Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar
AI InsightThe clinical outcomes and radiographic changes were also similar in both groups.
📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale
Özet
AIM: Dynamic plates have been popularized to promote cervical spine fusion. There are no studies comparing the effectiveness and complications between traditional static plates and new dynamic plates (Vectra-T, Synthes, Switzerland). MATERIAL and METhODS: From June 2009 to October 2012, 70 patients underwent anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) in our hospital for the treatment of cervical spondylosis. Vectra-T plate was used in 36 patients (dynamic group) while traditional static plate was used in 34 patients (static group). Sagittal section angle, sagittal plane mobility, coronal angle of the titanium mesh cage were measured and the change of sedimentation rate was calculated at the postoperative 3rd, 6th, 12th months and at the end of follow-up period for each patient. The Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score and local cervical angle were also measured before, immediately after surgery and at the end of follow-up period. These data were compared for both groups. RESULTS: The follow-up period was between 12 and 38 months. The clinical outcome was similar in both groups based on the JOA score, local cervical angle and regional cervical angle. All patients had good clinical outcome without fracture of the plates or screws. There were no differences between the two groups at the 3rd, 6th and 12th months after surgery regarding to fusion rate (p>0.05). Settling of the construct and plate migration was similar between the groups at all time points. CONCLUSION: There was no statistically significant difference between dynamic plates and static plates regarding to fusion rate. The clinical outcomes and radiographic changes were also similar in both groups.