颈椎病手术治疗的最新研究进展
Recent Advances in Surgical Treatment of Cervical Spondylosis
DOI: 10.12677/acm.2025.1551586, PDF, HTML, XML,   
作者: 缪圣旺:赣南医科大学第一临床医学院,江西 赣州;徐房添*:赣南医科大学附属第一医院骨科,江西 赣州
关键词: 颈椎病手术治疗微创技术Cervical Spondylosis Surgical Treatment Minimally Invasive Techniques
摘要: 随着年龄和现代生活节奏的变化,颈椎病的手术治疗得到关注,而其选择何种手术治疗方式是目前的研究重点和热点。手术方式多种多样,且都可取得不错的疗效,本文对各种手术治疗颈椎病的最新研究进行综述。
Abstract: With the change of age and the rhythm of modern life, the surgical treatment of cervical spondylosis has attracted attention, and the choice of surgical treatment is the focus and hot spot of current research. There are a variety of surgical methods, and all of them can achieve good results, and the latest research on various surgical treatments for cervical spondylosis is reviewed in this article.
文章引用:缪圣旺, 徐房添. 颈椎病手术治疗的最新研究进展[J]. 临床医学进展, 2025, 15(5): 2011-2018. https://doi.org/10.12677/acm.2025.1551586

1. 引言

颈椎病以脊髓型颈椎病(CSM)和神经根型颈椎病(CSR)多见,指颈椎椎间盘、关节面和脊柱韧带等的退变,使颈脊髓、神经、血管等受压迫刺激而发生一系列症状体征的综合征[1]。临床上表现多为肢体疼痛麻木、无力等,部分有二便功能、性功能障碍,甚至四肢瘫痪等症状[2]。延误治疗或致神经不可逆的损伤,建议有手术指征的病人尽早手术治疗[3]。颈椎手术可分为前路、后路、前后联合入路和微创手术。增加椎管容积、重建颈椎稳定性、解除脊髓的压迫,为脊髓或神经根恢复提供空间条件、促进神经功能和颈椎功能恢复和改善患者生活质量是手术主要目的。对于病变节段不超过3节段的颈椎病,临床上多采用前路手术,但对于多节段CSM治疗,前、后入路手术均可获得良好疗效,手术方式的选择上意见不一[4]

2. 前路手术

前入路手术创伤小、出血少,显露方便,可对椎管前方直接减压,疗效显著,植骨融合率高,可恢复颈椎生理曲度,重建颈椎稳定性。

(1) 颈前路椎间盘切除减压融合术(ACDF):ACDF是治疗单节段CSM的金标准[5],手术快、创伤小、出血少,疗效满意。术中对颈椎管前方进行直接减压,在椎间隙高度恢复、颈椎生理前凸维持和融合率等优势[6]。但ACDF手术范围狭小,视野狭窄,单凭肉眼难以区分病灶和正常组织,且对椎体后缘暴露欠清,术后存在吞咽困难、融合器下沉、颈椎运动度降低等并发症。

零切迹椎间融合(Zero-P):ACDF使用钢板内固定装置,术后吞咽困难发生率较高,为此发明了零切迹内固定装置。零切迹可充分嵌入椎间隙与上下椎体中,避免了钢板的占位效应引起吞咽困难,在获得神经功能恢复的同时,维持椎间隙高度、保持颈椎生理前凸[7]

(2) 内镜辅助下前路颈椎间盘切除融合术(Endo-ACDF):充分体现了内镜技术的特点,通过开放手术器械建立工作通道、于内镜辅助下手术,减压操作在水介质下进行,水压利于止血,利于患者恢复,高倍镜下操作更清晰、更细致、更安全。2008年,Ruetten等报告了使用Endo-ACDF技术治疗颈椎病,并取得良好的治疗效果[8]。研究结果表明,Endo-ACDF和传统ACDF治疗CSM均能取得较好的临床疗效,内镜辅助ACDF手术有更清晰的视野,更精细的操作,术中出血更少,减少神经损伤的潜在风险[9]。Endo-ACDF作为新技术,有一定的临床应用前景,可行性仍需要大样本研究进一步证实,同时对内镜装置和手术器械进行改进以更适用于颈椎手术[10]

