Case control study on Mobi-C cervical artificial disc replacement and anterior cervical decompression MC+fusion for the treatment of cervical spondylosis.
- Author:
Si-Wei LI
1
;
Yue-Long TAN
1
;
Jian LI
1
;
Wen-Jun LYU
1
;
De-Long ZHANG
1
;
Nai-Yan HU
1
;
Ji-Tao LI
1
;
Hong-Zhen WANG
1
;
Lin-Lin CHEN
2
,
3
Author Information
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords: Cervical artificial disc; Cervical spondylosis; Decompression; Spinal fusion
- From: China Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology 2018;31(8):723-728
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVETo compare the clinical effects and clinical indications between Mobi-C cervical artificial disc replacement (CADR) and MC+ anterior cervical decompression and fusion(ACDF) in treating cervical spondylosis.
METHODSThe clinical data of 100 patients with cervical spondylosis treated ACDF or CADR from June 2009 to June 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. There were 53 males and 47 females, aged from 38 to 70 years old. Among them, 50 cases were treated by ACDF (ACDF group), follow-up time was for 22 to 42 months with an average of (32.24±5.20) months;other 50 cases were treated by CADR (CADR group), follow-up time was for 23 to 48 months with an average of (30.40±5.66) months. Odom criterion was used to evaluate the clinical effects in two groups. JOA score, including sensory function, motor function and bladder function was used to assess the spinal cord function. Preoperative and postoperative responsible intervertebral space heights, cervical curvatures were compared by image data between two groups.
RESULTSAll incisions obtained good healing and no serious complications were found. At final follow-up, 30 cases got excellent results, 12 good, 8 fair in ACDF group;and 34 cases got excellent results, 10 good, 6 fair in CADR group;there was no significant difference between two groups(u=4.000, =0.827). At final follow-up, the scores of sensory function and motor function were obviously improved(<0.05), and bladder function had not obviously recovered (>0.05) in two groups;and CADR group in the scores of sensory function and motor function were obviously better than of ACDF group(<0.05). There was no significant difference in preoperative intervertebral space height, cervical curvature between two groups, and at final follow-up both had different recovered. The recovery of CADR group was obviously better than of ACDF group.
CONCLUSIONSCADR can quickly recover normal action for patients and retains the movement. CADR has certain advantages in recovering cervical curvature, improveing sensory function and motor function, but it is not able to completely replace ACDF.
