单节段颈椎椎体次全切除钛笼植骨融合术后钛笼下沉相关危险因素分析

目的 :分析单节段应用钛笼植骨的颈椎椎体次全切除融合术(anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion,ACCF)术后钛笼下沉的相关危险因素。方法:统计并回顾性分析我院2014年7月~2016年6月间应用钛笼植骨的单节段ACCF的44例患者临床资料,测量术前、术后3d内和术后3个月复查时所拍摄的颈椎X线平片,根据术后3个月随访时融合节段高度与术后3d内融合节段相比高度变化,将患者分为下沉组(高度丢失2mm)与未下沉组(高度丢失≤2mm),测量并分析两组间撑开角、钛笼倾斜角、钛笼深度、钉板夹角之间是否存在统计学差异,并通过Logistic回归分析分析钛笼下沉的危险因素。结果:术后3个月随访时,17例(38.64%)患者纳入未下沉组(高度丢失≤2mm),27例(61.36%)患者纳入下沉组(高度丢失2mm)。下沉组与未下沉组之间钛笼倾斜角、钛笼深度、钉板夹角差异有统计学意义(P0.05),撑开角差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。多因素Logistic回归分析结果提示,钛笼倾斜角增加是钛笼下沉的危险因素[95%置信区间(1.065,1.374),P0.05]。结论:钛笼下沉为ACCF术后常见的现象。钛笼倾斜角为钛笼下沉的独立危险因素,若该角度8.6°将增加钛笼下沉的风险。     

颈椎ACCF术后出现钛笼下沉的危险因素Logistic回归分析

目的进行脊髓型颈椎病颈椎体次全切除融合术(anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion,ACCF)术后出现钛笼下沉的危险因素Logistic回归分析,为其预后的改善提供理论依据。方法纳入2014年6月～2017年6于我院行ACCF术治疗的102例脊髓型颈椎病患者,随访6个月,将钛笼下沉者设为下沉组,其余设为未下沉组。调查两组患者性别、影像检查等病历资料,采用单因素、多因素分析确定颈椎ACCF术后出现钛笼下沉的独立危险因素。结果术后20例发生钛笼下沉,下沉率19.61%;两组钛笼直径、椎体撑开程度、钛笼倾斜角、钛笼前缘与临近椎体前缘距离、钉板夹角差异具有统计学意义(P0.05);多因素分析钛笼直径(OR=2.321)、椎体撑开程度(OR=1.897)、钛笼倾斜角(OR=2.043)、钛笼前缘与临近椎体前缘距离(OR=2.248)是颈椎ACCF术后出现钛笼下沉的独立危险因素。结论脊髓型颈椎病患者ACCF术后钛笼下沉发生率较高,钛笼直径、椎体撑开程度、钛笼倾斜角、钛笼前缘与临近椎体前缘距离等均会增加钛笼下沉风险。     

3D打印人工椎体与钛笼在颈椎前路椎体次全切除减压植骨融合术中应用的效果比较

目的：评估3D打印人工椎体与传统钛笼在颈椎前路椎体次全切除减压植骨融合术(anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion,ACCF)中应用的临床效果。方法：回顾性分析2017年6月～2020年6月于承德医学院附属医院脊柱外科行单椎体ACCF的50例脊髓型颈椎病患者,其中25例术中应用3D打印人工椎体(观察组),25例术中应用传统钛笼植骨(对照组)。记录两组患者手术时间、术中出血量、C型臂X线机透视次数及随访时间。术前、术后3天、术后3个月及末次随访时在颈椎侧位X线片上测量椎体次全切除节段椎间高度(H1、H2)、C2-7 Cobb角、C2-7矢状面轴向距离(C2-7 sagittal vertical axis,C2-7 SVA)及T1倾斜角,比较两组患者各时间点的影像学参数;应用日本骨科协会(Japanese Orthopaedic Association,JOA)评分评价神经功能,应用疼痛视觉模拟(visual analogue scale,VAS)评分评价颈部疼痛。根据Kandziora标准判断植骨融合情况。结果：所有患者均获得随访,观察组随访时间1...     

