效。在X线片上测量颈椎曲度（C_2~7 Cobb角）、手术节段及邻近节段活动度（ROM）;采用X线片及CT观察是否发生异位骨化（HO）;采用MRI观察邻近节段退行性变（ASD）程度。结果 所有患者随访10.2 ~ 11.0年。术后各随访时间点患者NDI、JOA评分、颈部和上肢痛VAS评分较术前均明显改善,差异有统计学意义（P < 0.05）。末次随访时颈椎曲度、上下邻近节段ROM与术前相比,差异无统计学意义（P > 0.05）。末次随访时手术节段ROM与术前、术后3个月和术后2年相比,差异有统计学意义（P < 0.05）。末次随访时有13例（41.9%）患者发生不同程度HO,10例（32.3%）发生ASD,但并未发生颈痛、根性疼痛等不适症状。末次随访时发生HO患者的手术节段ROM比未发生HO的患者下降,差异有统计学意义（P < 0.05）。结论 采用Prestige LP CTDR治疗单节段退行性颈椎病具有良好的远期临床疗效,假体能在保持颈椎ROM的基础上减少手术相邻节段椎间盘的过度活动,但易发生HO而导致手术节段ROM下降。     

前路颈椎椎间盘切除融合术后早期应用唑来膦酸改善骨质疏松患者临床疗效

前路颈椎椎间盘切除融合术（ACDF）治疗颈椎病效果显著,尤其对于老年患者,在减轻脊髓压迫的同时还能有效改善颈部活动功能^[1]。但融合术对椎体稳定性的维持受术后骨性结构重建的影响较大,老年患者多伴有不同程度的骨质疏松,对手术部位骨性结构的重建会产生不利影响,降低术后疗效^[2]。唑来膦酸能有效抑制骨质疏松所致骨吸收及转换、增加骨密度及强度,具有较好的改善骨量丢失的作用^[3]。Nakamura等^[4]的研究显示,相较于口服二膦酸盐类药物,每年定期静脉输注唑来膦酸能有效改善骨质疏松症状,治疗方便,患者依从性较好。本研究旨在研究骨质疏松症患者行ACDF治疗术后早期静脉注射唑来膦酸对手术疗效及远期预后的影响,为合并骨质疏松症患者ACDF术后治疗方案选择提供参考。     

人工颈椎椎间盘置换与颈前路减压融合术治疗脊髓型颈椎病的疗效分析

目的比较人工颈椎椎间盘置换术与颈前路椎间盘切除减压植骨融合术(anterior cervical discectomy and fu-sion,ACDF)治疗脊髓型颈椎病的临床疗效。方法回顾性分析本院收治的人工颈椎椎间盘置换术及ACDF治疗的脊髓型颈椎病病例。测量所有患者颈椎活动度(range of motion,ROM),置换节段及相邻节段的ROM,并行日本骨科学会(Japanese Orthopaedic Association,JOA)评分及Odom分级。结果所有患者术后JOA评分和Odom功能评定均得到显著改善。置换组术后颈椎ROM、置换节段及其邻近间隙平均ROM无明显改变,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。ACDF组患者中,术后颈椎ROM显著减小,邻近间隙ROM明显增大,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。置换组术后邻近节段的ROM明显小于ACDF组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。结论人工颈椎椎间盘置换术能保持颈椎ROM,避免邻近节段退变,早、中期疗效满意,远期效果尚有待临床进一步研究。     

颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术治疗神经根型颈椎病

目的 探讨颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术（ACDF）治疗神经根型颈椎病（CSR）的临床疗效。方法 2017年6月—2019年6月,采用ACDF治疗CSR患者43例,患者病程为8~28个月,病变位于C_4,5节段12例、C_5,6节段14例、C_6,7节段11例、C₇~T₁节段6例。评估并比较术前及术后3、6个月颈椎功能障碍指数（NDI）及颈部和上肢疼痛视觉模拟量表（VAS）评分;测量并比较术前及术后3、6个月颈椎曲度（C_2-7 Cobb角）、椎间高度和颈椎活动度（ROM）,观察并发症发生情况。结果 所有患者术后颈椎曲度、NDI、颈部和上肢疼痛VAS评分均较术前改善,差异有统计学意义（P < 0.05）;椎间高度、颈椎ROM与术前相比,差异无统计学意义（P > 0.05）。发生脑脊液漏2例,术后血肿及感染2例。结论 ACDF治疗CSR可取得较好的疗效,其可改善颈椎曲度,恢复神经功能。     

