We have located links that may give you full text access.
Cervical Spine Surgery: Approach-Related Complications.
World Neurosurgery 2016 October
OBJECTIVE: Cervical spine surgery is a common procedure for treatment of wide variety of pathologies. In this paper we report approach-related complication rates experienced by our patients.
METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated data from patients who were treated surgically for cervical pathologies from February 2011 to October 2013. Medical records were collected and evaluated. We compared the anterior cervical approach with the posterior cervical approach for patients operated for all cervical pathologies, and a subanalysis was performed for patients with cervical myelopathy.
RESULTS: The study included 251 patients (192 anterior vs. 59 posterior). The anterior approach patients were younger (not significant), but the indications for surgery varied significantly. Mean number of levels treated was 2.2 and 3.5 for anterior and posterior approaches, respectively (statistically significant). Neurologic status change was favorable for both surgical approaches. Total and deep wound infection rates (5.8% vs. 11.9%; P = 0.008; 0.5% vs. 8.5%; P < 0.0005) were significantly greater for the posterior approach As well as total complication rate (7.8% vs. 20.3%; P = 0.005). A subanalysis that included only cervical myelopathy patients (131 anterior vs. 33 posterior) demonstrated again greater levels of deep wound infections and total infection rates for posterior approach (0% vs. 12%; P < 0.0005; 12% vs. 1.5%; P < 0.005). Total complication rate in the myelopathy group was greater for the posterior approach (6.1% vs. 18.1%; P = 0.026).
CONCLUSIONS: Both the posterior and the anterior approaches are highly efficacious in preventing neurologic deterioration and in most cases improve neurological function. This study demonstrates that the anterior approach was associated with significantly lower rates of complication especially infection related complications.
METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated data from patients who were treated surgically for cervical pathologies from February 2011 to October 2013. Medical records were collected and evaluated. We compared the anterior cervical approach with the posterior cervical approach for patients operated for all cervical pathologies, and a subanalysis was performed for patients with cervical myelopathy.
RESULTS: The study included 251 patients (192 anterior vs. 59 posterior). The anterior approach patients were younger (not significant), but the indications for surgery varied significantly. Mean number of levels treated was 2.2 and 3.5 for anterior and posterior approaches, respectively (statistically significant). Neurologic status change was favorable for both surgical approaches. Total and deep wound infection rates (5.8% vs. 11.9%; P = 0.008; 0.5% vs. 8.5%; P < 0.0005) were significantly greater for the posterior approach As well as total complication rate (7.8% vs. 20.3%; P = 0.005). A subanalysis that included only cervical myelopathy patients (131 anterior vs. 33 posterior) demonstrated again greater levels of deep wound infections and total infection rates for posterior approach (0% vs. 12%; P < 0.0005; 12% vs. 1.5%; P < 0.005). Total complication rate in the myelopathy group was greater for the posterior approach (6.1% vs. 18.1%; P = 0.026).
CONCLUSIONS: Both the posterior and the anterior approaches are highly efficacious in preventing neurologic deterioration and in most cases improve neurological function. This study demonstrates that the anterior approach was associated with significantly lower rates of complication especially infection related complications.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app