Meta-Analysis of Treatment for Adjacent Two-Segment Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: A Comparison Between Anterior Cervical Corpectomy and Fusion and Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.
meta_analysis · Level I
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 39475621.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1177/21925682241297586 and PMC identifier 11559831.
- Licence recorded as CC BY-NC-ND.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
Study DesignA systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the outcomes of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) vs Anterior Cervical Corpectomy and Fusion (ACCF) in treating adjacent two-segment cervical spondylotic myelopathy.ObjectiveTo assess the clinical effectiveness and safety of ACDF compared to ACCF.MethodsA literature search was conducted in Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PubMed, and Embase up to December 2023. Studies included were prospective and observational involving ACDF or ACCF for adjacent two-segment cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Data were analyzed using RevMan 5.4 software.ResultsTen studies (nine case-control and one RCT) were included. ACDF showed a shorter hospital stay (SMD = -0.29, 95% CI: -0.53 to -0.04, <i>P</i> < 0.05), better Cobb angle (SMD = 0.52, 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.74, <i>P</i> < 0.01), and improved T1S (SMD = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.80, <i>P</i> < 0.01). No significant differences were found in upper limb VAS, neck VAS, JOA scores, NDI, fusion rates, C2-7 SVA, total complications, blood loss, and operation time.ConclusionsACDF and ACCF are both effective for adjacent two-segment cervical spondylotic myelopathy, with ACDF offering advantages in hospitalization duration and cervical curvature restoration, making it the preferred surgical approach. Further research is needed to validate these findings.
Anatomy
- cervical spine