ACDF与ACCF治疗颈椎病术后内植物沉降的观察

目的 比较颈前路椎间盘切除减压融合内固定术(anterior cervical discectomy and fusion,ACDF)和颈前路椎体次全切除减压融合内固定术(anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion,ACCF)治疗相邻两节段脊髓型颈椎病时的内植物沉降情况.方法 回顾性分析2016年1月～2017年3月收治的43例相邻两节段脊髓型颈椎病患者,常规术后随访时间为1年.随访丢失3例,最后纳入统计:ACDF组20例,ACCF组20例.比较2组融合节段椎体高度、融合节段Cobb角.结果 两组术前JOA、NDI评分与术后比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);术后1年随访时的融合节段高度及Cobb角丢失度,ACDF组为(1.7±1.0)mm和(1.60±0.6)°,ACCF组为(2.8±1.3)mm;(2.44±1.2)°,两组差异有统计学意义(P<0.05).结论 ACDF与ACCF治疗脊髓型颈椎病均能获得较好的效果,但ACDF组的内植物沉降较ACCF组轻.     

钛笼与髂骨块植骨修复椎骨缺损治疗胸腰椎结核的疗效比较

[目的]探讨后路病灶清除、植骨融合内固定术治疗胸腰椎结核的疗效,并比较钛笼与自体髂骨块植骨重建椎骨缺损的疗效差异。[方法]回顾性分析2011年1月~2013年12月行后路病灶清除、植骨融合内固定治疗的49例单节段胸腰椎结核患者的临床资料。其中钛笼组25例、髂骨块组24例。观察VAS评分、ODI评分、Cobb角和椎间高度的改善及丢失、神经功能恢复情况、植骨融合时间及术后并发症等。[结果]平均随访35.3(15~56)个月;术后植骨均融合。两组Cobb角和椎间高度的矫正较术前改善,组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。钛笼组Cobb角和椎间高度丢失明显少于髂骨块组(P<0.05)。神经功能较术前明显改善。主要并发症有脑脊液漏(钛笼组1例)、窦道形成(钛笼组和髂骨块组各1例)、术区椎间隙感染(髂骨块组1例),无内置物及取髂骨区相关并发症。[结论]后路手术治疗胸腰椎结核可获得良好的临床疗效,结核病灶累及单节段时自体髂骨与钛笼植骨重建椎骨缺损均是较佳选择。     

双节段ACDF和单节段ACCF手术治疗脊髓型颈椎病疗效比较

目的对比分析双节段前路颈椎间盘切除融合术(anterior cervical discectomy and fusion,ACDF)与单节段前路椎体次全切钛网植骨融合术(anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion,ACCF)治疗邻近双节段脊髓型颈椎病的临床疗效。方法回顾性分析2009年6月至2014年3月因邻近双节段脊髓型颈椎病在我院行ACDF和ACCF手术的51例患者。27例患者行ACDF术(男性16例,女性11例),24例患者行ACCF术(男性13例,女性11例)。记录患者一般资料、手术相关参数、并发症发生率、融合率等数据;在术前和术后随访时进行疼痛视觉模拟评分(visual analogue scale,VAS)、颈椎功能障碍指数(neck disability index,NDI)、日本矫形外科学会评分(Japanese orthopaedic association,JOA)及测量颈椎Cobb角。结果 ACDF组平均随访时间为(30.2±10.5)个月,手术时间为(83.5±15.7)min,术中出血为(135.5±21.4)mL,术后并发症发生率为14.8%,术后3个月融合率为88.9%。术后3个月及末次随访的VAS评分、NDI指数、JOA评分、Cobb角均显著优于术前。ACCF组平均随访时间为(28.3±12.1)个月,手术时间为(118.3±20.9)min,术中出血为(329.3±70.2)mL,术后并发症发生率为16.7%,术后3个月融合率为91.7%。术后3个月及末次随访的VAS评分、NDI指数、JOA评分、Cobb角均显著优于术前。ACDF组的术中失血量、手术时间以及术后Cobb角均显著优于ACCF手术。结论双节段ACDF手术和单节段ACCF手术具有相似的临床效果,均能显著改善症状和恢复神经功能,不过ACDF手术的术中失血量、手术时间以及颈椎曲度的恢复均优于ACCF手术。因此在邻近双节段脊髓型颈椎病的治疗上,双节段ACDF手术在一定程度上优于单节段ACCF手术。     

双节段颈椎前路椎体次全切除融合术后钛笼下沉的影响因素分析

目的 探讨双节段颈椎前路椎体次全切除融合术(anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion,ACCF)后钛笼(titanium mesh cage,TMC)下沉的影响因素.方法 回顾性分析我院2011年1月至2013年4月收治的86例应用TMC内固定行ACCF患者的颈椎正侧位片及临床资料,随访6个月,根据TMC下沉与否分为下沉组和非下沉组,分析术后TMC下沉与年龄、性别、手术节段、临床疗效、病变节段撑开角度及安置位置的相关性.结果 术后6个月,86例患者中有22例发生TMC下沉(25.6％),下沉组和非下沉组的年龄、性别、手术节段(C5～G)、骨密度、身体质量指数(BMI)之间差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05);两组术后日本骨科协会评分(Japanese Orthopedic Association Scores,JOA)均较术前明显改善,且非下沉组高于下沉组,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05),但两组融合率的差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05);椎间撑开角度＜30°与≥30°,对下沉发生率的影响不同,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05);椎体前缘与钛笼前缘间距＜1 mm与≥1 mm,对下沉发生率的影响不同,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).结论 椎间撑开角度和安放位置可能是影响TMC术后下沉的重要因素,此外年龄、性别、手术节段(C5～C7)、骨密度、BMI对TMC下沉均有不同程度的影响.     

预弯钛网在单节段颈前路椎体次全切除减压融合术中的应用

目的 :评估预弯钛网在颈前路椎体次全切除减压融合术(anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion,ACCF)治疗脊髓型颈椎病中的实用性和有效性。方法:回顾性分析2016年1月～2017年1月间因脊髓型颈椎病在我科接受单节段ACCF的82例患者的病例资料,其中39例术中放置预弯钛网(预弯钛网组),43例术中放置普通直钛网(直钛网组)。对比两组患者随访期间钛网末端与椎体上终板和下终板贴合度的变化、椎体间高度变化、钛网沉降率、植骨融合率、日本骨科学会(Japanese Orthopedics Association,JOA)评分及颈项部疼痛视觉模拟评分(visual analog scale,VAS)变化情况。结果:预弯钛网组和直钛网组平均随访17.7±2.1个月和18.4±2.4个月。末次随访时,尽管两组间植骨融合率均为100%,但预弯组钛网末端与椎体上终板和下终板角度的变化(1.0°±0.7°,1.1°±0.6°)均低于直钛网组(1.9°±0.4°,2.2°±0.8°),且差异具有显著性(P0.05);预弯钛网组椎间前、后高度的丢失和钛网下沉率分别为-1.9±1.7mm、-1.5±1.6mm及28.2%,而直钛网组分别为-2.8±1.4mm、-2.7±2.2mm及53.4%,预弯钛网组均低于直钛网组且差异均具有统计学意义(P0.05)。末次随访时两组的JOA评分较术前均显著增加,但两组间的JOA评分、神经功能改善率均无明显统计学差异(P0.05);末次随访时两组颈项部VAS评分较术前均显著降低,且预弯钛网组(2.5±1.2分)显著低于直钛网组(3.2±0.8分),组间比较具有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:在单节段ACCF手术中,预弯钛网能够与邻近椎体上下终板达到较好的贴合度,减少钛网沉降率。     