Hybrid手术与单纯颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术治疗颈椎退行性疾病的疗效比较

目的 对比Hybrid手术［颈椎人工椎间盘置换术（CTDR）联合颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术（ACDF）］与单纯ACDF治疗颈椎退行性疾病的临床疗效。方法 回顾性分析2010年8月—2019年8月收治的48例双节段及三节段颈椎退行性病变患者临床资料,其中采用Hybrid手术治疗8例（Hybrid组）,采用ACDF治疗40例（ACDF组）。应用倾向性评分匹配法（PSM）对Hybrid组和ACDF组患者进行匹配,共8对匹配成功。分别采用t检验、χ²检验及重复测量方差分析比较2组患者基本资料、手术前后颈椎功能障碍指数（NDI）、日本骨科学会（JOA）评分、疼痛视觉模拟量表（VAS）评分及C_2~7活动度（ROM）的变化。结果 匹配后2组术前NDI、JOA评分、VAS评分、C_2~7 ROM差异均无统计学意义（P > 0.05）。2组手术时间、术中出血量、住院时间差异均无统计学意义（P > 0.05）。2组患者术后NDI、JOA评分、VAS评分均较术前明显改善,差异有统计学意义（P < 0.05）;且Hybrid组NDI改善优于ACDF组,差异有统计学意义（P < 0.05）。2组患者术后C_2~7 ROM均较术前下降,差异有统计学意义（P < 0.05）;C_2~7 ROM随访中逐渐增加,且Hybrid组在各随访时间点均优于ACDF组,差异有统计学意义（P < 0.05）。结论 Hybrid手术与ACDF治疗颈椎退行性疾病具有相同的临床效果,Hybrid手术在改善颈部功能和保留颈椎ROM方面优于ACDF。     

颈椎间盘置换联合椎间融合对比单纯颈椎前路椎间融合治疗多节段颈椎病的Meta分析

[目的]系统评价颈椎间盘置换联合颈椎椎间融合(Hybrid手术)与传统的颈前路减压植骨融合(ACDF)治疗多节段退变性颈椎病效果的差异。[方法]计算机检索Pubmed,Medline,荷兰医学文摘,Cochrane图书馆、Cochrane协作网背痛专业试验数据库、中国生物医学文献数据库,CNKI,手工检索中文文献,收集1995²013年12月发表的关于颈椎间盘置换联合颈椎椎间融合(Hybrid手术)与颈前路减压植骨融合比较治疗多节段退变性颈椎病的随机、半随机对照试验,进行严格的质量评价,利用RevMan 5.2软件对纳入研究结果进行Meta分析。[结果]共纳入5个研究160例病例,Meta分析结果显示:Hybrid手术组与颈前路减压植骨融合术组比较手术时间、术前及术后VAS评分、术前C22013年12月发表的关于颈椎间盘置换联合颈椎椎间融合(Hybrid手术)与颈前路减压植骨融合比较治疗多节段退变性颈椎病的随机、半随机对照试验,进行严格的质量评价,利用RevMan 5.2软件对纳入研究结果进行Meta分析。[结果]共纳入5个研究160例病例,Meta分析结果显示:Hybrid手术组与颈前路减压植骨融合术组比较手术时间、术前及术后VAS评分、术前C2⁷ROM、上位临近节段ROM、下位临近节段差异无统计学意义;手术平均出血量Hybrid手术组少于ACDF组,术后24个月C27ROM、上位临近节段ROM、下位临近节段差异无统计学意义;手术平均出血量Hybrid手术组少于ACDF组,术后24个月C2⁷ROM Hybrid手术组大于ACDF组、术后24个月上位临近间盘ROM及下位临近间盘ROM Hybrid手术组少于ACDF组,且差异有统计学意义。[结论]Hybrid手术对于治疗多节段颈椎病拥有满意的临床疗效和影像学结果,Hybrid手术患者在随访期间相邻节段颈椎活动度降低,而ACDF手术患者在随访期间相邻节段颈椎活动度增加,术后C27ROM Hybrid手术组大于ACDF组、术后24个月上位临近间盘ROM及下位临近间盘ROM Hybrid手术组少于ACDF组,且差异有统计学意义。[结论]Hybrid手术对于治疗多节段颈椎病拥有满意的临床疗效和影像学结果,Hybrid手术患者在随访期间相邻节段颈椎活动度降低,而ACDF手术患者在随访期间相邻节段颈椎活动度增加,术后C2⁷整体活动度Hybrid手术组较ACDF组大,颈椎活动度更接近生理水平。但上述结果因样本量较小、文献质量不高等可能存在各种偏倚,以及Hybrid手术的远期临床效果,需要更多高质量的临床随机对照试验来得出更为可靠的结论。     