(3) 前路椎体次全切除内固定术(ACCF):ACCF对颈椎后纵韧带骨化症、局部椎管狭窄、椎体后缘巨大骨赘等有良好疗效。术中切除部分椎体,视野开阔,减压简便,可以充分解除颈脊髓压迫。由于切除椎体造成的创伤大,术后并发症有脑脊液漏、神经损伤、钛网塌陷等[11]

3D打印技术在颈椎手术中的应用:3D打印技术依据患者个体情况定制椎间融合器及钢板等内植物,契合手术切除部位相邻椎体的上下终板解剖关系,增加了椎体与融合器材料的接触面积,极大贴近了颈椎的生理状态,更能防止假体的沉降维持颈椎生理曲度与椎体高度[12]

(4) 颈前路椎体次全切联合椎间盘切除融合术(ACHDF):作为颈前路Hybrid手术,结合ACCF和ACDF的特点,依据不同责任节段的实际情况选择不同的减压融合方式,行彻底减压的同时,又能减少对非责任椎体的干扰,是一种安全可行且有效的手术方法[13]

(5) 颈椎人工间盘置换术(ACDR):通过置入人工椎间盘以维持病变节段的结构和功能,在减压的同时保持颈椎运动功能,延缓邻近节段退化发生[14]。ACDR的局限性在于其学习曲线长、适应症严格,术后有假体塌陷、松动、异位骨化等并发症[15]

(6) 颈椎前路椎体骨化物复合体前移融合术(ACAF):ACAF由史建刚教授团队提出[16],适用于治疗严重的后纵韧带骨化症,将颈椎骨化物及其前方椎体向腹侧提拉融合,可扩大椎管、重建颈椎曲度,以达到理想的减压效果。

3. 后路手术

分为椎板切除术和椎板扩大成形术,以解除来自脊髓前、后方的压迫达到减压的目的,减压较为充分且安全,在恢复神经功能方面,两者都有良好疗效[17]

3.1. 椎板切除术

3.1.1. 全椎板切除术

在手术过程中,椎板、棘突韧带肌肉复合体等结构被切除,手术视野大,压迫的脊髓和神经根得到了充分的减压,因为过度剥离棘突表面肌肉改变了原有的生理结构,容易引发轴性疼痛、肢体运动功能障碍、C5神经根麻痹、节段不稳定和硬膜外瘢痕等并发症[18]

3.1.2. 半椎板切除

该术式仅对单侧椎管减压,椎管容积扩张有限。仅对单侧椎旁肌剥离,保留了一些颈椎后路生理结构,术后椎旁肌萎缩减少,减轻术后轴性症状,硬脊膜与肌肉直接接触的面积小,术后形成硬膜外瘢痕及降低椎管再狭窄率降低[19]

3.1.3. 跳跃式椎板切除术

选择性对颈脊髓压迫严重的节段进行减压,缩小手术时间、失血量少,术后颈椎活动范围较大,神经功能改善满意,轴性痛少,患者生活质量高[20]

机器人辅助置钉技术:近年来,机器人辅助置钉技术随着科技发展逐渐得到推广应用。该技术通过术前3D影像规划结合术中实时导航(如Mazor X、ROSA系统),可大幅度提高椎弓根螺钉置入精度,降低神经血管损伤风险。特别是颈椎椎弓根纤细,徒手置钉难度高,机器人辅助置钉具有精准规划、自动配准和准确置钉等优势,可以降低术者水平差异对置钉的影响,减少术中透视次数,降低了患者和术者的X线暴露[21]

3.2. 椎板成形

椎板成形术保留了椎板和黄韧带,与椎板切除术相比患者可早期康复锻炼,最大程度地保留颈椎的活动度和稳定性。

3.2.1. 颈椎后路单开门椎管扩大成形术

1977年,Hirabayashi首次采取用丝线固定法以维持“开门”实现减压,因在改善神经功能疗效确切,广泛用于治疗多节段CSM。固定方式先后经过伊藤法、锚定法、微型钛板固定等改良,目前微型钛板固定法广泛应用,钛板可刚性固定以预防“再关门”,患者术后颈椎活动范围大,轴性痛和C5神经根麻痹的发生率较低[22]

