Cage Subsidence after Surgery on the Anterior Part of the Subaxial Cervical Spine: a Monocentric Prospective Clinical Study with a 3-Year Follow-Up
The choice of an implant for vertebra body defect replacement in corpectomy for traumatic lesions remains a point of discussion among spinal surgeons. Nanostructured carbon cages are promising for use in spinal surgery.The purpose of this study was to determine the rate and degree of cage subsidence...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
S. V. Kolesov [verfasserIn] A. I. Kazmin [verfasserIn] I. V. Skorina [verfasserIn] V. V. Shvets [verfasserIn] M. L. Sazhnev [verfasserIn] A. A. Panteleev [verfasserIn] V. S. Pereverzev [verfasserIn] D. A. Kolbovski [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Russisch |
| Erschienen: |
2020 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
In: Travmatologiâ i Ortopediâ Rossii - Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics, 2016, 26(2020), 2, Seite 139-147 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:26 ; year:2020 ; number:2 ; pages:139-147 |
| Links: |
Link aufrufen |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.21823/2311-2905-2020-26-2-139-147 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
DOAJ070358400 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | DOAJ070358400 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230502100008.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 230228s2020 xx |||||o 00| ||rus c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.21823/2311-2905-2020-26-2-139-147 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)DOAJ070358400 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)DOAJ669f9c97b8774547972ec14a6c475b47 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a rus | ||
| 050 | 0 | |a RD701-811 | |
| 100 | 0 | |a S. V. Kolesov |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Cage Subsidence after Surgery on the Anterior Part of the Subaxial Cervical Spine: a Monocentric Prospective Clinical Study with a 3-Year Follow-Up |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2020 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a The choice of an implant for vertebra body defect replacement in corpectomy for traumatic lesions remains a point of discussion among spinal surgeons. Nanostructured carbon cages are promising for use in spinal surgery.The purpose of this study was to determine the rate and degree of cage subsidence in the patients with traumatic lesions of the cervical spine undergone a single-level anterior corpectomy in the subaxial part of the cervical spine with reconstruction using a carbon or titanium cage. Materials and Methods. A prospective study included 47 patients undergone a single-level corpectomy of the cervical spine due to traumatic injury. Two groups were formed by adaptive randomization: group I with the patients with carbon cages (n = 23), and group II with the patients with titanium cages (n = 24). The evaluation of cages subsidence and stability was carried by X-rays and CT before and after surgery. The quality of life before and after the surgery was evaluated using NDI and VAS questionnaires.Results. According to the questionnaires, the absolute majority of the patients in both groups showed a statistically significant improvement of quality of life in the postoperative period (p<0.01). The first signs of implant subsidence were noted 3 months after surgery in group II. There were none of such cases in group I. The final result of the subsidence at the end of the follow-up comprised: for group I 0.6±0.4 mm, for group II 3.1±1.4 mm (p = 0.023). In group II, the bone block between bone tissue and the cage was recorded in 30% of patients (p = 0.037), in group I, the bone block was not formed. At the same time, according to the functional X-ray data, there were no signs of carbon cages instability in group I. None of the patients in groups I and II required revision surgery due to complications associated with cages placement.Conclusion. The outcomes of carbon nanostructure cages placement as bodyreplacing implants in the cervical spine were not inferior to the outcomes of titanium mesh cages using. In group I, the carbon cages subsidence was significantly lower than in group II with titanium cages. The bone block was not formed in the case of carbon cages. It is worth noting that the carbon structure of the cages allowed the radiological diagnostics of the operated segment without artifacts formation. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a cervical spine injury | |
| 650 | 4 | |a carbon cage | |
| 650 | 4 | |a titanium mesh cages | |
| 653 | 0 | |a Orthopedic surgery | |
| 700 | 0 | |a A. I. Kazmin |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 0 | |a I. V. Skorina |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 0 | |a V. V. Shvets |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 0 | |a M. L. Sazhnev |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 0 | |a A. A. Panteleev |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 0 | |a V. S. Pereverzev |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 0 | |a D. A. Kolbovski |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i In |t Travmatologiâ i Ortopediâ Rossii |d Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics, 2016 |g 26(2020), 2, Seite 139-147 |w (DE-627)1760617466 |x 25420933 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:26 |g year:2020 |g number:2 |g pages:139-147 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.21823/2311-2905-2020-26-2-139-147 |z kostenfrei |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doaj.org/article/669f9c97b8774547972ec14a6c475b47 |z kostenfrei |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://journal.rniito.org/jour/article/view/1486 |z kostenfrei |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |u https://doaj.org/toc/2311-2905 |y Journal toc |z kostenfrei |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |u https://doaj.org/toc/2542-0933 |y Journal toc |z kostenfrei |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_DOAJ | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_31 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_39 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_63 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_65 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_95 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_105 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_161 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_213 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_230 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_285 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_293 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4012 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4037 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4125 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4126 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4249 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4306 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4307 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4323 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4324 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4338 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4367 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4700 | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 26 |j 2020 |e 2 |h 139-147 | ||
| author_variant |
s v k svk a i k aik i v s ivs v v s vvs m l s mls a a p aap v s p vsp d a k dak |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
article:25420933:2020----::aeusdnefesreynhatroproteuailevclpnaooetipopci |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2020 |
| callnumber-subject-code |
RD |
| publishDate |
2020 |
| allfields |
10.21823/2311-2905-2020-26-2-139-147 doi (DE-627)DOAJ070358400 (DE-599)DOAJ669f9c97b8774547972ec14a6c475b47 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb rus RD701-811 S. V. Kolesov verfasserin aut Cage Subsidence after Surgery on the Anterior Part of the Subaxial Cervical Spine: a Monocentric Prospective Clinical Study with a 3-Year Follow-Up 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier The choice of an implant for vertebra body defect replacement in corpectomy for traumatic lesions remains a point of discussion among spinal surgeons. Nanostructured carbon cages are promising for use in spinal surgery.The purpose of this study was to determine the rate and degree of cage subsidence in the patients with traumatic lesions of the cervical spine undergone a single-level anterior corpectomy in the subaxial part of the cervical spine with reconstruction using a carbon or titanium cage. Materials and Methods. A prospective study included 47 patients undergone a single-level corpectomy of the cervical spine due to traumatic injury. Two groups were formed by adaptive randomization: group I with the patients with carbon cages (n = 23), and group II with the patients with titanium cages (n = 24). The evaluation of cages subsidence and stability was carried by X-rays and CT before and after surgery. The quality of life before and after the surgery was evaluated using NDI and VAS questionnaires.Results. According to the questionnaires, the absolute majority of the patients in both groups showed a statistically significant improvement of quality of life in the postoperative period (p<0.01). The first signs of implant subsidence were noted 3 months after surgery in group II. There were none of such cases in group I. The final result of the subsidence at the end of the follow-up comprised: for group I 0.6±0.4 mm, for group II 3.1±1.4 mm (p = 0.023). In group II, the bone block between bone tissue and the cage was recorded in 30% of patients (p = 0.037), in group I, the bone block was not formed. At the same time, according to the functional X-ray data, there were no signs of carbon cages instability in group I. None of the patients in groups I and II required revision surgery due to complications associated with cages placement.Conclusion. The outcomes of carbon nanostructure cages placement as bodyreplacing implants in the cervical spine were not inferior to the outcomes of titanium mesh cages using. In group I, the carbon cages subsidence was significantly lower than in group II with titanium cages. The bone block was not formed in the case of carbon cages. It is worth noting that the carbon structure of the cages allowed the radiological diagnostics of the operated segment without artifacts formation. cervical spine injury carbon cage titanium mesh cages Orthopedic surgery A. I. Kazmin verfasserin aut I. V. Skorina verfasserin aut V. V. Shvets verfasserin aut M. L. Sazhnev verfasserin aut A. A. Panteleev verfasserin aut V. S. Pereverzev verfasserin aut D. A. Kolbovski verfasserin aut In Travmatologiâ i Ortopediâ Rossii Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics, 2016 26(2020), 2, Seite 139-147 (DE-627)1760617466 25420933 nnns volume:26 year:2020 number:2 pages:139-147 https://doi.org/10.21823/2311-2905-2020-26-2-139-147 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/669f9c97b8774547972ec14a6c475b47 kostenfrei https://journal.rniito.org/jour/article/view/1486 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2311-2905 Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2542-0933 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 26 2020 2 139-147 |
| spelling |