ACDF联合ACCF术中运用Solis融合器、颈前路钛板与n-HA/PA66支撑体治疗3节段脊髓型颈椎病

目的探讨颈前路间盘切除减压融合术(Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion,ACDF)联合颈前路椎体次全切除减压融合术(Anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion,ACCF)中运用Solis融合器、颈前路钛板与n-HA/PA66支撑体治疗3节段脊髓型颈椎病的疗效。方法回顾性分析自2015-04—2017-06采用ACDF联合ACCF治疗的46例3节段脊髓型颈椎病,术中联合运用Solis融合器、颈前路钛板与n-HA/PA66支撑体,比较术前与末次随访时的JOA评分、颈椎整体曲度、融合节段Cobb角、融合节段前柱高度。结果 46例均顺利完成手术并获得完整随访,随访时间36～48个月,平均42.1个月。46例切口均一期愈合,术后12个月均获得植骨融合。2例出现一过性吞咽困难,1例出现脑脊液漏,1例出现n-HA/PA66支撑体下沉,对症治疗后均治愈。末次随访时JOA评分较术前高,颈椎整体曲度、融合节段Cobb角、融合节段前柱高度较术前大,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。末次随访时按JOA评分改善率评价疗效:优17例,良23例,可6例,优良率86.96%。结论 ACDF联合ACCF术中运用Solis融合器、颈前路钛板与n-HA/PA66支撑体治疗3节段脊髓型颈椎病可有效恢复颈椎高度,改善并维持颈椎曲度,减少并发症的发生率。     

颈椎前路减压融合术后钛笼下沉临床分析

目的:探讨颈椎前路减压融合术治疗脊髓型颈椎病术后影响钛笼下沉的相关因素。方法:回顾性分析2005年6月～2009年6月我院收治的104例行颈椎融合钛笼植骨患者的颈椎平片和手术资料,分析撑开程度、钛笼直径和安放部位与钛笼下沉的相关性。结果:104例手术患者中,术后6个月复查时发现16例(15.4%)钛笼发生下沉。46例钛笼直径10mm者中9例发生下沉(19.6%),而58例直径12mm者中7例发生下沉(12.1%),差异有显著性(P<0.05)。钛笼前缘与椎体前缘距离在1mm以内者89例,距离大于1mm者15例,发生下沉例数分别为13例和3例,差异有显著性(P<0.05)。开槽节段相邻椎体终板延长线成角,其中角度在20°～30°者82例,成角大于30°者22例,两组发生下沉例数分别为11例和5例,发生率有显著性差异(P<0.05)。结论:椎间撑开程度、钛笼直径和安放部位可能是影响钛笼下沉的重要因素。     