颈椎人工椎间盘置换术的价值与前景

颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术（ACDF）长期以来被视为颈椎病外科治疗的金标准，临床应用已有70余年，但其自身存在着一些难以克服的缺陷，如术后可能因植骨不愈合导致假关节形成、手术节段活动度（ROM）丧失、邻近节段退行性变加速、邻椎病等。     

颈人工椎间盘置换治疗单节段颈椎病的中期随访研究

目的观察颈人工椎间盘置换术(CTDR)治疗单节段颈椎病的中期临床疗效。方法回顾性分析2009年1月—2011年10月本院收治的随访4年的81例单节段退变性颈椎病患者临床资料,按照手术方式分为CTDR组(n=41)及颈椎前路椎间盘切除减压融合术(ACDF)组(n=40)。采用颈椎功能障碍指数(NDI)和日本骨科学会(JOA)评分进行功能评价,采用Mc Afee分级评定异位骨化情况,并进行组间比较。通过MRI进行影像学评估,比较2组手术节段、邻近节段活动度(ROM)和C_(2~7) Cobb角。结果两组患者术后NDI和JOA评分明显改善。术后1个月CTDR组NDI明显高于ACDF组,在工作、驾车和娱乐3个项目上差异均有统计学意义(P0.05),两组之间JOA评分改善差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。在上、下邻近节段ROM和C_(2~7) Cobb角方面,CTDR组术前、术后变化不明显;ACDF组上位邻近节段ROM术后明显增加,C_(2~7) Cobb角术后明显减小,与术前相比差异均有统计学意义(P0.05);CTDR组与ACDF组相比,术后上位邻近节段ROM及C_(2~7) Cobb角差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。CTDR组在末次随访时共有15例患者出现异位骨化,2例假体下沉,1例椎体前缘骨赘吸收。ACDF组无椎间融合器下沉、植骨不愈合、畸形愈合、内固定松动断裂等并发症发生。结论 CTDR在早期恢复独立生活能力方面优势明显,中期随访可较好维持颈椎生理曲度及置换节段ROM,减少相邻节段的异常活动,保护邻近椎间盘,但中期随访发现有异位骨化发生。     

单侧双通道内窥镜下椎间盘切除术治疗腰椎术后退行性变1例报告

腰椎术后邻近节段退行性变(ASD)是腰椎后路融合术后的常见远期并发症^[1-2],其发生率为4%~31%^[3-5]。ASD由多种因素引起,继而产生新的神经压迫症状。Kambin等^[6]于1986年提出单侧双通道内窥镜下椎间盘切除术(UBED)治疗腰椎椎间盘突出症(LDH)^[7],其兼具了开放手术与微创手术的优点^[8]。本院采用UBED治疗腰椎术后ASD患者1例,现将诊疗过程报告如下。     

颈椎人工椎间盘置换术治疗单节段颈椎病的长期疗效及安全性

目的 评估颈椎人工椎间盘置换术（CTDR）治疗单节段颈椎病的长期疗效及安全性。方法 回顾性分析2009年1月—2010年7月采用CTDR治疗并获10年以上随访的31例单节段颈椎病患者临床资料。采用疼痛视觉模拟量表（VAS）评分、日本骨科学会（JOA）评分及颈椎功能障碍指数（NDI）评价患者神经功能。采用影像学资料评估C_2~7 Cobb角、节段活动度（ROM）、椎间盘退行性变Pfirrmann分级及异位骨化（HO）McAfee等级。记录术后神经功能恶化、脑脊液漏、HO、人工假体相关并发症、邻椎病等并发症发生情况。结果 所有患者随访120 ~ 138（128.26±5.82）个月。末次随访时,C_2~7 Cobb角无明显变化;VAS评分、JOA评分及NDI均较术前明显改善,差异有统计学意义（P < 0.05）。末次随访时,置换节段ROM较术前有所下降,差异有统计学意义（P < 0.05）;上、下邻近节段及非邻近节段ROM较术前无明显变化,差异无统计学意义（P > 0.05）;上、下邻近节段及非邻近节段Pfirrmann分级均较术前显著进展,差异有统计学意义（P < 0.05）。末次随访时,发生HO 12例（38.71%）,包括McAfeeⅠ级2例,Ⅱ级4例,Ⅲ级6例;随着时间延长,HO发生率趋于稳定,但McAfee Ⅲ级比例仍持续升高。术后出现假体下沉前移2例（6.45%）,置换节段ROM均轻度下降,无神经功能恶化或后凸畸形,未予外科处理。结论 CTDR在改善神经功能、维持颈椎生理曲度和保留手术节段ROM方面具有良好的长期疗效;虽有HO、假体相关并发症及邻近节段退行性变发生,但并未导致邻椎病、神经功能恶化或后凸畸形,具有较高的安全性。     

Postoperative instability of cervical OPLL and cervical radiculomyelopathy

The presence of cervical spine instability with respect to preoperative and postoperative changes in angular, horizontal, and rotational displacement of the vertebral body were studied. With the anterior approach, the instability in the remaining unfused segments, and their relation to the kyphotic or lordotic fused segment were studied. With the posterior approach, postoperative ROM (range of motion) could be better maintained, and horizontal displacement was improved in more cases by laminoplasty compared with laminectomy. With the anterior approach, the compensatory function for the loss of motion of the segments resulting from fusion was most remarkable at the levels of C2-3 and C6-7. In the alignment of the anterior fused segments, it appears important that the physiologic lordotic position be maintained.     

Comparison of cervical kinematics between patients with cervical artificial disc replacement and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for cervical disc herniation

Background contextAlthough anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is an effective treatment option for patients with cervical disc herniation, it limits cervical range of motion, which sometimes causes discomfort and leads to biomechanical stress at neighboring segments. In contrast, cervical artificial disc replacement (ADR) is supposed to preserve normal cervical range of motion than ACDF. A biomechanical measurement is necessary to identify the advantages and clinical implications of ADR. However, literature is scarce about this topic and in those available studies, authors used the static radiological method, which cannot identify three-dimensional motion and coupled movement during motion of one axis.PurposeThe purpose of this study was to compare the clinical parameters and cervical motion by three-dimensional motion analysis between ACDF and ADR and to investigate the ability of ADR to maintain cervical kinematics.Study designThis was a prospective case control study.Patient samplePatients who underwent ADR or ACDF for the treatment of single-level cervical disc herniation.Outcome measuresVisual analog scale (VAS), Korean version of Neck Disability Index (NDI, %), and three-dimensional motion analysis were used.MethodsThe patients were evaluated by VAS and the Korean version of the NDI (%) to assess pain degree and functional status. Cervical motions were assessed by three-dimensional motion analysis in terms of sagittal, coronal, and horizontal planes. Markers of 2.5 cm in diameter were attached at frontal polar (Fpz), center (Cz), and occipital (Oz) of 10–20 system of electroencephalography, C7 spinous process, and both acromions. These evaluations were performed preoperatively and 1 month and 6 months after surgery.ResultsThe ACDF and ADR groups revealed no significant difference in VAS, NDI (%), and cervical range of motion preoperatively. After surgery, both groups showed no significant difference in VAS and NDI (%). In motion analysis, significantly more range of motion was retained in flexion and extension in the ADR group than the ACDF group at 1 month and 6 months. There was no significant difference in lateral tilt and rotation angle. In terms of coupled motion, ADR group exhibited significantly more preserved sagittal plane motion during right and left rotation and also showed significantly more preserved right lateral bending angle during right rotation than ACDF group at 1 month and 6 months. There was no significant difference in other coupled motions.ConclusionThree-dimensional motion analysis could provide useful information in an objective and quantitative way about cervical motion after surgery. In addition, it allowed us to measure not only main motion but also coupled motion in three planes. ADR demonstrated better retained cervical motion mainly in sagittal plane (flexion and extension) and better preserved coupled sagittal and coronal motion during transverse plane motion than ACDF. ADR had the advantage in that it had the ability to preserve more cervical motions after surgery than ACDF.     

