2005
DOI: 10.1016/s1130-1473(05)70406-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mielopatía cervical: análisis retrospectivo de los resultados quirúrgicos de 54 pacientes tratados mediante discectomía y fusión intersomática por vía anterior

Abstract: Treatment optimisation of the patient suffering cervical spondylotic myelopathy requires individualised evaluation. Prospective randomised studies are needed to answer the questions when and how to operate.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

1
0
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 72 publications
1
0
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Likewise, during the evaluations conducted at three and six months following surgery, it was noted that the patients who perceived an improvement in paresthesia symptoms had relapses between three and six months after surgery. The results of a retrospective analysis by R. Martin et al 15 of 54 patients who were submitted to the same procedure mention an improvement in the Nurick scale in 64.2% of the patients who were treated surgically, while in our study there was an improvement in 60% of the patients at six months following surgery. We observed neurological deterioration in 11% of our patients while R. Martin et al mention that 9.4% of the patients presented neurological deterioration.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 51%
“…Likewise, during the evaluations conducted at three and six months following surgery, it was noted that the patients who perceived an improvement in paresthesia symptoms had relapses between three and six months after surgery. The results of a retrospective analysis by R. Martin et al 15 of 54 patients who were submitted to the same procedure mention an improvement in the Nurick scale in 64.2% of the patients who were treated surgically, while in our study there was an improvement in 60% of the patients at six months following surgery. We observed neurological deterioration in 11% of our patients while R. Martin et al mention that 9.4% of the patients presented neurological deterioration.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 51%