颈椎前路手术应用端盖钛网治疗合并骨质疏松的老年脊髓型颈椎病对照研究

目的:比较颈前路椎体次全切除应用端盖钛网与无端盖钛网植骨融合术治疗合并骨质疏松的老年脊髓型颈椎病的影像结果及临床疗效。方法:对2011年1月至2016年1月采用颈前路单个椎体次全切除钛网植骨融合术治疗的60例合并骨质疏松老年脊髓型颈椎病患者进行回顾性分析,其中男26例,女34例,年龄68~79岁,平均75.8岁。根据术中所用钛网分为端盖钛网组(A组,32例)及无端盖钛网组(B组,28例)。通过JOA评分对两组患者的神经功能进行评定;通过X线对融合节段椎间高度及前凸角度(Cobb角)进行测量;通过CT评估钛网植骨融合率。结果:60例患者均获随访,随访时间1~2年,平均1.5年。临床疗效评价结果:A组术前JOA评分为9.3±1.7,术后1周、3个月、1年JOA评分分别为14.2±1.8、15.7±1.2、15.4±1.5;B组术前JOA评分为9.1±1.8,术后1周、3个月、1年JOA评分分别为14.5±1.3、14.9±1.7、15.2±1.6。两组术后JOA评分与术前相比均明显改善(P0.05)。术后1周、3个月、1年两组JOA评分比较差异均无统计学意义(P0.05)。影像学评价结果:A组术前融合节段椎间高度为(42.1±2.4)mm,术后1周、3个月、1年分别为(45.3±3.2)mm、(44.7±2.9)mm、(44.5±3.0)mm;A组术前Cobb角为(5.3±1.2)°,术后1周、3个月、1年分别为(10.3±1.9)°、(10.1±1.7)°、(9.9±1.3)°;B组术前椎间高度为(43.4±2.3)mm,术后1周、3个月、1年分别为(45.7±2.8)mm、(44.2±2.7)mm、(41.5±2.1)mm;B组术前Cobb角为(5.4±1.0)°,术后1周、3个月、1年分别为(11.2±1.8)°、(10.8±1.6)°、(7.2±1.4)°。两组术后融合节段椎间高度、融合节段Cobb角与术前比较明显提高(P0.05)。术后1周、3个月A组椎间高度、融合节段Cobb角与B组比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05),术后1年椎间高度、融合节段Cobb角A组均明显优于B组(P0.05),末次随访,A组钛网沉陷率为6%,B组为18%。结论:颈前路手术应用端盖钛网治疗合并骨质疏松的老年脊髓型颈椎病患者,术后维持椎间隙高度及融合节段前凸角度方面优于无端盖钛网,端盖钛网的应用可有效降低骨质疏松患者的钛网沉陷的发生率。     

两种不同颈前路固定系统治疗双节段脊髓型颈椎病早期临床效果观察

目的 比较颈椎前路椎间盘切除减压术(Anterior cervical decompression and fusion operation,ACDF)术中使用ROI-C零切迹自稳型颈椎融合器与钛板联合cage治疗双节段脊髓型颈椎病的临床疗效.方法 回顾性分析自2018-01-2019-12诊治的83例双节段脊髓型颈椎...     

终板环在颈椎前路椎体次全切除植骨融合术中防止钛网沉陷的临床价值

目的：探讨使用终板环对颈椎前路椎体次全切除植骨融合术后钛网沉陷及临床效果的影响。方法：对2008年2月至2011年2月采用颈椎前路椎体次全切除植骨融合术治疗的71例脊髓型颈椎病患者进行回顾性分析,男38例,女33例;年龄39-74岁,平均53.8岁。根据术中是否使用终板环将71例患者分为终板环使用组（33例）及无终板环使用组（38例）。比较两组手术前后的影像学资料及临床疗效。影像学评价指标为融合节段前凸角度（Cobb角）及融合节段椎体间前缘高度（Da）、后缘高度（Dp）及平均高度（Dm）,用以评估钛网沉陷情况;临床疗效评价指标为JOA评分,观察改善率,并记录术后症状及Odom分级。结果：71例患者的随访时间为13-34个月,平均19.5个月。影像学评价：两组患者术前及术后1周融合节段Cobb角、平均椎体间高度差异均无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。术后1年,融合节段Cobb角终板环使用组为（9.4±3.8）°,无终板环使用组为（7.5±3.9）°,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）;Dm终板环使用组为（57.3±2.2）mm,无终板环使用组为（55.2±2.6）mm,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）;沉陷的发生率终板环组为57.6%,无终板环使用组为78.9%,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。临床疗效评价：两组患者术前术后在JOA评分及改善率上差异均无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。术后1年,90.9%的终板环使用组患者及89.5%的无终板环使用组患者Odom评分获得很好或较好结果。结论：终板环的使用可在一定程度上降低钛网沉陷的发生率及其程度。     

