颈椎间盘置换术与颈前路椎间融合术治疗双节段颈椎间盘退变性疾病疗效的Meta分析

目的 :系统评价颈椎间盘置换术(TDR)与颈前路椎间盘切除椎间植骨融合术(ACDF)治疗相邻两个节段颈椎间盘退变性疾病的疗效。方法:检索Pubmed、Medline、Embase等数据库,筛选应用两种手术方式治疗相邻两个节段颈椎间盘退变性疾病的前瞻性临床对照研究;各研究中观察组术式为TDR(TDR组),对照组术式为ACDF(ACDF组);两组病例数均不少于10例;随访时间均不少于2年;术后疗效评价指标至少包括以下指标中的一项:颈痛及上肢痛VAS评分(VAS),颈部功能障碍指数(NDI),健康调查简表SF-36评分(SF-36),术后不良事件(AE)等指标。采用Doowns-Black评分及NOS评分评价纳入研究的质量。结果:共纳入5篇英文文献,2篇为随机对照研究(RCT),3篇为前瞻性队列研究,研究质量Doowns-Black评分均在18分及以上,NOS评价前瞻性队列研究质量均为6星。共纳入593例患者,其中TDR组314例,ACDF组279例。经Meta分析合并效应指标,末次随访时颈痛VAS评分标准化均数差(SMD)及不良事件发生相对危险度(RR)两组比较无显著性差异(P0.05);TDR组上肢痛VAS评分、NDI评分、邻近上节段和下节段屈伸ROM、邻近节段退变低于ACDF组(P0.05),SF36-PCS躯体健康评分及手术节段屈伸ROM SMD高于ACDF组(P0.05)。结论 :相邻两个节段颈椎间盘退变性疾病行TDR的疗效较ACDF具有优势,安全性较高,但需要更多大样本随机对照研究以及更长时间的随访结果来验证。     

颈椎人工椎间盘置换术与颈椎前路减压融合术治疗双节段颈椎病的Meta分析

目的:系统评价前路颈椎人工椎间盘置换术(anterior cervical artificial disc replacement,ACDR)与前路颈椎减压融合术(anterior cervical decompression and fusion,ACDF)治疗双节段颈椎病的有效性与安全性。方法:计算机检索2016年5月1日以前Pub Med、Embase、Medline、Cochrane图书馆、中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM)、中国期刊全文数据库(CNKI)、万方数据库(Wanfang Database)、维普中文科技期刊数据库(VIP)关于应用ACDR与ACDF治疗双节段颈椎病的随机对照试验(randomized control Ied trials,RCT)及队列研究(cohort study)的文献,纳入文献的方法学质量采用改良Jadad量表及MINORS量表评价,提取各研究中术后24个月、48个月、60个月时的颈部功能障碍指数(NDI)评分、颈痛VAS评分、上肢痛VAS评分、SF-36评分、神经功能改善率、邻近节段椎间盘退变、再手术率、不良事件、患者满意度数据,并将这些研究的数据通过Review Manager 5.3软件进行Meta分析。结果:共纳入9篇文献、2570例患者,随访时间24~60个月,ACDR组1601例,ACDF组969例。纳入文献改良Jadad评4分3篇,3分4篇;MINORS评分18分2篇。Meta分析结果显示:术后24个月、48个月、60个月随访时,ACDR组的NDI[SMD=0.52;95%CI:(0.43,0.62),P0.00001]、颈痛VAS[SMD=0.19;95%CI:(0.10,0.29),P0.0001]、上肢痛VAS[SMD=0.15;95%CI:(0.06,0.25),P=0.002]、SF-36生理健康评分(PCS)[SMD=0.35;95%CI:(0.25,0.44),P0.00001]改善均优于ACDF组;神经功能改善率[RR=1.01;95%CI:(0.97,1.05),P=0.54]两组比较无统计学差异;两组上位椎间盘退变[RR=0.43;95%CI:(0.37,0.51),P0.00001]、下位椎间盘退变[RR=0.35;95%CI:(0.19,0.66),P=0.001]、再手术率[RR=0.30;95%CI:(0.23,0.40),P0.00001]、不良事件发生率[RR=0.72;95%CI:(0.58,0.89),P=0.003]、满意度[RR=1.08;95%CI:(1.04,1.11),P0.0001]比较差异均有统计学意义,ACDR组均优于ACDF组。结论:ACDR和ACDF治疗双节段颈椎病在改善神经功能方面一致,但在提高患者术后生活质量、减少手术相关并发症方面,前者优于后者。     

