Literature DB >> 20736851

ACDF with the PCB cage-plate system versus laminoplasty for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

Tao Liu1, Hui-Lin Yang, Yao-Zeng Xu, Rong-Fu Qi, Hua-Qing Guan.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: A nonrandomized controlled trial.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical outcomes, radiographic changes, and complications of patients with multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy who underwent ACDF with the plate cage benezech (PCB) implant system and laminoplasty. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Using anterior or posterior surgery for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy continues to be the subject of considerable debate. Studies on the comparison of the 2 approaches are limited and few studies focus on anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) versus laminoplasty.
METHODS: We evaluated 52 consecutive patients (25 patients for the ACDF group and 27 patients for the laminoplasty group) at our institution from 2002 to 2007. The clinical and radiographic backgrounds of both the groups were comparable. The mean independent follow-up duration was 25.4 months and 24.5 months, respectively (P>0.05). The clinical outcomes, radiographic changes, and complications were compared between the 2 groups.
RESULTS: As compared with the ACDF group, the laminoplasty group required a longer operative time (187.78 min vs. 115.92 min) and caused more operative blood loss (361.11 mL vs. 118.48 mL). Both the groups significantly improved the JOA score (P<0.001), and the recovery rate was similar (59.79% for the ACDF group vs. 59.54% for the laminoplasty group, P>0.05). The cervical ROM significantly decreased after surgery for both the groups (P<0.05), while the laminoplasty group had a lower decrease rate of ROM than the ACDF group (11.39% vs. 29.45%, P<0.05). The complications for the ACDF group were significantly more than the laminoplasty group (P<0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Both ACDF with the PCB system and laminoplasty are effective therapies for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy. As compared with laminoplasty, ACDF with the PCB system requires a shorter operative time and causes less operative blood loss, but has a higher decrease rate of the cervical ROM and more complications.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 20736851     DOI: 10.1097/BSD.0b013e3181e9f294

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech        ISSN: 1536-0652


  9 in total

Review 1.  Anterior approach versus posterior approach for the treatment of multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a systemic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Bin Zhu; Yilan Xu; Xiaoguang Liu; Zhongjun Liu; Gengting Dang
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-05-09       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 2.  Comparison of anterior approach versus posterior approach for the treatment of multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

Authors:  Jiaquan Luo; Kai Cao; Sheng Huang; Liangping Li; Ting Yu; Cong Cao; Rui Zhong; Ming Gong; Zhiyu Zhou; Xuenong Zou
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-04-04       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Clinical and radiological outcomes of multilevel cervical laminoplasty versus three-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

Authors:  Jong Joo Lee; Nam Lee; Sung Han Oh; Dong Ah Shin; Seong Yi; Keung Nyun Kim; Do Heum Yoon; Hyun Chul Shin; Yoon Ha
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2020-11

4.  A prospective, randomised, controlled multicentre study comparing cervical disc replacement with anterior cervical decompression and fusion.

Authors:  Hao-Xuan Zhang; Yuan-Dong Shao; Yu Chen; Yong Hou; Lei Cheng; Meng Si; Lin Nie
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-09-11       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Expansive open-door laminoplasty secured with titanium miniplates is a good surgical method for multiple-level cervical stenosis.

Authors:  Kuang-Ting Yeh; Tzai-Chiu Yu; Ing-Ho Chen; Cheng-Huan Peng; Kuan-Lin Liu; Ru-Ping Lee; Wen-Tien Wu
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2014-08-21       Impact factor: 2.359

Review 6.  A Meta-Analysis of Cervical Laminoplasty Techniques: Are Mini-Plates Superior?

Authors:  Ali Humadi; Tat Chao; Sulaf Dawood; Mark Tacey; Arshad Barmare; Brian Freeman
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2017-05-16

Review 7.  Surgical decision-making for ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament versus other types of degenerative cervical myelopathy: anterior versus posterior approaches.

Authors:  Suzanna Sum Sum Kwok; Jason Pui Yin Cheung
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2020-12-08       Impact factor: 2.362

8.  Assessment of spino cranial angle of cervical spine sagittal balance system after multi-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.

Authors:  Zheng Wang; Zhi-Wei Wang; Xi-Wen Fan; Xian-Da Gao; Wen-Yuan Ding; Da-Long Yang
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2021-03-17       Impact factor: 2.359

9.  Zero-profile implant (Zero-p) versus plate cage benezech implant (PCB) in the treatment of single-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

Authors:  ZhiDong Wang; RuoFu Zhu; HuiLin Yang; MinJie Shen; Genlin Wang; Kangwu Chen; Minfeng Gan; Mao Li
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2015-10-12       Impact factor: 2.362

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.