ACCF联合颈前路减压zero-p椎间植骨融合内固定术治疗多节段脊髓型颈椎病

目的探讨颈前路椎体次全切除减压融合术(ACCF)联合颈前路减压zero-p椎间植骨融合内固定术治疗多节段脊髓型颈椎病的临床疗效。方法回顾性分析自2016-05—2017-07采用ACCF联合颈前路减压zero-p椎间植骨融合内固定术治疗的30例多节段脊髓型颈椎病,比较术前、术后1周及末次随访时JOA评分、颈椎Cobb角、椎间隙高度。结果30例均顺利完成手术并获得完整随访,随访时间平均21.6个月,切口均一期愈合,植骨均骨性愈合,无内固定松动、移位、断裂、伤口感染、声音嘶哑及神经功能加重等并发症。术后1例出现脑脊液漏,2例出现吞咽不适,非手术治疗后均治愈。术后1周与末次随访时JOA评分、颈椎Cobb角、椎间隙高度较术前均明显改善,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。末次随访时根据JOA评分改善率评定综合疗效:优12例,良14例,可4例。结论ACCF联合颈前路减压zerop椎间植骨融合内固定术治疗多节段脊髓型颈椎病安全可靠,能够有效地恢复椎间隙高度和颈椎生理曲度。     

Evaluation of a new type of titanium mesh cage versus the traditional titanium mesh cage for single-level, anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion

Study design

A retrospective review of prospectively collected data in an academic institution.

Objective

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of a new type of titanium mesh cage (TMC) in single-level, anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF).

Methods

Fifty-eight patients consecutive with cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) from cervical degenerative spondylosis and isolated ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament were treated with a single-level ACCF using either a new type of TMC (28 patients, group A) or the traditional TMC (30 patients, group B). We evaluated the patients for TMC subsidence, cervical lordosis (C2–C7 Cobb and Cobb of fused segments) and fusion status for a minimum of 30 months postoperatively based on spine radiographs. In addition, neurologic outcomes were evaluated using the Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scores. Neck pain was evaluated using a 10-point visual analog scale (VAS).

Results

The loss of height of the fused segments was less for group A than for group B (0.8 ± 0.3 vs. 2.8 ± 0.4 mm) (p < 0.01); also, there was a lower rate of severe subsidence (≥3 mm) in group A (4 %, 1/28) than in group B (17 %, 5/30) (p < 0.01). There were no differences in the C2–C7 Cobb and Cobb of fused segments between the groups preoperatively or at final follow-up (p > 0.05), but the Cobb of fused segments immediately postoperative were significantly less for group B than for group A (p < 0.01). All patients, however, had successful fusion (100 %, each). Both groups had marked improvement in the JOA score after operation (p < 0.01), with no significant differences in the JOA recovery ratio (p > 0.05). The postoperative VAS neck pain scores for group A were significantly less than that for group B (p < 0.05); severe subsidence was correlated with neck pain.

Conclusions

The new type of TMC provides comparable clinical results and fusion rates with the traditional TMC for patients undergoing single-level corpectomy. The new design TMC decreases postoperative subsidence (compared to the traditional TMC); the unique design of the new type of TMC matches the vertebral endplate morphology which appears to decrease the severity of subsidence-related neck pain in follow-up.     