颈椎前路减压人工颈椎间盘置换术与融合术治疗单节段颈椎间盘突出症的短期疗效比较

背景：颈前路椎间盘切除植骨融合术（ACDF）能够为有症状的颈椎病患者提供较好的治疗效果,但颈椎融合可导致相邻节段椎间盘内部应力增加,加速邻近节段椎间盘的退变。颈椎人工椎间盘置换术（ACDR）作为最具代表性的颈椎前路非融合技术,为颈椎间盘突出症的治疗提供了另外一种外科手段。目的：比较ACDR和ACDF治疗单节段颈椎间盘突出症的临床效果。方法：2009年1月至2012年2月,61例单节段颈椎间盘突出症患者接受Discover人工颈椎间盘置换手术（置换组,26例）或ACDF手术（融合组,35例）。分别在术前,术后1周,术后3、6、12及24个月对患者进行疼痛视觉模拟评分（VAS）、日本矫形外科协会（JOA）评分及影像学评估,同时记录患者并发症及二次手术情况。结果：最终,52例患者（融合组29例,置换组23例）获得平均15.3个月（12-24个月）随访。两组患者术后各随访时间点的颈痛、上肢痛VAS和JOA评分,较术前均有改善（P〈0.05）,但两组间无显著统计学差异（P〉0.05）。置换组术后手术节段及邻近节段屈伸活动度与术前比较无统计学差异（P〉0.05）。融合组融合成功率为90.5%。置换组中2例患者术后6个月时假体有〈3 mm的前移,l例术后发生脑脊液漏。融合组中1例患者发生邻椎病并接受二次手术治疗。结论：单节段Discover人工颈椎间盘置换术和ACDF均可明显缓解颈椎间盘突出症患者的症状。间盘置换还能减少手术邻近节段代偿活动度的增加,有望预防相邻节段退变的发生。     

单节段颈椎间盘置换术对相邻颈椎节段退变的影响

目的比较单节段人工颈椎间盘置换术(CDA)与单节段颈椎前路减压融合术(ACDF)对相邻颈椎节段退变的影响。方法收集自2007-02—2011-08共150例纳入队列研究。行CDA 45例、ACDF 105例。比较2组术前、术后颈椎疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS法)、颈椎功能障碍指数(NDI)、日本骨科协会(JOA)评分、手术节段活动度(ROM)评价疗效。常规拍摄颈椎正侧位、过伸过屈位X线片,或行颈椎CT或(和)MRI进一步检查,以改良的Hilibrand法评价相邻节段退变程度。结果 2组均获得随访4年。ADR可以明显保留节段运动,但二者在术后VAS评分、NDI评分、JOA评分,及相邻节段退变率上差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论 CDA减少相邻节段的退变并不明确,仍需要大量严格随机对照试验的长时间、大样本观察。     