3.2.2. 颈后路双开门椎管扩大成形术

术中于双侧椎板与侧块交界处各磨出一个骨槽,从中间将棘突和椎板对称切开,将椎板向两侧门轴掀开,中间植入固定物以稳定椎管扩大,通过“弓弦效应”使脊髓向后漂移,解除颈脊髓压迫。研究发现,双开门与单开门手术均可使患者神经功能改善,且具有良好的安全性及可重复性[23]

3.2.3. 升顶式椎管扩大成形术

在双侧椎板与关节突交界处开槽,将椎板整体后移,同时双侧微型钢板固定,采用“升顶”方法扩大椎管矢状径、椎管容积,达到更彻底的减压效果,保留颈后肌肉韧带复合体,减少了轴性症状发生,临床疗效确切[24] [25]

3.2.4. 颈椎后路Hybrid手术

根据病情对不同病变节段分别行颈椎椎板切除与颈椎椎管成形术,能够最大程度保持颈椎活动度和颈椎曲度,减少了颈后路椎板切除带来的轴性症状和并发症,术后神经功能恢复良好[26]

4. 前后联合入路手术

包括一期和分期前后入路手术,可以对椎管前后两个方向进行减压,使颈椎结构稳定性不足得到改善。适合颈脊髓前、后方均被严重压迫或伴有后凸畸形等的患者,由于手术工作量大、出血量大、并发症多,需考虑患者身体是否耐受手术创伤[27]

5. 颈椎微创技术

主要分为颈椎前路、后路微创手术,手术中结合内镜或显微镜技术,手术操作精细,可避免硬脊膜和神经等重要组织损伤的同时彻底减压,创伤小,住院时间短,是当前的研究热点。

5.1. 颈椎前路微创技术

5.1.1. 前路经椎间隙椎间盘切除术(AECD)

颈前方有大血管、食管、气管等重要结构,手术风险较大,对术者技术要求高。内镜工作通道直接穿过椎间盘进行减压,可保留大部分椎间盘,且无需融合,因此对颈椎不稳患者需慎重考虑[28]

5.1.2. 前路经椎体椎管减压术(AECTcD)

根据在椎体中建立的骨性通道,结合影像学表现可判断致压物的大小和位置,实现有效减压脊髓[29],不损伤椎间盘组织,可避免对椎间隙高度造成影响。

5.1.3. 三维外视镜颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合

外视镜结合了显微镜和内镜的特点,外视镜置于体腔外,具有提供了类似于显微镜手术的3D视图,使我们能够有效、安全地执行手术步骤,可以生成高清的手术现场画面,适合教学。

5.1.4. 显微镜辅助下前路颈椎间盘切除融合术

(M-ACDF):显微镜在狭小的操作空间提供了良好的光源和高倍视野,使手术操作更加安全、精细,达到精准减压、精确止血,极大减少颈前血肿和其他并发症的发生概率[30]。但该手术适应证较苛刻,空气介质下视野不够清晰,学习曲线陡峭,对手术操作技巧要求高。

5.2. 颈椎后路微创手术

5.2.1. 颈椎后路椎间孔切开减压术(PCF)

随着脊柱微创技术的广泛应用,微创颈椎后路椎间孔切开术在治疗神经根型颈椎病取得良好疗效。PCF在颈后路取2~3 cm切口并暴露至上、下关节突和椎板,用磨钻去除部分小关节和椎板,摘除突出的椎间盘组织并完全松解神经根。PCF在取得不逊色于ACDF疗效同时,无需对颈部肌肉进行大面积剥离,具有出血量少、术后恢复快等优点,避免了ACDF的许多缺点,包括吞咽困难、声音嘶哑、活动能力丧失、植入物相关并发症等[31] [32]

5.2.2. 经皮后路脊柱内镜下椎间孔切开减压术(FE-PCF)

该技术于2007年由PUETTEN等首次提出[33],与开放PCF不同,FE-PCF在水介质下进行减压操作,具有更清晰的手术视野。取责任节段上下关节突汇合点(V点),高速磨钻磨除部分关节突和上、下椎板以扩大椎间孔,以此建立一个钥匙孔大小的工作通道去除部分黄韧带和椎间盘组织,充分对神经根进行减压。相较于ACDF,PE-PCF技术创伤小,术中可呈现清晰的解剖结构,手术时间短及术中失血量少,避免了术中大面积颈后肌群的剥离,可延缓椎体后凸畸形的进展,降低了术后并发症的发生率[34]

