Hybrid surgery versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for multilevel cervical degenerative disc diseases: a meta-analysis

被引:0
作者
Peng Tian
Xin Fu
Zhi-Jun Li
Xiao-Lei Sun
Xin-Long Ma
机构
[1] Tianjin Hospital,Department of Orthopaedics
[2] Tianjin Medical University General Hospital,Department of Orthopaedics
来源
Scientific Reports | / 5卷
关键词
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The objective of this meta-analysis is to compare hybrid surgery (HS) and cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for multilevel cervical degenerative disc diseases (DDD). Systematic searches of all published studies through March 2015 were identified from Cochrane Library, Medline, PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect, CNKI, WANFANG DATA and CQVIP. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs involving HS and ACDF for multilevel DDD were included. All literature was searched and assessed by two independent reviewers according to the standard of Cochrane systematic review. Data of functional and radiological outcomes in two groups were pooled, which was then analyzed by RevMan 5.2 software. One RCT and four non-RCTs encompassing 160 patients met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis revealed significant differences in blood loss (p = 0.005), postoperative C2–C7 ROM (p = 0.002), ROM of superior adjacent segment (p < 0.00001) and ROM of inferior adjacent segment (p = 0.0007) between the HS group and the ACDF group. No significant differences were found regarding operation time (p = 0.75), postoperative VAS (p = 0.18) and complications (p = 0.73) between the groups. Hybrid surgery demonstrated excellent clinical efficacy and radiological results. Postoperative C2–C7 ROM was closer to the physiological status. No decrease in the ROM of the adjacent segment was noted in the hybrid surgery group.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 70 条
[1]  
Fay LY(2014)Differences between arthroplasty and anterior cervical fusion in two-level cervical degenerative disc disease Eur Spine J. 23 627-634
[2]  
Zechmeister I(2011)Artificial total disc replacement versus fusion for the cervical spine: a systematic review Eur Spine J. 20 177-184
[3]  
Winkler R(2011)Prospective, randomized, multicenter study of cervical arthroplasty: 269 patients from the Kineflex|C artificial disc investigational device exemption study with a minimum 2-year follow-up: clinical article J Neurosurg Spine. 15 348-358
[4]  
Mad P(2012)Adjacent-level biomechanics after single versus multilevel cervical spine fusion J Neurosurg Spine. 16 172-177
[5]  
Coric D(2015)Incidence of adjacent segment degeneration in cervical disc arthroplasty versus anterior cervical decompression and fusion meta-analysis of prospective studies Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 135 155-160
[6]  
Prasarn ML(2013)Rate of adjacent segment disease in cervical disc arthroplasty versus single-level fusion: meta-analysis of prospective studies Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 38 2253-2257
[7]  
Baria D(2015)Minimum 4-year outcomes of cervical total disc arthroplasty versus fusion: a meta-analysis based on prospective randomized controlled trials Medicine (Baltimore). 94 e665-1593
[8]  
Milne E(2013)Anterior approach versus posterior approach for the treatment of multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a systemic review and meta-analysis Eur Spine J. 22 1583-978
[9]  
Latta L(2006)Multilevel cervical fusion and its effect on disc degeneration and osteophyte formation Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 31 972-716
[10]  
Sukovich W(2008)The prevalence of indications and contraindications to cervical total disc replacement Spine J. 8 711-54