经皮与经肌间隙入路椎弓根螺钉内固定术治疗单节段胸腰椎骨折疗效的Meta分析

【摘要】 目的：系统评价经皮椎弓根螺钉内固定术（percutaneous pedicle screw fixation,PPSF）与经肌间隙入路椎弓根螺钉内固定术（mini-open Wiltse approach with pedicle screw fixation,MWPSF）治疗单节段胸腰椎骨折的疗效,为临床决策提供参考依据。方法：计算机检索Pubmed、Web of Science、Cochrane Library、万方数据库（Wangfang Database）、中国期刊全文数据库（CNKI）中关于PPSF与MWPSF治疗单节段胸腰椎骨折的临床对照研究,检索时限为自建库起至2020年3月。纳入文献包含下列参考指标中的两项以上：手术时间、术中出血量、术中透视次数、术后腰痛视觉模拟评分（visual analogue scale,VAS）、椎体后凸角（Cobb角）、伤椎椎体前缘高度比值（VBH）、Oswestry功能障碍指数（ODI）、手术并发症例数。Meta分析采用Cochrane Library提供的Rev-Man 5.3 软件进行。结果：共纳入17篇文献[3篇随机对照研究（randomized controlled trial,RCT）、14篇队列研究]、1057例患者,其中PPSF组519例,MWPSF组538例。MWPSF组手术时间较短[SMD=17.87,95%CI（11.60,24.15）,P＜0.05],术中透视次数较少[SMD=4.96,95%CI（4.29,5.63）,P＜0.05];末次随访时,MWPSF组Cobb角矫正较多[SMD=-7.56,95%CI（-10.61,-4.52）,P＜0.01],矫正丢失较少[SMD=1.76,95%CI（0.41,3.11）,P=0.01],VBH矫正丢失较少[SMD=0.90,95%CI（0.30,1.51）,P＜0.05]; PPSF组术中出血较少[SMD=-62.01,95%CI（-78.84,-45.18）,P＜0.05],术后1周VAS评分较低[SMD=-0.49,95%CI（-0.87,-0.11）,P=0.01]。在末次随访时两组的VAS评分、Cobb角、VBH、ODI、手术并发症无显著性差异（P＞0.05）。结论： PPSF和MWPSF治疗单节段胸腰椎骨折安全可靠,疗效一致。相较于MWPSF,PPSF具有创伤小、出血少及术后恢复快的优点,但增加手术时间和医源性辐射,且后凸矫形能力不足。     

两种颈前路手术方式治疗双节段颈椎病

[目的]比较两种颈前路术式治疗双节段颈椎病的疗效。[方法]回顾性分析2010~2014年52例双节段颈椎病患者的临床资料,其中颈前路椎体次全切减压+钛网植骨融合内固定术治疗29例(ACCF组),颈前路双节段椎间盘切除减压+Cage植骨融合内固定术治疗23例(ACDF组)。t检验比较两组平均失血量、平均手术时间、NDI评分。方差分析法比较术后JOA评分改善率、内固定沉降率。[结果]ACCF组平均随访时间(25±2.3)个月,ACDF组为(26±1.9)个月。两组患者神经症状均较术前明显改善,JOA评分及术后2年植骨沉降率差异无统计学意义。两组术中平均失血量、平均手术时间、术后2年NDI评分方面差异有统计学意义。平均失血量:ACCF组为(176±28.2)ml,ACDF组(65.7±16.7)ml,P=0.015;平均手术时间:ACCF组为(70±11.2)min,ACDF组(99±15.6)min,P=0.023;术后2年NDI评分:ACCF组为(9.3±3.3),ACDF组(5.2±1.1),P=0.019。[结论]除非出现病椎平面后方较大致压物,双节段ACDF组不能彻底减压的情况,双节段ACDF术式较单节段ACCF更具优势。     