颈椎前路减压cage与zero-p椎间植骨融合内固定治疗单节段脊髓型颈椎病的疗效比较

目的比较颈椎前路减压cage椎间植骨融合钛板内固定与zero-p椎间植骨融合内固定治疗单节段脊髓型颈椎病的临床疗效及并发症情况。方法纳入自2013-06—2015-06诊治的110例单节段脊髓型颈椎病,采用颈椎前路减压cage椎间植骨融合钛板内固定治疗55例(cage组),采用颈椎前路减压zero-p椎间植骨融合内固定治疗55例(zero-p组)。比较2组手术时间、术中出血量、住院时间,术后12个月JOA评分、NDI指数、颈椎曲度、颈椎节段高度及植骨融合率,术后1周、3个月吞咽困难发生例数。结果所有患者均获得(22.78±3.10)个月随访。2组手术时间、术中出血量、住院时间比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。2组术后12个月JOA评分、NDI指数、颈椎曲度、颈椎节段高度、植骨融合率差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。zero-p组术后1周、3个月吞咽困难发生例数少于cage组,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论颈椎前路减压cage椎间植骨融合钛板内固定与zero-p椎间植骨融合内固定治疗单节段脊髓型颈椎病均可取得满意的临床疗效,但zero-p椎间植骨融合内固定术后吞咽困难发生的风险明显较低,其安全性更符合临床需要。     

Cage subsidence does not, but cervical lordosis improvement does affect the long-term results of anterior cervical fusion with stand-alone cage for degenerative cervical disc disease: a retrospective study

Objective

Clinical outcomes of the stand-alone cage have been encouraging when used in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), but concerns remain regarding its complications, especially cage subsidence. This retrospective study was undertaken to investigate the long-term radiological and clinical outcomes of the stand-alone titanium cage and to evaluate the incidence of cage subsidence in relation to the clinical outcome in the surgical treatment of degenerative cervical disc disease.

Methods

A total of 57 consecutive patients (68 levels) who underwent ACDF using a titanium box cage for the treatment of cervical radiculopathy and/or myelopathy were reviewed for the radiological and clinical outcomes. They were followed for at least 5 years. Radiographs were obtained before and after surgery, 3 months postoperatively, and at the final follow-up to determine the presence of fusion and cage subsidence. The Cobb angle of C2–C7 and the vertebral bodies adjacent to the treated disc were measured to evaluate the cervical sagittal alignment and local lordosis. The disc height was measured as well. The clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score for cervical myelopathy, before and after surgery, and at the final follow-up. The recovery rate of JOA score was also calculated. The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score of neck and radicular pain were evaluated as well. The fusion rate was 95.6% (65/68) 3 months after surgery.

Results

Successful bone fusion was achieved in all patients at the final follow-up. Cage subsidence occurred in 13 cages (19.1%) at 3-month follow-up; however, there was no relation between fusion and cage subsidence. Cervical and local lordosis improved after surgery, with the improvement preserved at the final follow-up. The preoperative disc height of both subsidence and non-subsidence patients was similar; however, postoperative posterior disc height (PDH) of subsidence group was significantly greater than of non-subsidence group. Significant improvement of the JOA score was noted immediately after surgery and at the final follow-up. There was no significant difference of the recovery rate of JOA score between subsidence and non-subsidence groups. The recovery rate of JOA score was significantly related to the improvement of the C2–C7 Cobb angle. The VAS score regarding neck and radicular pain was significantly improved after surgery and at the final follow-up. There was no significant difference of the neck and radicular pain between both subsidence and non-subsidence groups.

Conclusions

The results suggest that the clinical and radiological outcomes of the stand-alone titanium box cage for the surgical treatment of one- or two-level degenerative cervical disc disease are satisfactory. Cage subsidence does not exert significant impact upon the long-term clinical outcome although it is common for the stand-alone cages. The cervical lordosis may be more important for the long-term clinical outcome than cage subsidence     

椎体间融合器置入术治疗脊髓型颈椎病病人的康复护理

目的评价康复护理对椎体间融合器 (CIFC)置入术治疗脊髓型颈椎病病人的效果。方法将 82例病人按手术时间先后顺序分为两组 ,对照组 4 0例 ,行常规护理 ;观察组 4 2例 ,在常规护理基础上进行康复护理。术前进行耐受力训练 ,术后指导四肢功能锻炼。结果术后 2 4个月观察组JOA评分及功能改善率明显优于对照组 (均P <0 .0 5 )。结论康复护理能提高CIFC置入治疗脊髓型颈椎病病人的手术效果。     

