Open AccessClinical effect of combined anterior and posterior approach surgery for cervical spondylotic myelopathy
Author(s) -
Yanzhou Jiang,
Liancong Fu,
Mu Yunshan
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
advanced emergency medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 2315-456X
DOI - 10.18686/aem.v6.84
Subject(s) - medicine , corpectomy , surgery , cervical spondylosis , internal fixation , vertebra , decompression , bone grafting , alternative medicine , pathology
Objective: To evaluate the clinical efficacy of combined anterior and posterior approach surgery for patients with spinal type. Methods: Randomly selected from January 2013 to December 2015 in our hospital 96 cases of cervical spondylosis patients treated in our hospital from January 2013 to December 2015 , the technical way of the operation of these 96 cases of loyalty if they were randomly divided into A, B, C three groups. A group of 32 cases were treated by combined anterior and posterior approach in treatment of cervical myelopathy. B group of 32 cases patients with anterior cervical corpectomy decompression and bone graft fusion internal fixation surgery to treat cervical vertebra disease, C treatment group of 32 patients used conventional posterior decompression and fusion surgery for lateral mass screw fixation. Postoperative follow-up, the three groups of X-ray intervertebral stability and fusion, neurological function JOA score and clinical efficacy of the effective date were compared. Results: three group of patients after half a year, the JOA scores were improved, the patients of the A group after a year of score(16.3±1.83)the scores of B and C two groups were respectively (15.7±1.15、15.59±1.21, there was statistically differences between the three groups P 0.05). After one year’s follow-up, the bone graft and internal fixation material had no loosening, displacement and subsidence, the fusion rate of A group reached 90.6%, the fusion rate of B group was 53.1%, the fusion rate of C group was 56.25%, and the difference was statistically significant (P0.05. For clinical effectiveness is divided into apparent, effective, fair, invalid. the effective rate of group A was 87.5%, and the effective rate was 50% in group B, the difference was statistically significantP0.05. Conclusion: the treatment effect of A group was better than that of B and C two groups before and after operation, and the effect was significant.