单节段Discover人工颈椎间盘置换术与颈前路减压融合术治疗颈椎病的长期疗效对比

【摘要】 目的：比较单节段Discover人工颈椎间盘置换术（artificial cervical disc replacement,ACDR）与颈前路椎间盘切除减压融合术（anterior cervical discectomy and fusion,ACDF）治疗颈椎病的长期临床疗效。方法：回顾性分析2009年1月～2011年12月在西京医院行单节段ACDR和ACDF治疗的颈椎病患者的临床资料。ACDR组（n=21例）男性15例,女性6例,年龄33~58岁（44.0±7.5岁）;采用Discover假体,C4/5 2例,C5/6 17例,C6/7 2例。ACDF组（n=25例）男性20例,女性5例,年龄33~63岁（48.2±8.5岁）;C3/4 1例,C4/5 3例, C5/6 18例,C6/7 3例。采用日本矫形外科学会（Japanese Orthopedic Association,JOA）评分法、疼痛视觉模拟评分法（visual analogue scale,VAS）和颈椎功能障碍指数（neck disability index,NDI）对两组患者术前/术后3个月、1年、2年、5年及末次随访时的神经功能和临床疗效进行评估;利用X线、CT及MRI影像学资料测量和评估ACDR组手术节段活动度（range of motion,ROM）、末次随访时的异位骨化（heterotopic ossification,HO）以及末次随访时两组患者手术邻近节段退变（adjacent segment degeneration,ASD）情况,并进行统计学分析。结果：ACDR组随访时间138.9±12.0个月,ACDF组随访时间136.9±10.8个月,两组无统计学差异（P>0.05）。两组患者术后各随访时间点JOA评分、上肢痛VAS评分、颈痛VAS评分和NDI均较术前显著性改善,与同组术前比较均有统计学差异（P<0.05）,末次随访与术后2年比较均无统计学差异（P>0.05）;两组同时间点比较均无统计学差异（P>0.05）。ACDR组术后3个月、1年、2年时手术节段ROM与术前比较显著性增加（P<0.05）,术后5年和末次随访时与术前比较均无统计学差异（P>0.05）。ACDR组末次随访时13例（61.9%）手术节段发生HO,其中McAfee分级Ⅰ级1例,Ⅱ级3例,Ⅲ级6例,Ⅳ级3例。ACDR组17个（40.5%）邻近节段发生退变,ACDF组34个（68.0%）邻近节段发生退变,两组ASD发生率有统计学差异（P<0.05）。末次随访时ACDR组无二次手术患者,ACDF组2例因ASD导致二次手术。两组二次手术率有统计学差异（0 vs 8%,P<0.05）。结论：与ACDF术式相比,单节段ACDR治疗颈椎病能够获得一致的、良好的长期临床疗效,并在减少ASD发生方面具有优势。然而,随时间延长ACDR手术节段HO发生率较高,造成手术节段活动度降低。     

皮质骨轨迹螺钉与传统椎弓根螺钉固定对短节段腰椎融合术患者临床疗效影响的Meta分析

【摘要】 目的：通过Meta分析系统评价皮质骨轨迹（cortical bone trajectory,CBT）螺钉与传统椎弓根螺钉（pedicle screw,PS）固定对短节段腰椎融合术患者临床疗效的影响,为脊柱外科医生选择相应的内固定方式提供理论参考。方法：检索PubMed、Scopus、Web of Science、EI和知网数据库自建库至2022年7月1日发表的对比CBT螺钉（CBT组）和PS（PS组）固定对腰椎椎间融合术疗效影响的文献,提取椎间融合率、手术并发症发生率、术后邻近节段退变（adjacent segment degeneration,ASD）发生率、术中失血量、手术时间、平均住院时间、背部疼痛视觉模拟评分（visual analog scale,VAS）、Oswestry功能障碍指数（Oswestry disability index,ODI）和日本骨科协会（Japanese Orthopaedic Association,JOA）评分等指标,采用RevMan 5.3进行Meta分析。随机对照试验采用Cochrane风险偏倚评估标准,队列分析采用Newcastle-Ottawa Scale（NOS）风险偏倚评估标准对纳入文献质量进行评估。结果：共纳入15篇文献,其中3篇为随机对照试验,12篇为队列研究,文献质量评估结果显示纳入文献质量较高。通过Meta分析得出,与PS固定相比,CBT组手术并发症发生率[RR=0.49,95%CI（0.34,0.70）,P<0.05]、术后ASD发生率[RR=0.33,95%CI（0.16,0.65）,P<0.05]更低;术中出血量[SMD=-0.81,95%CI（-0.98,-0.63）,P<0.05]更少;手术时间[SMD=-0.49,95%CI（-0.67,-0.30）,P<0.05]及平均住院时间[SMD=-0.60,95% CI（-0.81,-0.38）,P<0.05]更短;JOA评分[SMD=0.23,95%CI（0.02,0.43）,P<0.05]更高;而两者在椎间融合率、背部疼痛VAS评分和ODI方面无统计学差异。结论：与应用PS固定相比,在短节段腰椎固定融合术中应用CBT螺钉固定的手术并发症发生率、术后ASD发生率较低,手术时间、住院时间较短,术中出血量较少,JOA评分较高。     

零切迹椎间融合器与钛板椎间融合器治疗多节段颈椎病的Meta分析

目的 :比较零切迹椎间融合器(Zero-p)与椎间融合器联合钛板固定(cage-plate)治疗多节段颈椎病(multilevel cervical spondylotic)临床疗效、放射学结果及并发症情况。方法 :计算机检索中国知网、万方数据库、中国生物医学文献数据库、PubMed, Ovid,Medline数据库。中文关键词为:"零切迹椎间融合器"、"自稳型椎间融合器"、"锚定式椎间融合器"、"钉板内固定"、"Zero-p"、"ROI-C"、"ACDF"、"颈椎前路减压融合";英文检索词"Zero-p"、"Zero-profile"、"ROI-C"、"cage and plate"、"stand-alone anchored spacer"、"anchored cage"、‘‘anchored spacer"、"no-profile"、"ACDF"。由2名评价者严格按照纳入及排除标准进行文献筛选,收集对比Zero-p与cage联合钛板治疗多节段颈椎病的文献,并进行数据提取及质量评价。采用RevMan 5.3软件进行Meta分析,比较ACDF术中应用两种不同内固定材料治疗多节段颈椎病的临床疗效、影像学结果及并发症。结果:共纳入8篇高质量文献,共634例患者,零切迹组302例,cage+钛板组332例。Meta分析显示:零切迹组在手术时间[MD=-13.08,95%CI(-23.38,-2.78),P=0.01]、术中出血量[MD=-6.76,95%CI(-12.92,-0.61),P=0.03]与cage+钛板组比较差异具有统计学意义;两组JOA评分差异[MD=-0.14,95%CI(-0.36,0.09),P=0.23]、NDI评分差异[MD=-0.05,95%CI (-0.43,0.33),P=0.80]及手术节段融合率[RR=0.99,95%CI (0.95,1.04),P=0.78]均无统计学差异;零切迹组与cage+钛板组术后C2-7Cobb角[MD=-3.11,95%CI(-4.47,-1.74),P0.0001]及术后椎前软组织厚度[MD=-1.00,95%CI(-1.35,-0.65),P0.00001]差异有统计学意义;零切迹组术后吞咽困难发生率[RR=0.61, 95%CI(0.50,0.75),P0.00001]及术后影像学邻近节段退变发生率[RR=0.20,95%CI(0.06,0.66),P=0.008]均低于cage+钛板组;零切迹组术后融合器沉降发生率[RR=3.07,95%CI(1.73,5.47),P=0.0001]显著高于cage+钛板固定组。结论:两种内固定治疗多节段颈椎病的临床疗效相同,零切迹椎间融合器具有手术时间短、术中出血量少、吞咽困难及邻近节段退变发生率低等特点,但传统cage联合钛板固定在恢复颈椎生理曲度、防止融合器沉降方面更具优势。     