10.21823/2311-2905-2020-26-2-139-147 doi (DE-627)DOAJ070358400 (DE-599)DOAJ669f9c97b8774547972ec14a6c475b47 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb rus RD701-811 S. V. Kolesov verfasserin aut Cage Subsidence after Surgery on the Anterior Part of the Subaxial Cervical Spine: a Monocentric Prospective Clinical Study with a 3-Year Follow-Up 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier The choice of an implant for vertebra body defect replacement in corpectomy for traumatic lesions remains a point of discussion among spinal surgeons. Nanostructured carbon cages are promising for use in spinal surgery.The purpose of this study was to determine the rate and degree of cage subsidence in the patients with traumatic lesions of the cervical spine undergone a single-level anterior corpectomy in the subaxial part of the cervical spine with reconstruction using a carbon or titanium cage. Materials and Methods. A prospective study included 47 patients undergone a single-level corpectomy of the cervical spine due to traumatic injury. Two groups were formed by adaptive randomization: group I with the patients with carbon cages (n = 23), and group II with the patients with titanium cages (n = 24). The evaluation of cages subsidence and stability was carried by X-rays and CT before and after surgery. The quality of life before and after the surgery was evaluated using NDI and VAS questionnaires.Results. According to the questionnaires, the absolute majority of the patients in both groups showed a statistically significant improvement of quality of life in the postoperative period (p<0.01). The first signs of implant subsidence were noted 3 months after surgery in group II. There were none of such cases in group I. The final result of the subsidence at the end of the follow-up comprised: for group I 0.6±0.4 mm, for group II 3.1±1.4 mm (p = 0.023). In group II, the bone block between bone tissue and the cage was recorded in 30% of patients (p = 0.037), in group I, the bone block was not formed. At the same time, according to the functional X-ray data, there were no signs of carbon cages instability in group I. None of the patients in groups I and II required revision surgery due to complications associated with cages placement.Conclusion. The outcomes of carbon nanostructure cages placement as bodyreplacing implants in the cervical spine were not inferior to the outcomes of titanium mesh cages using. In group I, the carbon cages subsidence was significantly lower than in group II with titanium cages. The bone block was not formed in the case of carbon cages. It is worth noting that the carbon structure of the cages allowed the radiological diagnostics of the operated segment without artifacts formation. cervical spine injury carbon cage titanium mesh cages Orthopedic surgery A. I. Kazmin verfasserin aut I. V. Skorina verfasserin aut V. V. Shvets verfasserin aut M. L. Sazhnev verfasserin aut A. A. Panteleev verfasserin aut V. S. Pereverzev verfasserin aut D. A. Kolbovski verfasserin aut In Travmatologiâ i Ortopediâ Rossii Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics, 2016 26(2020), 2, Seite 139-147 (DE-627)1760617466 25420933 nnns volume:26 year:2020 number:2 pages:139-147 https://doi.org/10.21823/2311-2905-2020-26-2-139-147 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/669f9c97b8774547972ec14a6c475b47 kostenfrei https://journal.rniito.org/jour/article/view/1486 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2311-2905 Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2542-0933 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 26 2020 2 139-147 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.21823/2311-2905-2020-26-2-139-147 doi (DE-627)DOAJ070358400 (DE-599)DOAJ669f9c97b8774547972ec14a6c475b47 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb rus RD701-811 S. V. Kolesov verfasserin aut Cage Subsidence after Surgery on the Anterior Part of the Subaxial Cervical Spine: a Monocentric Prospective Clinical Study with a 3-Year Follow-Up 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier The choice of an implant for vertebra body defect replacement in corpectomy for traumatic lesions remains a point of discussion among spinal surgeons. Nanostructured carbon cages are promising for use in spinal surgery.The purpose of this study was to determine the rate and degree of cage subsidence in the patients with traumatic lesions of the cervical spine undergone a single-level anterior corpectomy in the subaxial part of the cervical spine with reconstruction using a carbon or titanium cage. Materials and Methods. A prospective study included 47 patients undergone a single-level corpectomy of the cervical spine due to traumatic injury. Two groups were formed by adaptive randomization: group I with the patients with carbon cages (n = 23), and group II with the patients with titanium cages (n = 24). The evaluation of cages subsidence and stability was carried by X-rays and CT before and after surgery. The quality of life before and after the surgery was evaluated using NDI and VAS questionnaires.Results. According to the questionnaires, the absolute majority of the patients in both groups showed a statistically significant improvement of quality of life in the postoperative period (p<0.01). The first signs of implant subsidence were noted 3 months after surgery in group II. There were none of such cases in group I. The final result of the subsidence at the end of the follow-up comprised: for group I 0.6±0.4 mm, for group II 3.1±1.4 mm (p = 0.023). In group II, the bone block between bone tissue and the cage was recorded in 30% of patients (p = 0.037), in group I, the bone block was not formed. At the same time, according to the functional X-ray data, there were no signs of carbon cages instability in group I. None of the patients in groups I and II required revision surgery due to complications associated with cages placement.Conclusion. The outcomes of carbon nanostructure cages placement as bodyreplacing implants in the cervical spine were not inferior to the outcomes of titanium mesh cages using. In group I, the carbon cages subsidence was significantly lower than in group II with titanium cages. The bone block was not formed in the case of carbon cages. It is worth noting that the carbon structure of the cages allowed the radiological diagnostics of the operated segment without artifacts formation. cervical spine injury carbon cage titanium mesh cages Orthopedic surgery A. I. Kazmin verfasserin aut I. V. Skorina verfasserin aut V. V. Shvets verfasserin aut M. L. Sazhnev verfasserin aut A. A. Panteleev verfasserin aut V. S. Pereverzev verfasserin aut D. A. Kolbovski verfasserin aut In Travmatologiâ i Ortopediâ Rossii Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics, 2016 26(2020), 2, Seite 139-147 (DE-627)1760617466 25420933 nnns volume:26 year:2020 number:2 pages:139-147 https://doi.org/10.21823/2311-2905-2020-26-2-139-147 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/669f9c97b8774547972ec14a6c475b47 kostenfrei https://journal.rniito.org/jour/article/view/1486 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2311-2905 Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2542-0933 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 26 2020 2 139-147 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.21823/2311-2905-2020-26-2-139-147 doi (DE-627)DOAJ070358400 (DE-599)DOAJ669f9c97b8774547972ec14a6c475b47 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb rus RD701-811 S. V. Kolesov verfasserin aut Cage Subsidence after Surgery on the Anterior Part of the Subaxial Cervical Spine: a Monocentric Prospective Clinical Study with a 3-Year Follow-Up 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier The choice of an implant for vertebra body defect replacement in corpectomy for traumatic lesions remains a point of discussion among spinal surgeons. Nanostructured carbon cages are promising for use in spinal surgery.The purpose of this study was to determine the rate and degree of cage subsidence in the patients with traumatic lesions of the cervical spine undergone a single-level anterior corpectomy in the subaxial part of the cervical spine with reconstruction using a carbon or titanium cage. Materials and Methods. A prospective study included 47 patients undergone a single-level corpectomy of the cervical spine due to traumatic injury. Two groups were formed by adaptive randomization: group I with the patients with carbon cages (n = 23), and group II with the patients with titanium cages (n = 24). The evaluation of cages subsidence and stability was carried by X-rays and CT before and after surgery. The quality of life before and after the surgery was evaluated using NDI and VAS questionnaires.Results. According to the questionnaires, the absolute majority of the patients in both groups showed a statistically significant improvement of quality of life in the postoperative period (p<0.01). The first signs of implant subsidence were noted 3 months after surgery in group II. There were none of such cases in group I. The final result of the subsidence at the end of the follow-up comprised: for group I 0.6±0.4 mm, for group II 3.1±1.4 mm (p = 0.023). In group II, the bone block between bone tissue and the cage was recorded in 30% of patients (p = 0.037), in group I, the bone block was not formed. At the same time, according to the functional X-ray data, there were no signs of carbon cages instability in group I. None of the patients in groups I and II required revision surgery due to complications associated with cages placement.Conclusion. The outcomes of carbon nanostructure cages placement as bodyreplacing implants in the cervical spine were not inferior to the outcomes of titanium mesh cages using. In group I, the carbon cages subsidence was significantly lower than in group II with titanium cages. The bone block was not formed in the case of carbon cages. It is worth noting that the carbon structure of the cages allowed the radiological diagnostics of the operated segment without artifacts formation. cervical spine injury carbon cage titanium mesh cages Orthopedic surgery A. I. Kazmin verfasserin aut I. V. Skorina verfasserin aut V. V. Shvets verfasserin aut M. L. Sazhnev verfasserin aut A. A. Panteleev verfasserin aut V. S. Pereverzev verfasserin aut D. A. Kolbovski verfasserin aut In Travmatologiâ i Ortopediâ Rossii Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics, 2016 26(2020), 2, Seite 139-147 (DE-627)1760617466 25420933 nnns volume:26 year:2020 number:2 pages:139-147 https://doi.org/10.21823/2311-2905-2020-26-2-139-147 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/669f9c97b8774547972ec14a6c475b47 kostenfrei https://journal.rniito.org/jour/article/view/1486 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2311-2905 Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2542-0933 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 26 2020 2 139-147 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.21823/2311-2905-2020-26-2-139-147 doi (DE-627)DOAJ070358400 (DE-599)DOAJ669f9c97b8774547972ec14a6c475b47 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb rus RD701-811 S. V. Kolesov verfasserin aut Cage Subsidence after Surgery on the Anterior Part of the Subaxial Cervical Spine: a Monocentric Prospective Clinical Study with a 3-Year Follow-Up 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier The choice of an implant for vertebra body defect replacement in corpectomy for traumatic lesions remains a point of discussion among spinal surgeons. Nanostructured carbon cages are promising for use in spinal surgery.The purpose of this study was to determine the rate and degree of cage subsidence in the patients with traumatic lesions of the cervical spine undergone a single-level anterior corpectomy in the subaxial part of the cervical spine with reconstruction using a carbon or titanium cage. Materials and Methods. A prospective study included 47 patients undergone a single-level corpectomy of the cervical spine due to traumatic injury. Two groups were formed by adaptive randomization: group I with the patients with carbon cages (n = 23), and group II with the patients with titanium cages (n = 24). The evaluation of cages subsidence and stability was carried by X-rays and CT before and after surgery. The quality of life before and after the surgery was evaluated using NDI and VAS questionnaires.Results. According to the questionnaires, the absolute majority of the patients in both groups showed a statistically significant improvement of quality of life in the postoperative period (p<0.01). The first signs of implant subsidence were noted 3 months after surgery in group II. There were none of such cases in group I. The final result of the subsidence at the end of