SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Journal of Turkish Spinal Surgery / 2018 / Cilt: 29 - Sayı: 1

CERVICAL DEGENERATIVE DISC DISEASE: ANALYSIS OF CLINICAL SERIES

Murat Hamit AYTAR
İrfan ÇINAR
Pages
41–44
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusions: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion is the most efficient, safe and selected surgical technique in our clinic for the treatment of degenerative cervical disc diseases.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: The aim of the study is to analyze the surgeries for cervical degenerative disc disease with anterior approach in a year.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and Method: We inspected 82 patients who were operated for cervical spinal problems between January-2017 and December-2017 at Department of Neurosurgery.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusions: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion is the most efficient, safe and selected surgical technique in our clinic for the treatment of degenerative cervical disc diseases.
🔬Design:Lab & Field Experiment
📍Scope:2017 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Objective: The aim of the study is to analyze the surgeries for cervical degenerative disc disease with anterior approach in a year. Materials and Method: We inspected 82 patients who were operated for cervical spinal problems between January-2017 and December-2017 at Department of Neurosurgery. The parameters that evaluated are the level of disease, side of the cord compression and type of surgery. Results: Data of a total of 82 patients were included in the study. Mean age of the participants was 48,9 ± 11,1 years, M/F was 36 / 46 (43.9 % vs. 56.1 %). The lesions were on the left side in 44 cases (53.7 %), on the right side in 30 cases (36,6 %), and bilateral in 8 cases (9,8 %). Most frequent level was C5-6, C6-7 (n=17; 20,7 %). 79,3 % of the patients had cage operation, and 17,1 % had cage + plate. The comparisons of the clinical parameters between males and females revealed that age (p=0,091), lesion side (p=0,169), level (p=0,414) and operation type (p=0,599) were similar between genders. Conclusions: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion is the most efficient, safe and selected surgical technique in our clinic for the treatment of degenerative cervical disc diseases.

🔖

Cite This Article

AYTAR, M. H., ÇINAR, İ. (2018). CERVICAL DEGENERATIVE DISC DISEASE: ANALYSIS OF CLINICAL SERIES. Journal of Turkish Spinal Surgery, Cilt: 29 - Sayı: 1, 41–44. https://ajindex.com/articles/197689

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Blumenthal SL, Ohnmeiss DD, Guyer RD, Zigler JE. Reoperations in cervical total disc replacement compared with anterior cervical fusion: results compiled from multiple prospective food and drug administration investigational device exemption trials conducted at a single site. Spine 2013; 38(14): 1177–1182. Cloward RB. The anterior approach for removal of ruptured cervical disks. J Neurosurg 1958; 15: 602-617.
  2. Düzkalır AH, Özdoğan S, Demirel N, Yaltırık CK. Complications of anterior cervical spine surgery: review of the literature. JTSS 2015; 26(4): 307-314.
  3. Gao Y, Liu M, Li T, et al. A meta-analysis comparing the results of cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for the treatment of symptomatic cervical disc disease. J Bone Joint Surg 2013; 95- A(6): 555–561.
  4. Kelly JC, Groarke PJ, Butler JS, et al. The natural history and clinical syndromes of degenerative cervical spondylosis. Adv Orthop 2012; 2012: 393642. Kim HJ, Nemani VM, Piyaskulkaew C, Vargas SR, Riew KD. Cervical radiculopathy: incidence and treatment of 1,420 consecutive cases. Asian Spine J 2016; 10(2): 231-237.
  5. Kong L, Ma Q, Yu K, Cao J, Wang L, Shen Y. Survivorship Analysis of Clinical Adjacent-Segment Pathology After Single-Level Cervical Fusion. Med Sci Monit 2017; 25(23): 5083-5089.
  6. Köken M, Özdoğan S, Gergin YE, Aydın SO, Yüce E, Tiryaki M, Tatarlı N, Süslü HT, Hiçdönmez T. Alt servikal bölge disk mesafelerinin yüksekliklerinin ölçümü ve klinikte kullanımı. J Turk Spinal Surg 2014; 25(3): 189-192.
  7. Lahey FH, Warren KW. Esophageal diverticula. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1954; 98: 1-28.
  8. Lehto IJ, Tertti MO, Komu ME. Age-related MRI changes at 0.1 T in cervical discs in asymptomatic subjects. Neuroradiology 1994; 36(1): 49–53.
  9. Matsumoto M, Fujimura Y, Suzuki N, Nishi Y, Nakamura M, Yabe Y, Shiga H. MRI of cervical intervertebral discs in asymptomatic subjects. J Bone Joint Surg 1998; 80-B(1): 19–24.
  10. Mayo BC, Massel DH, Bohl DD, Long WW, Modi KD, Singh K. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: the surgical learning curve. Spine 2016; 41(20): 1580-1585.
  11. Mummaneni PV, Burkus JK, Haid RW. Clinical and radiographic analysis of cervical disc arthroplasty compared with allograft fusion: a randomized controlled clinical trial. J Neurosurg Spine 2007; 6(3): 198–209.
  12. Silber JS, Anderson DG, Daffner SD, Brislin BT, Leland JM, Hilibrand AS, Vaccaro AR, Albert TJ. Donor site morbidity after anterior iliac crest bone harvest for single-level anterior cervical discectomy and