共 50 条
Reoperation rates after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus posterior cervical foraminotomy: a propensity-matched analysis
被引:53
|作者:
Lubelski, Daniel
[1
,2
,3
]
Healy, Andrew T.
[1
,3
]
Silverstein, Michael P.
[1
,4
]
Abdullah, Kalil G.
[5
]
Thompson, Nicolas R.
[6
,7
]
Riew, K. Daniel
[8
]
Steinmetz, Michael P.
[9
]
Benzel, Edward C.
[1
,2
,3
]
Mroz, Thomas E.
[1
,2
,4
]
机构:
[1] Cleveland Clin, Ctr Spine Hlth, Cleveland, OH 44195 USA
[2] Cleveland Clin, Lerner Coll Med, Cleveland, OH 44195 USA
[3] Cleveland Clin, Dept Neurosurg, Cleveland, OH 44195 USA
[4] Cleveland Clin, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Cleveland, OH 44195 USA
[5] Hosp Univ Penn, Dept Neurosurg, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
[6] Cleveland Clin, Dept Quantitat Hlth Sci, Cleveland, OH 44195 USA
[7] Cleveland Clin, Neurol Inst Ctr Outcomes Res & Evaluat, Cleveland, OH 44195 USA
[8] Washington Univ, Sch Med, Washington Univ Orthoped, St Louis, MO 63110 USA
[9] Case Western Reserve Univ, Sch Med, MetroHlth Med Ctr, Dept Neurol Surg, Cleveland, OH 44106 USA
来源:
关键词:
Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion;
Posterior cervical foraminotomy;
Reoperation rates;
Propensity matching;
Foraminal stenosis;
Cervical radiculopathy;
INVESTIGATIONAL DEVICE EXEMPTION;
ADJACENT-SEGMENT DISEASE;
UP CLINICAL ARTICLE;
2-YEAR FOLLOW-UP;
DISC DISEASE;
MULTIVARIATE IMPUTATION;
COST-EFFECTIVENESS;
RADICULOPATHY;
ARTHROPLASTY;
SINGLE;
D O I:
10.1016/j.spinee.2015.02.026
中图分类号:
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号:
摘要:
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF) are both used to surgically treat patients with cervical radiculopathy and have been shown to have similar outcomes. Nonetheless, ACDF has become increasingly more commonplace compared with PCF, in part because of a pervasive belief that PCF has a higher incidence of required reoperations. PURPOSE: To determine the reoperation rate at the index level of ACDF versus PCF 2 years postoperatively. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective case-control. PATIENT SAMPLE: All patients that underwent ACDF and PCF for radiculopathy (excluding myelopathy indications) between January 2005 and December 2011. OUTCOME MEASURES: Revision surgery within 2 years, at the index level, was recorded. METHODS: Propensity score analysis between the ACDF and PCF groups was done, matching for age, gender, race, body mass index, tobacco use, median income and insurance status, primary surgeon, level of surgery, surgery duration, and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: Seven hundred ninety patients met the inclusion/exclusion criteria, including 627 ACDF and 163 PCF. Before propensity matching, the PCF group was found to be significantly older and more likely to be male. After matching, there were no significant differences between groups for any baseline characteristics. Reoperation rate at the index level was 4.8% for the ACDF group and 6.4% for the PCF group (p=.7) within 2 years of the initial surgery. Using equivalence testing, based on an a priori null hypothesis that a clinically meaningful difference between the two groups would be >= 5%, we found that the absolute difference of 1.6% was significantly (p=.01) less than our hypothesized difference. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that even after accounting for patient demographics, operative characteristics, and primary surgeon, there are no significant differences in 2-year reoperation rates at the index level between ACDF and PCF. The reoperation rates are statistically equivalent. Thus, spine surgeons can operate via the posterior approach without putting patients at increased risk for revision surgery at the index level. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1277 / 1283
页数:7
相关论文