the follow-up comprised: for group I 0.6±0.4 mm, for group II 3.1±1.4 mm (p = 0.023). In group II, the bone block between bone tissue and the cage was recorded in 30% of patients (p = 0.037), in group I, the bone block was not formed. At the same time, according to the functional X-ray data, there were no signs of carbon cages instability in group I. None of the patients in groups I and II required revision surgery due to complications associated with cages placement.Conclusion. The outcomes of carbon nanostructure cages placement as bodyreplacing implants in the cervical spine were not inferior to the outcomes of titanium mesh cages using. In group I, the carbon cages subsidence was significantly lower than in group II with titanium cages. The bone block was not formed in the case of carbon cages. It is worth noting that the carbon structure of the cages allowed the radiological diagnostics of the operated segment without artifacts formation. cervical spine injury carbon cage titanium mesh cages Orthopedic surgery A. I. Kazmin verfasserin aut I. V. Skorina verfasserin aut V. V. Shvets verfasserin aut M. L. Sazhnev verfasserin aut A. A. Panteleev verfasserin aut V. S. Pereverzev verfasserin aut D. A. Kolbovski verfasserin aut In Travmatologiâ i Ortopediâ Rossii Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics, 2016 26(2020), 2, Seite 139-147 (DE-627)1760617466 25420933 nnns volume:26 year:2020 number:2 pages:139-147 https://doi.org/10.21823/2311-2905-2020-26-2-139-147 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/669f9c97b8774547972ec14a6c475b47 kostenfrei https://journal.rniito.org/jour/article/view/1486 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2311-2905 Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2542-0933 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 26 2020 2 139-147 |
| language |
Russian |
| source |
In Travmatologiâ i Ortopediâ Rossii 26(2020), 2, Seite 139-147 volume:26 year:2020 number:2 pages:139-147 |
| sourceStr |
In Travmatologiâ i Ortopediâ Rossii 26(2020), 2, Seite 139-147 volume:26 year:2020 number:2 pages:139-147 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
cervical spine injury carbon cage titanium mesh cages Orthopedic surgery |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
true |
| container_title |
Travmatologiâ i Ortopediâ Rossii |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
S. V. Kolesov @@aut@@ A. I. Kazmin @@aut@@ I. V. Skorina @@aut@@ V. V. Shvets @@aut@@ M. L. Sazhnev @@aut@@ A. A. Panteleev @@aut@@ V. S. Pereverzev @@aut@@ D. A. Kolbovski @@aut@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2020-01-01T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
1760617466 |
| id |
DOAJ070358400 |
| language_de |
russisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ070358400</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230502100008.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230228s2020 xx |||||o 00| ||rus c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.21823/2311-2905-2020-26-2-139-147</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ070358400</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ669f9c97b8774547972ec14a6c475b47</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">rus</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RD701-811</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">S. V. Kolesov</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Cage Subsidence after Surgery on the Anterior Part of the Subaxial Cervical Spine: a Monocentric Prospective Clinical Study with a 3-Year Follow-Up</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">The choice of an implant for vertebra body defect replacement in corpectomy for traumatic lesions remains a point of discussion among spinal surgeons. Nanostructured carbon cages are promising for use in spinal surgery.The purpose of this study was to determine the rate and degree of cage subsidence in the patients with traumatic lesions of the cervical spine undergone a single-level anterior corpectomy in the subaxial part of the cervical spine with reconstruction using a carbon or titanium cage. Materials and Methods. A prospective study included 47 patients undergone a single-level corpectomy of the cervical spine due to traumatic injury. Two groups were formed by adaptive randomization: group I with the patients with carbon cages (n = 23), and group II with the patients with titanium cages (n = 24). The evaluation of cages subsidence and stability was carried by X-rays and CT before and after surgery. The quality of life before and after the surgery was evaluated using NDI and VAS questionnaires.Results. According to the questionnaires, the absolute majority of the patients in both groups showed a statistically significant improvement of quality of life in the postoperative period (p&lt;0.01). The first signs of implant subsidence were noted 3 months after surgery in group II. There were none of such cases in group I. The final result of the subsidence at the end of the follow-up comprised: for group I 0.6±0.4 mm, for group II 3.1±1.4 mm (p = 0.023). In group II, the bone block between bone tissue and the cage was recorded in 30% of patients (p = 0.037), in group I, the bone block was not formed. At the same time, according to the functional X-ray data, there were no signs of carbon cages instability in group I. None of the patients in groups I and II required revision surgery due to complications associated with cages placement.Conclusion. The outcomes of carbon nanostructure cages placement as bodyreplacing implants in the cervical spine were not inferior to the outcomes of titanium mesh cages using. In group I, the carbon cages subsidence was significantly lower than in group II with titanium cages. The bone block was not formed in the case of carbon cages. It is worth noting that the carbon structure of the cages allowed the radiological diagnostics of the operated segment without artifacts formation.