RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      KCI등재 SCOPUS

      More postoperative complications and revision surgery after occipitocervical fusion than after atlantoaxial fusion: a retrospective multicenter cohort study

      한글로보기

      https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A109770220

      • 0

        상세조회
      • 0

        다운로드
      서지정보 열기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

      Study Design: A retrospective multicenter cohort study.
      Purpose: We sought to determine whether occipitocervical (OC) fusion is followed by more postoperative complications and revision surgery than is atlantoaxial (AA) fusion. We aim to compare postoperative complications and revision surgery associated with OC fusion and AA fusion.
      Overview of Literature: OC and AA fusion are established techniques for restoring upper cervical stability. However, the outcomes of the two methods have not been compared.
      Methods: This study included 90 patients who underwent upper spinal fusion surgery for mechanical instability, performed by three surgeons in two hospitals from 2011 to 2023; OC fusion was indicated for irreducible AA subluxation, os odontoideum, and severe upper C1 fracture. Of the patients, 38 (mean age, 58.7 years) underwent OC fusion, and 52 (mean age, 62.8 years) underwent AA fusion. To evaluate surgical outcomes, we documented surgical time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative complications, and the rate of revision surgery. Radiographs were obtained to identify screw malposition, rod breakage, and nonunion. To compare the outcomes of the two techniques, we used the Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables and the chi-square or Fisher’s exact test for dichotomous variables.
      Results: OC fusion took significantly longer (175.4 minutes) than AA fusion (150.7 minutes, p =0.020) and had a higher complication rate (39.5% vs. 11.5%, p <0.0001). The reoperation rate was 23.7% (9/38) after OC fusion and 3.8% (2/52) after AA fusion; the difference was statistically significant (p =0.0073). Average amounts of blood loss were 224 mL during OC fusion and 224 mL during AA fusion; the difference was not significant (p =0.947).
      Conclusions: Although OC fusion is indispensable for certain conditions, particularly basilar invagination, it entails more risk than dose AA fusion; the choice of technique thus warrants careful consideration.
      번역하기

      Study Design: A retrospective multicenter cohort study. Purpose: We sought to determine whether occipitocervical (OC) fusion is followed by more postoperative complications and revision surgery than is atlantoaxial (AA) fusion. We aim to compare posto...

      Study Design: A retrospective multicenter cohort study.
      Purpose: We sought to determine whether occipitocervical (OC) fusion is followed by more postoperative complications and revision surgery than is atlantoaxial (AA) fusion. We aim to compare postoperative complications and revision surgery associated with OC fusion and AA fusion.
      Overview of Literature: OC and AA fusion are established techniques for restoring upper cervical stability. However, the outcomes of the two methods have not been compared.
      Methods: This study included 90 patients who underwent upper spinal fusion surgery for mechanical instability, performed by three surgeons in two hospitals from 2011 to 2023; OC fusion was indicated for irreducible AA subluxation, os odontoideum, and severe upper C1 fracture. Of the patients, 38 (mean age, 58.7 years) underwent OC fusion, and 52 (mean age, 62.8 years) underwent AA fusion. To evaluate surgical outcomes, we documented surgical time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative complications, and the rate of revision surgery. Radiographs were obtained to identify screw malposition, rod breakage, and nonunion. To compare the outcomes of the two techniques, we used the Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables and the chi-square or Fisher’s exact test for dichotomous variables.
      Results: OC fusion took significantly longer (175.4 minutes) than AA fusion (150.7 minutes, p =0.020) and had a higher complication rate (39.5% vs. 11.5%, p <0.0001). The reoperation rate was 23.7% (9/38) after OC fusion and 3.8% (2/52) after AA fusion; the difference was statistically significant (p =0.0073). Average amounts of blood loss were 224 mL during OC fusion and 224 mL during AA fusion; the difference was not significant (p =0.947).
      Conclusions: Although OC fusion is indispensable for certain conditions, particularly basilar invagination, it entails more risk than dose AA fusion; the choice of technique thus warrants careful consideration.

      더보기

      분석정보

      View

      상세정보조회

      0

      Usage

      원문다운로드

      0

      대출신청

      0

      복사신청

      0

      EDDS신청

      0

      동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

      더보기

      주제

      연도별 연구동향

      연도별 활용동향

      연관논문

      연구자 네트워크맵

      공동연구자 (7)

      유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