Predictive value of vertebral Hounsfiled Unit for titanium mesh cage subsidence following ACCF surgery
To investigate the predictive value of cervical Hounsfiled Unit (HU) values for postoperative titanium mesh cage (TMC) subsidence. Clinical data of patients who underwent ACCF surgery for degenerative cervical myelopathy between January 2016 and August 2018 were analyzed. Among the 126 patients incl...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Clinical neurology and neurosurgery 2024-01, Vol.236, p.108047-108047, Article 108047 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | To investigate the predictive value of cervical Hounsfiled Unit (HU) values for postoperative titanium mesh cage (TMC) subsidence.
Clinical data of patients who underwent ACCF surgery for degenerative cervical myelopathy between January 2016 and August 2018 were analyzed. Among the 126 patients included, 74 were male and 52 were female, with a mean age of 61.0 ± 9.9 years. The mean follow-up was 37.1 ± 11.2 months. Preoperative vertebral HU values were measured and the degree of TMC subsidence during follow-up was assessed. Patients were divided into two groups according to the presence or absence of subsidence: the subsidence group and the control group. Vertebral HU values were compared between the two groups, and correlation analysis was performed between HU values and TMC subsidence values. In addition, the predictive value and threshold of HU were analyzed by using ROC.
There were 22 patients (14 males and 8 females) who developed TMC subsidence (subsidence group), while 104 patients (60 males and 44 females) did not develop TMC subsidence (control group) during follow-up. Comparative analysis of demographic characteristics between the two groups showed no significant differences in gender, age, BMI, diagnosis, surgical levels, and follow-up duration (all P values > 0.05). There was a significant difference in mean HU between the subsidence group (287.6 ± 49.6) and the control group (342.4 ± 61.4) (t = −3.92, P |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0303-8467 1872-6968 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.clineuro.2023.108047 |