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">cervical spine injury</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">carbon cage</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">titanium mesh cages</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Orthopedic surgery</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">A. I. Kazmin</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">I. V. Skorina</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">V. V. Shvets</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">M. L. Sazhnev</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">A. A. Panteleev</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">V. S. Pereverzev</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">D. A. Kolbovski</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Travmatologiâ i Ortopediâ Rossii</subfield><subfield code="d">Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics, 2016</subfield><subfield code="g">26(2020), 2, Seite 139-147</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)1760617466</subfield><subfield code="x">25420933</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:26</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2020</subfield><subfield code="g">number:2</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:139-147</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.21823/2311-2905-2020-26-2-139-147</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/669f9c97b8774547972ec14a6c475b47</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://journal.rniito.org/jour/article/view/1486</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2311-2905</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2542-0933</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">26</subfield><subfield code="j">2020</subfield><subfield code="e">2</subfield><subfield code="h">139-147</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| callnumber-first |
R - Medicine |
| author |
S. V. Kolesov |
| spellingShingle |
S. V. Kolesov misc RD701-811 misc cervical spine injury misc carbon cage misc titanium mesh cages misc Orthopedic surgery Cage Subsidence after Surgery on the Anterior Part of the Subaxial Cervical Spine: a Monocentric Prospective Clinical Study with a 3-Year Follow-Up |
| authorStr |
S. V. Kolesov |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)1760617466 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut |
| collection |
DOAJ |
| remote_str |
true |
| callnumber-label |
RD701-811 |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| issn |
25420933 |
| topic_title |
RD701-811 Cage Subsidence after Surgery on the Anterior Part of the Subaxial Cervical Spine: a Monocentric Prospective Clinical Study with a 3-Year Follow-Up cervical spine injury carbon cage titanium mesh cages |
| topic |
misc RD701-811 misc cervical spine injury misc carbon cage misc titanium mesh cages misc Orthopedic surgery |
| topic_unstemmed |
misc RD701-811 misc cervical spine injury misc carbon cage misc titanium mesh cages misc Orthopedic surgery |
| topic_browse |
misc RD701-811 misc cervical spine injury misc carbon cage misc titanium mesh cages misc Orthopedic surgery |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Travmatologiâ i Ortopediâ Rossii |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
1760617466 |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Travmatologiâ i Ortopediâ Rossii |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
true |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)1760617466 |
| title |
Cage Subsidence after Surgery on the Anterior Part of the Subaxial Cervical Spine: a Monocentric Prospective Clinical Study with a 3-Year Follow-Up |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)DOAJ070358400 (DE-599)DOAJ669f9c97b8774547972ec14a6c475b47 |
| title_full |
Cage Subsidence after Surgery on the Anterior Part of the Subaxial Cervical Spine: a Monocentric Prospective Clinical Study with a 3-Year Follow-Up |
| author_sort |
S. V. Kolesov |
| journal |
Travmatologiâ i Ortopediâ Rossii |
| journalStr |
Travmatologiâ i Ortopediâ Rossii |
| callnumber-first-code |
R |
| lang_code |
rus |
| isOA_bool |
true |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2020 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
| container_start_page |
139 |
| author_browse |
S. V. Kolesov A. I. Kazmin I. V. Skorina V. V. Shvets M. L. Sazhnev A. A. Panteleev V. S. Pereverzev D. A. Kolbovski |
| container_volume |
26 |
| class |
RD701-811 |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
S. V. Kolesov |
| doi_str_mv |
10.21823/2311-2905-2020-26-2-139-147 |
| author2-role |
verfasserin |
| title_sort |
cage subsidence after surgery on the anterior part of the subaxial cervical spine: a monocentric prospective clinical study with a 3-year follow-up |
| callnumber |
RD701-811 |
| title_auth |
Cage Subsidence after Surgery on the Anterior Part of the Subaxial Cervical Spine: a Monocentric Prospective Clinical Study with a 3-Year Follow-Up |
| abstract |
The choice of an implant for vertebra body defect replacement in corpectomy for traumatic lesions remains a point of discussion among spinal surgeons. Nanostructured carbon cages are promising for use in spinal surgery.The purpose of this study was to determine the rate and degree of cage subsidence in the patients with traumatic lesions of the cervical spine undergone a single-level anterior corpectomy in the subaxial part of the cervical spine with reconstruction using a carbon or titanium cage. Materials and Methods. A prospective study included 47 patients undergone a single-level corpectomy of the cervical spine due to traumatic injury. Two groups were formed by adaptive randomization: group I with the patients with carbon cages (n = 23), and group II with the patients with titanium cages (n = 24). The evaluation of cages subsidence and stability was carried by X-rays and CT before and after surgery. The quality of life before and after the surgery was evaluated using NDI and VAS questionnaires.Results. According to the questionnaires, the absolute majority of the patients in both groups showed a statistically significant