5.2.3. 显微镜辅助下椎间孔切开减压术(MI-PCF)

与FE-PCF在水介质下进行操作不同,MI-PCF是在空气介质下对神经根行减压操作,相比于ACDF,MI-PCF可以使手术视野放大、减压操作精细、避免损伤神经[35]。在术后随访中,MI-PCF同样取得了不错的效果,患者术后VSA评分显著改善,研究认为MI-PCF为治疗脊髓根部外侧压迫的有效手术方式。MI-PCF在技术上是可行的,在治疗神经根型颈椎病取得与FE-PCF相似的疗效,都具备陡峭的学习曲线,且需要术者充分掌握与手术有关的解剖结构[36]

5.2.4. UBE通道下椎间孔切开减压术(UBE-PCF)

UBE技术起初由关节镜技术演变而来,手术时需行两个切口以做观察通道和工作通道,两个切口之间的距离为1~2 cm,由于观察通道和操作通道相互独立,具有视野宽、操作灵活等优点,在流动的水介质下行减压操作,解剖结构的清晰,操作精确。研究表明,UBE-PCF和FE-PCF都可以为神经根型颈椎病提供有效且相对安全的治疗,两种技术的总体并发症发生率没有显著差异[37],UBE-PCF在手术时间和术中透视次数具有优势[38]。目前用UBE-PCF治疗颈椎疾病的研究及报道较少,存在样本量少及术后随访时间较短等问题,尚处于摸索阶段。

5.2.5. 显微内镜下颈椎髓核摘除术(MED)

MED由颈椎“key-hoel”技术发展而来,相较于ACDF,创伤小,可保留颈椎运动功能,降低邻近节段退变风险。手术通过增大椎间孔,摘除突出髓核对神经根减压。受限于操作空间不足,适用于单侧髓椎间盘突出、小关节增生引起椎间孔狭窄,而不适用于中央型髓核突出。

5.2.6. 内镜下颈椎单侧椎板切开双侧椎管减压术(PPEUL)

在手术过程中,用通道扩张器逐层扩开椎旁肌肉及软组织,使用椎板咬骨钳和高速磨钻处理单侧上下椎板和关节突关节部分骨质,然后通过改变工作通道角度实现双侧减压,减压效果良好[39]。脊柱内镜下可以清楚地显示解剖结构,更好地区分后纵韧带和硬膜之间的边界,尽量更准确地实现减压,具有皮肤切口小、组织损伤小、可视性好、安全性高、疗效好等优点[40]

5.2.7. 内镜下颈椎管成形术(CMSL)

在保护颈后方棘突韧带复合体等重要组织的同时,在双侧椎板与关节突交界处分别做一骨槽,将椎板–棘突–韧带复合体整体后移,使椎板矢状径、椎管容积扩大,避免脊髓压迫,为脊髓功能恢复创造空间,手术创伤小、手术安全性高、并发症少[41]

6. 总结与展望

由于颈椎病病情多样、手术治疗方式较多,临床中应结合患者病情设计最适宜的手术方案。随着医学技术的发展,颈椎微创手术成为现在的研究热点,同时许多新器械、新材料、新技术也被应用到手术中,例如机器人辅助置钉技术、术中导航系统、3D打印材料等,为手术的制定提供了多样化的选择。可以预测颈椎病手术治疗的未来发展方向将聚焦于更精准、微创、功能保留和个性化,同时结合生物技术、材料科学及人工智能等跨学科创新,手术目的从“解剖复位”到“功能重建”、从“开放手术”到“微创治疗”、从“治病”到“防病”,功能保留、微创化、早期干预会贯彻到手术理念中,而飞速发展的人工智能也将覆盖从诊断、术式选择到康复的全过程决策支持。