颈前路应用Zero-P椎间融合系统与钛板联合cage融合系统治疗颈椎病的Meta分析

目的:比较颈前路应用Zero-P椎间融合系统与钛板联合cage椎间融合系统治疗颈椎病的疗效与安全性。方法:通过计算机检索PubMed、Embase、Cochrane Library、中国知网数据库2008年1月～2018年6月对比Zero-P椎间融合系统与传统钛板联合cage椎间融合系统治疗颈椎病的临床研究文献,按照纳入与排除标准选择文献,以纽卡斯尔渥太华评分(Newcastle Ottawa scale,NOS)对纳入文献进行质量评价,提取数据包括手术时间、术中出血量、术后吞咽困难发生情况、手术前后日本骨科协会(Japanese Orthopaedic Association,JOA)评分、颈椎功能障碍指数(neck disability index,NDI)、上肢痛视觉模拟评分(visual analogue score,VAS)、C3～C7Cobb角、融合率、邻近节段退变。使用Revman 5.3软件进行Meta分析,用固定效应模型或随机效应模型进行数据合并,计算比值比(odds ratio,OR)/标准化均数差(standardized mean difference,SMD)/危险度差值(risk difference,RD)和95%可信区间(confidence interval,CI)。以漏斗图判定发表偏倚。结果 :共有14篇文献总计1159例患者(Zero-P组546例患者,钛板组613例患者)纳入研究。文献质量评价6篇为9分,4篇为8分,4篇为7分。Meta分析结果显示,应用Zero-P椎间融合系统患者的手术时间[SMD=-0.60,95%CI(-0.73,0.46),P0.01]、术中出血量[SMD=-0.50,95%CI(-0.64,-0.37),P0.01]、术后吞咽困难发生率[RD=-0.09,95%CI(-0.14,-0.04),P0.01]及慢性吞咽困难发生率[RD=0.14,95%CI(0.06,0.31),P0.01]显著低于应用钛板联合cage椎间融合系统的患者。两组手术前后JOA评分、NDI、VAS评分、Cobb角、融合率及邻近节段退变无显著性差异(P0.05)。漏斗图显示无明显发表偏倚。结论:与应用钛板联合cage椎间融合系统相比,应用Zero-P椎间融合系统治疗颈椎病亦具有满意的疗效,且能显著减少手术时间、术中出血量,并减少术后吞咽困难发生情况,具有较高的安全性。     

Anterior cervical foramenotomy for cervical radiculopathy

Anterior cervical discectomy (ACD) is standard practice for cervical radiculopathy. Irrespective of the precise method used, it involves more or less complete disc removal with resultant anatomical and biomechanical derangements, and frequently the insertion of a bone or prosthetic graft. Anterior cervical foramenotomy is an alternative procedure that allows effective anterior decompression of the nerve root and lateral spinal cord, whilst conserving the native disc, preserving normal anatomy and movement, and protecting against later degeneration at adjacent spaces as far as possible. The aim of the study was to determine the safety and efficacy of anterior cervical foramenotomy in the treatment of cervical radiculopathy and took the form of a prospective study of 21 cases under the care of a single surgeon. All patients had a single level or two level anterior cervical foramenotomy. All had pre- and postoperative visual analogue scores for arm and neck pain, arm strength, sensation and overall use. A comparison between patients' perceptions and surgeon's observations was also made. Patients were followed up for between 10 and 36 months. Sixty-eight per cent completed full pre- and postoperative assessments. Twenty-eight per cent of the responders had complete arm pain resolution. There were statistically significant reductions in arm and neck pain, and overall disability. The surgeon's impression of improvement paralleled that of the patients. There was one complication with discitis. Anterior cervical foramenotomy is a safe and effective treatment for cervical radiculopathy caused by posterolateral cervical disc prolapse or uncovertebral osteophyte, and might also reduce adjacent segment degeneration.     

Posterior cervical laminoplasty formultilevel cervical spine stenosis

Cervical laminoplasty for treating multilevel spinal stenosis appears to be a good surgical alternative to the more traditional laminectomy or anterior decompression and fusion. This procedure avoids the morbidity associated with extensive anterior procedures and also appears not to be associated with late kyphosis, which can be seen in patients after a laminectomy. This review outlines the rationale, indications, contraindications, and early clinical results for patients undergoing a posterior laminoplasty.     