improvement of quality of life in the postoperative period (p<0.01). The first signs of implant subsidence were noted 3 months after surgery in group II. There were none of such cases in group I. The final result of the subsidence at the end of the follow-up comprised: for group I 0.6±0.4 mm, for group II 3.1±1.4 mm (p = 0.023). In group II, the bone block between bone tissue and the cage was recorded in 30% of patients (p = 0.037), in group I, the bone block was not formed. At the same time, according to the functional X-ray data, there were no signs of carbon cages instability in group I. None of the patients in groups I and II required revision surgery due to complications associated with cages placement.Conclusion. The outcomes of carbon nanostructure cages placement as bodyreplacing implants in the cervical spine were not inferior to the outcomes of titanium mesh cages using. In group I, the carbon cages subsidence was significantly lower than in group II with titanium cages. The bone block was not formed in the case of carbon cages. It is worth noting that the carbon structure of the cages allowed the radiological diagnostics of the operated segment without artifacts formation. |
| abstractGer |
The choice of an implant for vertebra body defect replacement in corpectomy for traumatic lesions remains a point of discussion among spinal surgeons. Nanostructured carbon cages are promising for use in spinal surgery.The purpose of this study was to determine the rate and degree of cage subsidence in the patients with traumatic lesions of the cervical spine undergone a single-level anterior corpectomy in the subaxial part of the cervical spine with reconstruction using a carbon or titanium cage. Materials and Methods. A prospective study included 47 patients undergone a single-level corpectomy of the cervical spine due to traumatic injury. Two groups were formed by adaptive randomization: group I with the patients with carbon cages (n = 23), and group II with the patients with titanium cages (n = 24). The evaluation of cages subsidence and stability was carried by X-rays and CT before and after surgery. The quality of life before and after the surgery was evaluated using NDI and VAS questionnaires.Results. According to the questionnaires, the absolute majority of the patients in both groups showed a statistically significant improvement of quality of life in the postoperative period (p<0.01). The first signs of implant subsidence were noted 3 months after surgery in group II. There were none of such cases in group I. The final result of the subsidence at the end of the follow-up comprised: for group I 0.6±0.4 mm, for group II 3.1±1.4 mm (p = 0.023). In group II, the bone block between bone tissue and the cage was recorded in 30% of patients (p = 0.037), in group I, the bone block was not formed. At the same time, according to the functional X-ray data, there were no signs of carbon cages instability in group I. None of the patients in groups I and II required revision surgery due to complications associated with cages placement.Conclusion. The outcomes of carbon nanostructure cages placement as bodyreplacing implants in the cervical spine were not inferior to the outcomes of titanium mesh cages using. In group I, the carbon cages subsidence was significantly lower than in group II with titanium cages. The bone block was not formed in the case of carbon cages. It is worth noting that the carbon structure of the cages allowed the radiological diagnostics of the operated segment without artifacts formation. |
| abstract_unstemmed |
The choice of an implant for vertebra body defect replacement in corpectomy for traumatic lesions remains a point of discussion among spinal surgeons. Nanostructured carbon cages are promising for use in spinal surgery.The purpose of this study was to determine the rate and degree of cage subsidence in the patients with traumatic lesions of the cervical spine undergone a single-level anterior corpectomy in the subaxial part of the cervical spine with reconstruction using a carbon or titanium cage. Materials and Methods. A prospective study included 47 patients undergone a single-level corpectomy of the cervical spine due to traumatic injury. Two groups were formed by adaptive randomization: group I with the patients with carbon cages (n = 23), and group II with the patients with titanium cages (n = 24). The evaluation of cages subsidence and stability was carried by X-rays and CT before and after surgery. The quality of life before and after the surgery was evaluated using NDI and VAS questionnaires.Results. According to the questionnaires, the absolute majority of the patients in both groups showed a statistically significant improvement of quality of life in the postoperative period (p<0.01). The first signs of implant subsidence were noted 3 months after surgery in group II. There were none of such cases in group I. The final result of the subsidence at the end of the follow-up comprised: for group I 0.6±0.4 mm, for group II 3.1±1.4 mm (p = 0.023). In group II, the bone block between bone tissue and the cage was recorded in 30% of patients (p = 0.037), in group I, the bone block was not formed. At the same time, according to the functional X-ray data, there were no signs of carbon cages instability in group I. None of the patients in groups I and II required revision surgery due to complications associated with cages placement.Conclusion. The outcomes of carbon nanostructure cages placement as bodyreplacing implants in the cervical spine were not inferior to the outcomes of titanium mesh cages using. In group I, the carbon cages subsidence was significantly lower than in group II with titanium cages. The bone block was not formed in the case of carbon cages. It is worth noting that the carbon structure of the cages allowed the radiological diagnostics of the operated segment without artifacts formation. |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 |
| container_issue |
2 |
| title_short |
Cage Subsidence after Surgery on the Anterior Part of the Subaxial Cervical Spine: a Monocentric Prospective Clinical Study with a 3-Year Follow-Up |
