Literature DB >> 21164373

Comparative effectiveness of ventral vs dorsal surgery for cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

Zoher Ghogawala1, Brook Martin, Edward C Benzel, James Dziura, Subu N Magge, Khalid M Abbed, Erica F Bisson, Javed Shahid, Jean-Valery C E Coumans, Tanvir F Choudhri, Michael P Steinmetz, Ajit A Krishnaney, Joseph T King, William E Butler, Fred G Barker, Robert F Heary.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) is the most common cause of spinal cord dysfunction.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the feasibility of a randomized clinical trial comparing the clinical effectiveness and costs of ventral vs dorsal decompression with fusion surgery for treating CSM.
METHODS: A nonrandomized, prospective, clinical pilot trial was conducted. Patients ages 40 to 85 years with degenerative CSM were enrolled at 7 sites over 2 years (2007-2009). Outcome assessments were obtained preoperatively and at 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year postoperatively. A hospital-based economic analysis used costs derived from hospital charges and Medicare cost-to-charge ratios.
RESULTS: The pilot study enrolled 50 patients. Twenty-eight were treated with ventral fusion surgery and 22 with dorsal fusion surgery. The average age was 61.6 years. Baseline demographics and health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) scores were comparable between groups; however, dorsal surgery patients had significantly more severe myelopathy (P<.01). Comprehensive 1-year follow-up was obtained in 46 of 50 patients (92%). Greater HR-QOL improvement (Short-Form 36 Physical Component Summary) was observed after ventral surgery (P=.05). The complication rate (16.6% overall) was comparable between groups. Significant improvement in the modified Japanese Orthopedic Association scale score was observed in both groups (P<.01). Dorsal fusion surgery had significantly greater mean hospital costs ($29 465 vs $19 245; P<.01) and longer average length of hospital stay (4.0 vs 2.6 days; P<.01) compared with ventral fusion surgery.
CONCLUSION: Surgery for treating CSM was followed by significant improvement in disease-specific symptoms and in HR-QOL. Greater improvement in HR-QOL was observed after ventral surgery. Dorsal fusion surgery was associated with longer length of hospital stay and higher hospital costs. The pilot study demonstrated feasibility for a larger randomized clinical trial. Copyright (C) by the Congress of Neurological Surgeons

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21164373     DOI: 10.1227/NEU.0b013e31820777cf

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurosurgery        ISSN: 0148-396X            Impact factor:   4.654


  23 in total

1.  Propensity-matched Analysis of Outcomes and Hospital Charges for Anterior Versus Posterior Cervical Fusion for Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy.

Authors:  Joseph E Tanenbaum; Daniel Lubelski; Benjamin P Rosenbaum; Edward C Benzel; Thomas E Mroz
Journal:  Clin Spine Surg       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 1.876

Review 2.  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 3.  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

4.  Effect of Ventral vs Dorsal Spinal Surgery on Patient-Reported Physical Functioning in Patients With Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Zoher Ghogawala; Norma Terrin; Melissa R Dunbar; Janis L Breeze; Karen M Freund; Adam S Kanter; Praveen V Mummaneni; Erica F Bisson; Fred G Barker; J Sanford Schwartz; James S Harrop; Subu N Magge; Robert F Heary; Michael G Fehlings; Todd J Albert; Paul M Arnold; K Daniel Riew; Michael P Steinmetz; Marjorie C Wang; Robert G Whitmore; John G Heller; Edward C Benzel
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2021-03-09       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Regression of Anterior Disk-Osteophyte Complex Following Cervical Laminectomy and Fusion for Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy.

Authors:  Adedayo O Ashana; Jeremiah R Cohen; Brandon Evans; Langston T Holly
Journal:  Clin Spine Surg       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 1.876

6.  Anterior surgical treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy: review article.

Authors:  John C Quinn; Paul D Kiely; Darren R Lebl; Alexander P Hughes
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2014-08-08

7.  Relevance of expandable titanium cage for the treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

Authors:  Fahed Zaïri; Rabih Aboukais; Laurent Thines; Mohamed Allaoui; Richard Assaker
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-05-26       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Surgery vs Conservative Care for Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: Surgery Is Appropriate for Progressive Myelopathy.

Authors:  Zoher Ghogawala; Edward C Benzel; K Daniel Riew; Erica F Bisson; Robert F Heary
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 4.654

9.  Cervical spondylotic myelopathy surgical trial: randomized, controlled trial design and rationale.

Authors:  Zoher Ghogawala; Edward C Benzel; Robert F Heary; K Daniel Riew; Todd J Albert; William E Butler; Fred G Barker; John G Heller; Paul C McCormick; Robert G Whitmore; Karen M Freund; J Sanford Schwartz
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 4.654

10.  Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: A two decade experience.

Authors:  Robert F Heary; Anna MacDowall; Nitin Agarwal
Journal:  J Spinal Cord Med       Date:  2018-07-26       Impact factor: 1.985

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.