Methods: Patients who received single-level ADR or CS between January 2008 and December 2018 were included. Data collected was preoperatively, intraoperatively, and postoperatively (6, 12, 24 months). Demographic information, surgical information, complications, follow-up surgery, and outcome ratings (Japanese Orthopaedic Association [JOA], Neck Disability Index [NDI], Visual Analog Scale [VAS] neck and arm, 36-item Short Form Health Survey [SF-36], EuroQoL-5 Dimension [EQ-5D]) were gathered. The radiological assessment included motion segment height, adjacent disc height, lordosis, cervical lordosis, T1 slope, the sagittal vertical axis C2–7, and adjacent level ossification development (ALOD). Results: Fifty-eight patients were included (ADR: 37 and CS: 21). At 6 months, both groups’ JOA, VAS, NDI, SF-36, and EQ-5D scores significantly improved, and the positive trends persisted at 2 years. Noted no significant difference in the enhancement of clinical scores except for the VAS arm (ADR: 5.95 vs. CS: 3.43, p =0.001). Radiological parameters were comparable except for the progression of ALOD of the subjacent disc (ADR: 29.7% vs. CS: 66.9%, p =0.02). No significant difference in adverse events or severe complications seen. Conclusions ADR and CS obtain good clinical results for symptomatic single-level cervical DDD. ADR demonstrated a significant advantage over CS in the improvement of VAS arm and reduced progression of ALOD of the adjacent lower disc. No statistically significant difference of dysphonia or dysphagia between the two groups were seen, attributed to their comparable zero profile.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the rate of diabetes complications in young-onset type 2 diabetes (T2DM) with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) patients and to examine the relationship between diabetes complications with clinical and metabolic parameters.
METHODOLOGY: This is a retrospective,comparative study based on electronic medical records review. Young-onset T2DM patients defined as those with disease onset before the age of 40 and T1DM patients were included. Data was collected on demographic and clinical parameters, cardiovascular risks factors, macrovascular and microvascular complications.
RESULTS: There were 194 young-onset T2DM and 45 T1DM subjects. Despite similar glycemic profile, more subjects in the T2DM group hadunfavourable cardiovascular risk factors and developedmacro- or microvascular complications than the T1DM group (22 vs. 0%, p< 0.001for macrovascular, 68 vs. 40%, p< 0.001 for microvascular). Afteradjustment ofthe confounders, young-onset T2DM remained an independent predictor for both macrovascular and microvascular complications in the overall cohort (HR= 2.635, p= 0.022).
CONCLUSION: Young-onset T2DM appeared to be a more aggressive disease compared to T1DM. An aggressive approach should be adopted in treating young-onset T2DM to optimise the cardiovascular risk factors and glycemic control to prevent premature mortality and morbidity.

Human ; Adult ; Diabetes Mellitus ; Patients ; Mortality ; Morbidity