| url |
https://doi.org/10.21823/2311-2905-2020-26-2-139-147 https://doaj.org/article/669f9c97b8774547972ec14a6c475b47 https://journal.rniito.org/jour/article/view/1486 https://doaj.org/toc/2311-2905 https://doaj.org/toc/2542-0933 |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
A. I. Kazmin I. V. Skorina V. V. Shvets M. L. Sazhnev A. A. Panteleev V. S. Pereverzev D. A. Kolbovski |
| author2Str |
A. I. Kazmin I. V. Skorina V. V. Shvets M. L. Sazhnev A. A. Panteleev V. S. Pereverzev D. A. Kolbovski |
| ppnlink |
1760617466 |
| callnumber-subject |
RD - Surgery |
| mediatype_str_mv |
c |
| isOA_txt |
true |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| doi_str |
10.21823/2311-2905-2020-26-2-139-147 |
| callnumber-a |
RD701-811 |
| up_date |
2024-07-03T14:22:08.966Z |
| _version_ |
1803568051885441024 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ070358400</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230502100008.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230228s2020 xx |||||o 00| ||rus c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.21823/2311-2905-2020-26-2-139-147</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ070358400</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ669f9c97b8774547972ec14a6c475b47</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">rus</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RD701-811</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">S. V. Kolesov</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Cage Subsidence after Surgery on the Anterior Part of the Subaxial Cervical Spine: a Monocentric Prospective Clinical Study with a 3-Year Follow-Up</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">The choice of an implant for vertebra body defect replacement in corpectomy for traumatic lesions remains a point of discussion among spinal surgeons. Nanostructured carbon cages are promising for use in spinal surgery.The purpose of this study was to determine the rate and degree of cage subsidence in the patients with traumatic lesions of the cervical spine undergone a single-level anterior corpectomy in the subaxial part of the cervical spine with reconstruction using a carbon or titanium cage. Materials and Methods. A prospective study included 47 patients undergone a single-level corpectomy of the cervical spine due to traumatic injury. Two groups were formed by adaptive randomization: group I with the patients with carbon cages (n = 23), and group II with the patients with titanium cages (n = 24). The evaluation of cages subsidence and stability was carried by X-rays and CT before and after surgery. The quality of life before and after the surgery was evaluated using NDI and VAS questionnaires.Results. According to the questionnaires, the absolute majority of the patients in both groups showed a statistically significant improvement of quality of life in the postoperative period (p&lt;0.01). The first signs of implant subsidence were noted 3 months after surgery in group II. There were none of such cases in group I. The final result of the subsidence at the end of the follow-up comprised: for group I 0.6±0.4 mm, for group II 3.1±1.4 mm (p = 0.023). In group II, the bone block between bone tissue and the cage was recorded in 30% of patients (p = 0.037), in group I, the bone block was not formed. At the same time, according to the functional X-ray data, there were no signs of carbon cages instability in group I. None of the patients in groups I and II required revision surgery due to complications associated with cages placement.Conclusion. The outcomes of carbon nanostructure cages placement as bodyreplacing implants in the cervical spine were not inferior to the outcomes of titanium mesh cages using. In group I, the carbon cages subsidence was significantly lower than in group II with titanium cages. The bone block was not formed in the case of carbon cages. It is worth noting that the carbon structure of the cages allowed the radiological diagnostics of the operated segment without artifacts formation.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">cervical spine injury</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">carbon cage</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">titanium mesh cages</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Orthopedic surgery</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">A. I. Kazmin</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">I. V. Skorina</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">V. V. Shvets</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">M. L. Sazhnev</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">A. A. Panteleev</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">V. S. Pereverzev</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">D. A. Kolbovski</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Travmatologiâ i Ortopediâ Rossii</subfield><subfield code="d">Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics, 2016</subfield><subfield code="g">26(2020), 2, Seite 139-147</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)1760617466</subfield><subfield code="x">25420933</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:26</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2020</subfield><subfield code="g">number:2</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:139-147</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.21823/2311-2905-2020-26-2-139-147</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/669f9c97b8774547972ec14a6c475b47</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://journal.rniito.org/jour/article/view/1486</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2311-2905</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2542-0933</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">26</subfield><subfield code="j">2020</subfield><subfield code="e">2</subfield><subfield code="h">139-147</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.397147 |