Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Purpose To compare the patient-derived modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (P-mJOA) scale with the European myelopathy score (EMS) for the assessment of patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM). Methods In this register-based cohort study with prospectively collected data, included patients were surgically treated for DCM and had reported both P-mJOA and EMS scores at baseline, 1-year follow-up, and/or 2-year follow-up to the Swedish Spine Register. P-mJOA and EMS scores were defined as severe (P-mJOA 0–11 and EMS 5–8), moderate (P-mJOA 12–14 and EMS 9–12), or mild (P-mJOA 15–18 and EMS 13–18). P-mJOA and EMS mean scores were compared, and agreement was evaluated with Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient (ρ), the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and kappa (κ) statistics. Results Included patients (n = 714, mean age 63.2 years, 42.2% female) completed 937 pairs of the P-mJOA and the EMS. The mean P-mJOA and EMS scores were 13.9 ± 3.0 and 14.5 ± 2.7, respectively (mean difference –0.61 [95% CI –0.72 to –0.51; p < 0.001]). Spearman’s ρ was 0.84 (p < 0.001), and intra-rater agreement measured with ICC was 0.83 (p < 0.001). Agreement of severity level measured with unweighted and weighted κ was fair (κ = 0.22 [p < 0.001]; κ = 0.34 [p < 0.001], respectively). Severity levels were significantly higher using the P-mJOA (p < 0.001). Conclusion The P-mJOA and the EMS had similar mean scores, and intra-rater agreement was high, whereas severity levels only demonstrated fair agreement. The EMS has a lower sensitivity for detecting severe myelopathy but shows an increasing agreement with the P-mJOA for milder disease severity. A larger interval to define severe myelopathy with the EMS is recommended.
Purpose To compare the patient-derived modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (P-mJOA) scale with the European myelopathy score (EMS) for the assessment of patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM). Methods In this register-based cohort study with prospectively collected data, included patients were surgically treated for DCM and had reported both P-mJOA and EMS scores at baseline, 1-year follow-up, and/or 2-year follow-up to the Swedish Spine Register. P-mJOA and EMS scores were defined as severe (P-mJOA 0–11 and EMS 5–8), moderate (P-mJOA 12–14 and EMS 9–12), or mild (P-mJOA 15–18 and EMS 13–18). P-mJOA and EMS mean scores were compared, and agreement was evaluated with Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient (ρ), the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and kappa (κ) statistics. Results Included patients (n = 714, mean age 63.2 years, 42.2% female) completed 937 pairs of the P-mJOA and the EMS. The mean P-mJOA and EMS scores were 13.9 ± 3.0 and 14.5 ± 2.7, respectively (mean difference –0.61 [95% CI –0.72 to –0.51; p < 0.001]). Spearman’s ρ was 0.84 (p < 0.001), and intra-rater agreement measured with ICC was 0.83 (p < 0.001). Agreement of severity level measured with unweighted and weighted κ was fair (κ = 0.22 [p < 0.001]; κ = 0.34 [p < 0.001], respectively). Severity levels were significantly higher using the P-mJOA (p < 0.001). Conclusion The P-mJOA and the EMS had similar mean scores, and intra-rater agreement was high, whereas severity levels only demonstrated fair agreement. The EMS has a lower sensitivity for detecting severe myelopathy but shows an increasing agreement with the P-mJOA for milder disease severity. A larger interval to define severe myelopathy with the EMS is recommended.
Background Zero-profile anchored spacers (ZAS) and plate-cage constructs (PCC) are currently employed when performing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Nevertheless, the efficacy and safety of both devices in bilevel ACDF remain controversial. The goal of our meta-analysis is to assess the overall long-term efficacy and security among ZAS and PCC in bilevel ACDF. Methods A search of four electronic databases was conducted to identify researches that compared ZAS with PCC for bilevel ACDF. Stata MP 17.0 software was used for this meta-analysis. Results Nine researches with a total of 580 patients were involved. In comparison to PCC, ZAS significantly reduced intraoperative bleeding and postoperative dysphagia rates. No significant differences were found concerning operation time, JOA score, NDI score, cervical Cobb angle, fusion rates, the incidence of adjacent segmental degeneration (ASD) and implant sinking rates at last follow-up. Conclusion Compared to PCC, ZAS achieved similar efficacy and security in bilevel ACDF with respect to operative time, JOA score, NDI score, cervical Cobb angle, fusion rates, implant sinking rates and ASD rates at final follow-up. It is worth noting that ZAS offered considerable benefits over conventional PCC for the reduction of intraoperative bleeding and postoperative dysphagia. Therefore, for patients requiring bilevel ACDF, ZAS seems superior to PCC. Given the limitations of our study, larger prospective randomised controlled trials are needed to establish reliable proof to consolidate our conclusions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.