微创前路经上位椎体椎间孔减压术治疗神经根型颈椎病

【摘要】 目的：探讨微创前路经上位椎体椎间孔减压术治疗神经根型颈椎病的有效性。方法：2008年7月~2010年7月12例单侧神经根型颈椎病患者在延边大学医院接受微创前路经上位椎体椎间孔减压术。其中男7例,女5例,年龄为35~68岁,平均49岁。椎间孔狭窄部位：C5/6 4例,C6/7 5例,C7/T1 3例。软性髓核突出3例,钩椎关节骨质增生7例,突出的髓核钙化2例。均行前路手术,术中采用脊柱手术专用显微镜,在病变上位椎体确定钻孔起始部位,利用高速钻石气钻磨出一约6mm直径的通路达到病变区域,减压椎间孔。观察术前及末次随访时上肢放射性疼痛的VAS评分、颈椎功能障碍指数（NDI）及病变水平椎间盘高度。结果：手术时间为56~110min,平均86±6min;术中失血量为40~120ml,平均92±8ml。无椎动脉损伤、贺纳氏综合征、喉返神经损伤等并发症。术后随访时间为12~23个月,平均15.8±1.3个月。术前上肢疼痛VAS评分为8.5±0.5分（7~10分）,末次随访时为1.4±0.2分（0~3分）,两者比较有显著性差异（P<0.05）;术前NDI为26.4±1.3分（22~31分）,末次随访时为4.2±0.6分（3~8分）,两者比较有显著性差异（P<0.05）,改善率为84.1%;术前病变水平椎间盘高度为5.4±0.7mm（4.2~6.1mm）,末次随访时为4.9±0.7mm（3.6~5.8mm）,两者比较无显著性差异（P>0.05）。术后满意度为100%。结论：微创前路经上位椎体椎间孔减压术可减少对椎间盘的损伤,是治疗单侧神经根型颈椎病的有效手术方法。     

Alternating cervical laminoplasty for cervical spondylotic myelopathy

We present a novel method of performing an 'open-door' cervical laminoplasty. The complete laminotomy is sited on alternate sides at successive levels, thereby allowing the posterior arch to be elevated to alternate sides. Foraminotomies can be carried out on either side to relieve root compression. The midline structures are preserved. We undertook this procedure in 23 elderly patients with a spondylotic myelopathy. Each was assessed clinically and radiologically before and after their operation. Follow-up was for a minimum of three years (mean 4.5 years; 3 to 7). Using the modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association scoring system, the mean pre-operative score was 8.1 (6 to 10), which improved post-operatively to a mean of 12.7 (11 to 14). The mean percentage improvement was 61% (50% to 85.7%) after three years. The canal/vertebral body ratio improved from a mean of 0.65 (0.33 to 0.73) pre-operatively to 0.94 (0.5 to 1.07) postoperatively. Alternating cervical laminoplasty can be performed safely in elderly patients with minimal morbidity and good results.     

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DC...     

颈椎不稳在交感型颈椎病发病中的作用

目的：研究交感型颈椎病的病理因素及治疗方法。方法：回顾分析了1988-2000年收治的20例手术治疗的交感型颈椎病患者。根据术前及术后颈椎伸屈侧位X光片判断有无颈椎不稳。结果：20例患者术前均有颈椎不稳,颈椎不稳主要发生在C3-C4和C4-C5,颈椎高位硬膜外封闭对大部分患者有短期效果。每例患者均于不稳节段行颈前路融合术,手术有效率为90％。结论：颈椎不稳是导致交感型颈椎病发病的重要因素;颈椎高位硬膜外封闭可有短期疗效因此具有重要的诊断价值;颈椎前路植骨融合术是治疗交感型颈椎病的有效方法。     

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.     

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.     

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.