Percutaneous cervical nucleoplasty and percutaneous cervical discectomy treatments of the contained cervical disc herniation

Background  

There were no studies in literature to compare the clinical outcomes of percutaneous nucleoplasty (PCN) and percutaneous cervical discectomy (PCD) in contained cervical disc herniation.     

前路颈椎椎间盘切除融合术与动态装置植入术治疗单节段颈椎椎间盘突出症

目的对比前路颈椎椎间盘切除融合术(ACDF)与颈椎前路动态装置植入术(DCI)对单节段颈椎椎间盘突出症(CDH)患者颈椎活动度(ROM)及术后颈椎曲度的影响。方法回顾性分析2018年6月—2019年9月海军军医大学长征医院收治的78例单节段CDH患者临床资料,其中42例采用ACDF治疗(ACDF组),36例采用DCI治疗(DCI组)。记录并比较2组患者手术时间、术中出血量,术前及术后1年日本骨科学会(JOA)评分、疼痛视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分、手术节段Cobb角、C2~7颈椎曲度、邻近椎体高度及颈椎各运动方向(前屈后伸、左右侧曲、左右旋转)的ROM。结果所有手术顺利完成。2组术中出血量比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。DCI组手术时间比ACDF组短,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。2组患者术后1年JOA评分、VAS评分和邻近椎体高度均较术前改善,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);组间比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。术后1年ACDF组C2~7颈椎曲度、手术节段Cobb角均较术前有所丢失,DCI组无明显丢失,组间比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。术后1年2组前屈后伸、左右侧曲ROM与术前比较均未出现明显变化,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。术后1年2组左右旋转ROM出现了相近程度的受限,与术前比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);组间比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论ACDF与DCI治疗单节段CDH均可获得满意的临床效果,虽然ACDF术后影像学资料显示有生理曲度的丢失,但颈椎ROM维持良好,并不影响患者的生活质量。     

Anterior cervical microforaminotomy for cervical radiculopathy--results and review

Analysis of anterior cervical microforaminotomy performed at the North Staffordshire University Hospital along with a review of literature of this minimally invasive procedure is presented. METHODS: A retrospective-prospective study was performed on 34 patients (24 males, 10 females) with cervical disc disease who had been surgically treated with anterior cervical microforaminotomy between 1999 and 2005. Age ranged from 37 to 75. MRI findings were disc prolapse in 28 and additional osteophytes in six. Microforaminotomy was performed according to the published technique. RESULTS: Single level operations were performed in 22 patients (21 unilateral, 1 bilateral) and multi-level operations were performed in 12 patients (7 unilateral and 5 bilateral). The short-term outcomes were excellent in 65% (i.e., complete resolution of all symptoms), good in 29% (relief of radiculopathy but some non-radicular discomfort persists), and fair in 6% (mild residual radiculopathy with or without non-radicular symptoms). Postoperative complications include one patient with partial C6 root damage, which was identified intraoperatively, but had excellent results at 2 months post operation. Long-term follow-up (using the cervical spine research society questionnaire) ranged from 2-48 months. The average pain score, neurological outcome and functional outcome improved after this operation. RE-OPERATION: One patient, who had 2 level bilateral surgeries, needed discectomies with fusion for new onset myelopathy 18 months later. CONCLUSION: Appropriate patient selection is cardinal in achieving good outcome in anterior microforaminotomy.     

经皮髓核成形术与椎间盘切除术治疗退变性颈椎间盘突出症

目的比较经皮髓核成形术与经皮椎间盘切除术治疗退变性颈椎间盘突出症的临床疗效及对颈椎稳定性的影响。方法2002年7月至2004年12月共收治退变性颈椎间盘突出症患者80例,行经皮髓核成形术42例(PCN组),经皮椎间盘切除术38例(PCD组)。回顾性分析两组的临床资料,比较两组在手术时间、临床效果及颈椎稳定性等的差异。结果所有病例随访6~26个月,PCN组平均(12±5)个月;PCD组平均(12±4)个月。两组手术均获成功。两组手术时间有显著差异(t=-21·70,P=0·000);两组手术临床效果(JOA评分)经自身配对t检验显示均有显著性差异(PCN:t=14·05,P=0·000;PCD:t=-14·79,P=0·000),即两组均有效;两组手术临床效果(Williams评分)经Kruskal-Wallis检验无显著差异(z=-0·377,P=0·706,>0·05),即两组临床效果相似。两组手术后均无颈椎不稳病例发生,颈椎稳定性手术前后均无显著差异(P>0·05)。结论经皮髓核成形术与经皮椎间盘切除术治疗颈椎间盘突出症的临床疗效优良,对颈椎稳定性影响小,不会造成颈椎失稳的发生。     

Raman spectroscopic study of cervical precancerous lesions and cervical cancer

Lasers in Medical Science - Early detection of cervical lesions, accurate diagnosis of cervical lesions, and timely and effective therapy can effectively avoid the occurrence of cervical cancer or...     