ROI-C双嵌片自锁融合器在脊髓型颈椎病前路减压融合术中的应用

 目的 探讨ROI-C双嵌片自锁融合器在多节段脊髓型颈椎病前路减压融合术中的应用效果。方法 2010年3月至2013年9月采用颈椎前路减压融合术治疗多节段脊髓型颈椎病92例,男58例,女34例;年龄46~76,平均56.8岁。采用普通cage加钛板固定（cage+钛板组）52例,ROI-C双嵌片自锁融合器固定（ROI-C融合器组）40例。比较两组患者的术前情况、手术时间、术中出血量、手术前后椎间隙高度、颈椎Cobb角、植骨融合率、并发症发生率、手术前后日本骨科协会（Japanese Orthopedic Association,JOA）评分、颈痛及上肢疼痛视觉模拟评分（visual analogue scale,VAS）。结果 92例均获得随访,随访时间12~48个月,平均22个月。cage+钛板组及ROI-C融合器组椎间隙高度由术前（47.15±6.96） mm、（46.95±7.14） mm分别增加至术后3个月（79.06±6.67） mm、（78.80±6.85） mm;颈椎Cobb角由术前4.27°±11.15°、2.80°±10.81°分别增加至术后3个月9.29°±12.90°、8.57°±13.00°。ROI-C融合器组较cage+钛板组手术时间短、术中出血量小、术后并发症发生率低,两组差异有统计学意义。末次随访时ROI-C融合器组JOA评分从术前（9.32±1.74）分增加到（15.15±0.91）分,改善率75.82%±13.28%;cage+钛板组从术前（9.11±1.23）分增加到（15.29±1.07）分,改善率77.91%±14.14%。两组改善率的差异无统计学差异。两组的颈痛及上肢痛VAS评分均较术前明显降低,但组间比较差异无统计学意义。结论 应用ROI-C双嵌片自锁融合器与普通cage+钛板融合的颈前路减压融合术治疗多节段脊髓型颈椎病疗效相当,而采用 ROI-C双嵌片自锁融合器固定具有手术时间短、出血少、创伤小、并发症发生率低等优点。     

Comparison of anterior cervical fusion by titanium mesh cage versus nano-hydroxyapatite/polyamide cage following single-level corpectomy

Purpose

The titanium mesh cage (TMC) is a typical metal cage device which has been widely used in cervical reconstruction for decades. Nano-hydroxyapatite/polyamide-66 (n-HA/PA66) cage is a novel biomimetic non-metal cage device growing in popularity in many medical centres in recent years. There has been no comparison of the efficacy between these two anterior reconstructing cages. The purpose of this study was to compare the radiographic and clinical outcomes of these two different devices.

Methods

Sixty-seven eligible patients with single-level ACCF using TMC or n-HA/PA66 cage for cervical degenerative diseases, with four-year minimum follow-up, were included in this prospective non-randomised comparative study. Their radiographic (cage subsidence, fusion status, segmental sagittal alignment [SSA]) and clinical (VAS and JOA scales) data before surgery and at each follow-up was recorded completely.

Results

The fusion rate of the n-HA/PA66 group was higher than TMC at one year after surgery (94 % vs. 84 %) though their finial fusion rates were similar (97 % vs. 94 %). Finial n-HA/PA66 cage subsidence was 1.5 mm with 6 % of severe subsidence over three millimetres, which was significantly lower than the respective 2.9 mm and 22 % of TMC (P < 0.0001). Lastly, SSA, VAS and JOA in TMC group were worse than in the n-HA/PA66 group (P = 0.235, 0.034 and 0.007, respectively).

Conclusions

The n-HA/PA66 cage is associated with earlier radiographic fusion, less subsidence and better clinical results than TMC within four years after one-level ACCF. With the added benefit of radiolucency, the n-HA/PA66 cage may be superior to TMC in anterior cervical construction.