Comparison of efficacy between endoscope-assisted anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and open ACDF in the treatment of single-segment cervical spondylotic myelopathy

Zhi-Peng Wu,Zhao-yong Wei,Xiao-Lei Song
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-023-04514-w
IF: 2.6
2024-01-05
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
Abstract:Abstract Background In this study, we compared the clinical efficacy of endoscope-assisted anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with open ACDF in the treatment of single-segment cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Methods A retrospective analysis was performed on 52 patients with single-segment cervical spondylotic myelopathy between June 2021 and February 2022, including 33 males and 19 females, with a mean age of 58.42 ± 9.26) years. Among them, 28 patients were treated with endoscope-assisted ACDF (Group A), including 2 cases of C4/5 segment, 16 cases of C5/6 segment, and 10 cases of C6/7 segment; 24 patients were treated with open ACDF (Group B), including 4 cases of C4/5 segment, 11 cases of C5/6 segment, and 9 cases of C6/7 segment. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, and complications were recorded and compared between the two groups. The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score were used for clinical evaluation during the follow-up in the 1st month and 3rd month after surgery, and at the final follow-up. Results The 52 patients were followed up on average for 13.04 months (12–17 months). The operation time in Group A and Group B was (105.18 + 8.66) minutes and (81.88 + 6.05) minutes, the intraoperative blood loss was (84.29 + 13.45) mL and (112.92 + 17.81) mL, and the hospital stay was (6.75 + 1.29) days and (7.63 + 1.41) days, respectively. The difference between the two groups was statistically significant ( P < 0.05). The VAS and JOA scores in the 1st month and the 3rd month after surgery and the last follow-up significantly improved in both groups compared with those before surgery ( P < 0.05). The VAS and JOA scores of Group A in the 1st month, 3rd month after surgery, and the last follow-up were better than those in Group B ( P < 0.05). The complication rate in Group A was 7% (2/28), which was not significantly different from the 17% (4/24) in Group B ( P > 0.05). Conclusion Both endoscope-assisted ACDF and open ACDF can achieve satisfactory clinical efficacy in the treatment of single-segment cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Although the operation time of endoscope-assisted ACDF is prolonged, it has the advantages of clear vision, thorough decompression, less blood loss, and reduced risk of nerve damage, and is worthy of clinical promotion and application.
orthopedics
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
The problem that this paper attempts to solve is to compare the clinical efficacy of endoscopic - assisted anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and open ACDF in the treatment of single - level cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). Specifically, the study aims to evaluate the differences between these two surgical methods in terms of operation time, intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay, complication rate, as well as postoperative pain score (VAS) and neurological function recovery score (JOA), in order to determine which method is better. The research background indicates that cervical spondylotic myelopathy is caused by chronic mechanical compression resulting from factors such as cervical disc herniation and osteophyte hyperplasia at the posterior edge of the vertebral body, which further leads to spinal cord ischemia and substantial pathological changes, and ultimately results in spinal cord dysfunction. For patients with ineffective non - surgical treatment or progressive aggravation of spinal cord dysfunction, surgical intervention is required. Although traditional open ACDF is effective, it has problems such as narrow surgical field of view, difficulty in hemostasis, and difficulty in identifying anatomical structures, which increase the risk of spinal cord nerve injury. With the development of minimally invasive spine surgery technology, endoscopic technology has been gradually applied in cervical ACDF surgery. Its advantages lie in expanding the surgical field of view, improving the accuracy of surgical operations, and reducing the risk of spinal cord nerve injury. However, endoscopic technology also has its limitations, such as poor hand - eye coordination and difficulty in maintaining the focus of the surgical plane. Therefore, this study explores the application value of endoscopic - assisted ACDF in the treatment of single - level CSM by comparing the two surgical methods.