Bryan人工颈椎间盘置换术与椎间融合术治疗颈椎病的中期疗效比较

目的 分析对比Bryan人工颈椎间盘置换术与颈前路减压植骨融合术(anterior ceryical discectomy and fusion,ACDF)治疗颈椎病的中期疗效.方法 2003年11月至2004年2月,16例患者行Bryan人工颈椎间盘置换术(A组),35例患者行ACDF(B组),于术前、出院前、术后6周、3、6、12、24个月及随后每半年一次随访,通过日本矫形外科协会(JOA)评分、简明健康状况调查表(SF-36评分)、颈椎残障功能指数(neck disability index,NDI)评定治疗效果.同期摄X线片,检测病变节段的稳定性和活动度.结果 两组患者术中、术后均无严重并发症发生.所有患者均获得6年以上随访,平均73.5个月.A组术后无假体移位、脱落等并发症发生,1例发生自发融合;置换节段活动度与置换前活动度的差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).B组术后6个月X线片示植骨全部达骨性融合.两组患者术后随访时临床症状均明显缓解,疗效满意.两组患者的JOA评分及SF-36评分、NDI,术后随访时均较术前有明显提高(P＜0.05).B组活动度较术前明显减小(P＜0.01),而A组手术前后差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05);两组术后活动度差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).结论 Bryan人工颈椎间盘置换术疗效良好,同时还可保留颈椎病变节段活动度,减少轴性症状,为颈椎病治疗提供一种新的方法.

Abstract：

Objective To compare the clinical outcomes of Bryan disc replacement with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in patients with cervical spondylopathy. Methods Sixteen patients underwent Bryan cervical disc replacement (A group), and 35 patients underwent traditional ACDF (B group) were included in the study. Patients were followed up at regular intervals. The JOA score, SF-36, neck disability index (NDI) score and the dynamic flexion-extension radiographs were used to evaluated the oucomes.Results All the patients were followed up for more than 6 years (mean, 73.5 months). There were no severe adverse events in both groups. In A group, there were no differences between postoperative and preoperative mobility of surgical segments (P＞0.05). All patients obtained bone fusions 6 month after surgery in group B.In both groups, the clinical symptoms relieved obviously after surgery. The postoperative scores of the JOA,SF-36 and NDI significantly improved compared with those of preoperative ones (P＜0.05). In B group, range of motion (ROM) was significantly decreased postoperatively (P ＜0.01); in A group, there were no significant differences between postoperative and preoperative ROM (P＞0.05). The difference between two groups regarding ROM was noted (P＜0.05). Conclusion The mid-term outcomes of Bryan cervical arthroplasty are satisfied. And the cervical arthroplasty which can maintain the mobility of the segment, and decrease the incidence of the postoperative neck axial symptoms is a viable alternative to cervical spondylopathy.     

颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术后颈长肌、颈伸肌变化与临床疗效的相关性

目的评估颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术(anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, ACDF)后颈长肌、颈伸肌的容积变化, 以及其与临床疗效的相关性。方法回顾性分析2013年1月至2018年12月接受单节段ACDF手术治疗的脊髓型颈椎病患者57例, 随访时间为(23.0±4.8)个月(范围16～34个月)。所有纳入对象均于术前1周内和术后3、12个月及末次随访时进行MR检查, 在轴位MRI T2WI测量C2～C7各椎间盘水平的颈长肌截面积(axial section of longus colli cross section area, AxCSA)、长短径线比值(ratio of long and short diameter line, RLS), 并依据层厚计算颈长肌容积。同时测量相同层面包括多裂肌、颈半棘肌、头半棘肌、头夹肌、颈夹肌在内的颈伸肌截面积(cervical extensor cross-sectional area, CESA), 并将CESA与相应椎体截面积(vertebra body area, VBA)的比值作为颈伸肌容积进行分...