2021
DOI: 10.3340/jkns.2020.0263
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison between Anterior Cervical Decompression with Fusion and Posterior Cervical Fusion with Wide Facetectomy for Treatment of Severe Bony Foraminal Stenosis

Abstract: Objective : To compare the anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and posterior cervical fusion (PCF) with wide facetectomy in the treatment of parallel-shaped bony foraminal stenosis (FS). Methods : Thirty-six patients underwent surgery due to one-or-two levels of parallel-shaped cervical FS. ACDF was performed in 16 patients, and PCF using CPS was performed in 20 patients. All patients were followed up at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Standardized outcome measures such as Numeric rating sca… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In addition, cervical disc placement appears to require less esophageal friction and reduces esophageal pressure when compared to anterior plaque placement [39]. The reported rates of postoperative dysphagia are significantly higher in ACDF in comparison with posterior decompression and fusion [40][41][42]. Multiple cervical levels of ACDF represent a significantly higher postoperative risk for swallowing dysfunction, as compared with one-level ACDF [18,20,43].…”
Section: Surgical Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, cervical disc placement appears to require less esophageal friction and reduces esophageal pressure when compared to anterior plaque placement [39]. The reported rates of postoperative dysphagia are significantly higher in ACDF in comparison with posterior decompression and fusion [40][41][42]. Multiple cervical levels of ACDF represent a significantly higher postoperative risk for swallowing dysfunction, as compared with one-level ACDF [18,20,43].…”
Section: Surgical Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In patients with radiculopathy due to foraminal disc herniation or stenosis, surgery is recommended when non-surgical treatment is not effective [ 1 4 ]. Currently, surgical options include anterior cervical discectomy fusion (ACDF), artificial disc replacement, and posterior micro-foraminotomy [ 4 7 ]. Although ACDF and artificial disc replacement are well-established and popular surgical methods, surgery without instrumentation while preserving cervical motion would be a good alternative to those surgical methods [ 8 , 9 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite its efficacy, the anterior approach associated with ACDF can lead to certain complications. Dysphagia and hoarseness are most common 1) , but more severe complications could arise. One severe, though rare, complication includes the inadvertent perforation of the cervical esophagus or hypopharynx.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%