...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Neurosurgical focus >Perioperative morbidity and mortality comparison in circumferential cervical fusion for osteomyelitis versus cervical spondylotic myelopathy
【24h】

Perioperative morbidity and mortality comparison in circumferential cervical fusion for osteomyelitis versus cervical spondylotic myelopathy

机译：周围型颈椎融合术治疗骨髓炎与颈椎病的围手术期发病率和死亡率比较

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Object The most common indications for circumferential cervical decompression and fusion are cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) and cervical osteomyelitis (COM). Currently, the informed consent process prior to circumferential cervical fusion surgery is not different for these two groups of patients, as details of their diagnosis-specific risk profiles have not been quantified. The authors compared two patient cohorts with either CSM or COM treated using circumferential fusion. They sought to quantify perioperative morbidity and postoperative mortality in these two groups to assist with a diagnosis-specific informed consent process for future patients undergoing this type of surgery. Methods Perioperative and follow-up data from two cohorts of patients who had undergone circumferential cervical decompression and fusion were analyzed. Estimated blood loss (EBL), length of stay (LOS), perioperative complications, hospital readmission, 30-day reoperation rates, change in Nurick grade, and mortality were compared between the two groups. Results Twenty-two patients were in the COM cohort, and 24 were in the CSM cohort. Complications, hospital readmission, 30-day reoperation rates, EBL, and mortality were not statistically different, although patients with COM trended higher in each of these categories. There was a significantly greater LOS (p Conclusions When advising patients undergoing circumferential fusion about perioperative risk factors, it is important for those with COM to know that they are likely to have a higher rate of complications and mortality than those with CSM who are undergoing similar surgery. Furthermore, COM patients have less neurological improvement than CSM patients after surgery. This information may be useful to surgeons and patients in providing appropriate informed consent during preoperative planning.
机译：目的颈椎周围减压和融合最常见的适应症是颈椎病（CSM）和颈椎炎（COM）。目前，这两组患者在进行环颈融合术之前的知情同意程序没有区别，因为他们的诊断特异性风险特征的细节尚未量化。作者比较了两个使用CSM或COM进行圆周融合治疗的患者队列。他们试图对这两组患者的围手术期发病率和术后死亡率进行量化，以协助针对未来接受此类手术的患者进行特定于诊断的知情同意程序。方法分析两组队列性颈椎减压和融合患者的围手术期和随访数据。比较两组的估计失血量（EBL），住院时间（LOS），围手术期并发症，住院再入院，30天再手术率，Nurick等级变化和死亡率。结果COM队列22例，CSM队列24例。并发症，住院再入院率，30天再手术率，EBL和死亡率无统计学差异，尽管COM患者在所有这些类别中都有较高的趋势。 LOS（p结论）在建议接受围融合术的患者进行围手术期危险因素咨询时，重要的是，COM患者要知道他们的并发症和死亡率要高于CSM患者。此外，COM患者术后的神经功能改善不如CSM患者，该信息可能有助于外科医生和患者在术前计划中提供适当的知情同意。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号