Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Does the Predominant Pain Location Influence Functional Outcomes, Satisfaction and Return to Work After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion for Cervical Radiculopathy?
Goh, Graham S; Yue, Wai-Mun; Guo, Chang-Ming; Tan, Seang-Beng; Chen, John Li-Tat.
Afiliación
  • Goh GS; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore.
  • Yue WM; The Orthopedic Centre, Mount Elizabeth Medical Center, Singapore.
  • Guo CM; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore.
  • Tan SB; Orthopedic and Spine Clinic, Mount Elizabeth Medical Center, Singapore.
  • Chen JL; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976) ; 46(10): E568-E575, 2021 May 15.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33290363
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of prospectively-collected registry data. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine how different combinations of preoperative neck pain (NP) and arm pain (AP) influence functional outcomes, patient satisfaction, and return-to-work in patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for degenerative cervical radiculopathy (DCR). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Surgeons often base decisions on the traditional belief that the predominance of radicular upper extremity symptoms is a stronger indication for cervical spine surgery than axial pain. However, there is a paucity of literature supporting this notion. METHODS: A prospectively maintained registry was reviewed for all patients who underwent primary ACDF for DCR. Patients were categorized into three groups depending on predominant pain location: AP predominant ([APP]; AP > NP), NP predominant ([NPP]; NP > AP), and equal pain predominance ([EPP]; NP = AP). Patients were prospectively followed for at least 2 years. RESULTS: In total, 303 patients were included: 27.4% APP, 38.9% NPP, and 33.7% EPP cases. The APP group was significantly older (P = 0.030), although there were no other preoperative differences among the three groups. After adjusting for baseline differences, the SF-36 Physical Component Summary was significantly better in the APP group at 6 months (P = 0.048) and 2 years (P = 0.039). In addition, they showed a trend towards better 6-month Neck Disability Index (P = 0.077) and 2-year SF-36 Mental Component Summary (P = 0.059). However, an equal proportion of patients in each group achieved the Minimal Clinically Important Difference for each outcome, were satisfied, and returned to work 2 years after surgery. CONCLUSION: Although patients with NPP had slightly poorer function and quality of life, all patients experienced a clinically meaningful improvement in patient-reported outcomes, regardless of the predominant pain location. High rates of satisfaction and return-to-work were also achieved. In the context of proper indications, these findings suggest that ACDF can be equally effective for DCR patients with varying combinations of NP or AP.Level of Evidence: 3.
Asunto(s)

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Radiculopatía / Fusión Vertebral / Vértebras Cervicales / Satisfacción del Paciente / Discectomía / Reinserción al Trabajo Tipo de estudio: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Aspecto: Patient_preference Límite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Año: 2021 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Singapur Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Radiculopatía / Fusión Vertebral / Vértebras Cervicales / Satisfacción del Paciente / Discectomía / Reinserción al Trabajo Tipo de estudio: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Aspecto: Patient_preference Límite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Año: 2021 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Singapur Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos