We have located links that may give you full text access.
Motion analysis of dynamic cervical implant stabilization versus anterior discectomy and fusion: a retrospective analysis of 70 cases.
European Spine Journal 2018 November
PURPOSE: Retrospective kinematic analysis of treated level, adjacent levels, and overall cervical spine after single-level dynamic cervical implant (DCI) stabilization versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).
METHODS: Between June 2009 and March 2013, 70 consecutive patients with a symptomatic single-level cervical degenerative disk disease (DDD) were enrolled in this study and divided into DCI (n = 35) group and ACDF (n = 35) group. All cases were followed up for more than 5 years. The study compared perioperative parameters; clinical outcomes; and radiological parameters. Kinematic analysis included range of motion (ROM) of treated level and adjacent level, overall ROM (C2-C7), and changes in adjacent disk spaces.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the DCI group and ACDF group in terms of improvement in the SF-36, VAS, NDI, and JOA scores. DCI stabilization resulted in better ROM of C2-C7 and the treated level than ACDF did. The ROM of treated level decreased significantly at 24 months after surgery and last follow-up in the DCI group, and the C2-C7 ROM showed different degrees of reduction after the 24 months after surgery. Radiological evidence of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) at last follow-up was observed in 4/22 patients (18.2%) in the DCI group and 5/23 patients (21.7%) in the ACDF group which was not a significant difference between groups (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: DCI stabilization for the treatment of cervical DDD cannot preserve the normal kinematics of the cervical spine for a long time, especially the treated level. DCI stabilization cannot decrease the risk of ASD compared with ACDF. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
METHODS: Between June 2009 and March 2013, 70 consecutive patients with a symptomatic single-level cervical degenerative disk disease (DDD) were enrolled in this study and divided into DCI (n = 35) group and ACDF (n = 35) group. All cases were followed up for more than 5 years. The study compared perioperative parameters; clinical outcomes; and radiological parameters. Kinematic analysis included range of motion (ROM) of treated level and adjacent level, overall ROM (C2-C7), and changes in adjacent disk spaces.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the DCI group and ACDF group in terms of improvement in the SF-36, VAS, NDI, and JOA scores. DCI stabilization resulted in better ROM of C2-C7 and the treated level than ACDF did. The ROM of treated level decreased significantly at 24 months after surgery and last follow-up in the DCI group, and the C2-C7 ROM showed different degrees of reduction after the 24 months after surgery. Radiological evidence of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) at last follow-up was observed in 4/22 patients (18.2%) in the DCI group and 5/23 patients (21.7%) in the ACDF group which was not a significant difference between groups (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: DCI stabilization for the treatment of cervical DDD cannot preserve the normal kinematics of the cervical spine for a long time, especially the treated level. DCI stabilization cannot decrease the risk of ASD compared with ACDF. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app