NOTES

*通讯作者。

参考文献

[1] Theodore, N. (2020) Degenerative Cervical Spondylosis. New England Journal of Medicine, 383, 159-168.
https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmra2003558
[2] McCormick, J.R., Sama, A.J., Schiller, N.C., Butler, A.J. and Donnally, C.J. (2020) Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: A Guide to Diagnosis and Management. The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine, 33, 303-313.
https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2020.02.190195
[3] Williams, J., D’Amore, P., Redlich, N., Darlow, M., Suwak, P., Sarkovich, S., et al. (2022) Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: Evaluation and Management. Orthopedic Clinics of North America, 53, 509-521.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocl.2022.05.007
[4] Saygi, T., Ozdemir, O., Baran, O., Evran, S., Kayhan, A., Ozbek, M.A., et al. (2020) Multi-Level Anterior Cervical Decompression in Multi-Level Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy without Extending the Corpus Resection: A Cadaveric Study of a Novel Surgical Technique. Turkish Neurosurgery, 31, 173-181.
https://doi.org/10.5137/1019-5149.jtn.29896-20.2
[5] Lee, H., Chen, C., Wu, C., Guo, J. and Chen, Y. (2019) Comparison of Radiological Outcomes and Complications between Single-Level and Multilevel Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) by Using a Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Cage-Plate Fusion System. Medicine, 98, e14277.
https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000014277
[6] Meng, H., Jin, T., Wang, J., Ji, X., Peng, Z., Qi, M., et al. (2024) Comparison of Interbody Fusion Strategies in Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Network Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review. World Neurosurgery, 190, 65-75.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2024.06.117
[7] 雷洪俊, 陈忠羡, 付兆宗, 等. 零切迹颈椎前路椎间融合固定系统手术治疗单节段颈椎间盘突出症的临床效果[J]. 中国医学创新, 2021, 18(8): 57-60.
[8] Ruetten, S., Komp, M., Merk, H. and Godolias, G. (2008) Full-Endoscopic Anterior Decompression versus Conventional Anterior Decompression and Fusion in Cervical Disc Herniations. International Orthopaedics, 33, 1677-1682.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-008-0684-y
[9] Wu, Z., Wei, Z. and Song, X. (2024) Comparison of Efficacy between Endoscope-Assisted Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) and Open ACDF in the Treatment of Single-Segment Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, 19, Article No. 35.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-023-04514-w
[10] 杨贺军, 简磊, 唐骞, 等. 开放入路(空气/水介质)内镜辅助下颈椎前路间盘切除减压融合术对脊髓型颈椎病的早期疗效及安全性[J]. 中华医学杂志, 2023, 103(35): 2795-2800.
[11] Louie, P.K., Nemani, V.M. and Leveque, J.A. (2022) Anterior Cervical Corpectomy and Fusion for Degenerative Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: Case Presentation with Surgical Technique Demonstration and Review of Literature. Clinical Spine Surgery: A Spine Publication, 35, 440-446.
https://doi.org/10.1097/bsd.0000000000001410
[12] Chen, T., Wang, Y., Zhou, H., Lin, C., Li, X., Yang, H., et al. (2023) Comparison of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion versus Anterior Cervical Corpectomy and Fusion in the Treatment of Localized Ossification of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery, 31.
https://doi.org/10.1177/10225536231167704
[13] Tang, B., Yang, J., Zhang, Y., Ren, X., Jiang, T., Mo, Z., et al. (2022) Incorporating Strategy in Hybrid Surgery for Continuous Two-Level Cervical Spondylosis from a Biomechanical Perspective. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine, 226, Article ID: 107193.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2022.107193
[14] Chang, C., Liu, Y., Hsiao, Y., Huang, Y., Liu, K., Lin, R., et al. (2022) Comparison of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion versus Artificial Disc Replacement for Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, 37, 569-578.
https://doi.org/10.3171/2022.2.spine211500
[15] Steinberger, J. and Qureshi, S. (2020) Cervical Disc Replacement. Neurosurgery Clinics of North America, 31, 73-79.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nec.2019.08.009
[16] Sun, J., Shi, J., Xu, X., Yang, Y., Wang, Y., Kong, Q., et al. (2017) Anterior Controllable Antidisplacement and Fusion Surgery for the Treatment of Multilevel Severe Ossification of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament with Myelopathy: Preliminary Clinical Results of a Novel Technique. European Spine Journal, 27, 1469-1478.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-017-5437-4
[17] He, X., Zhang, J.N., Liu, T.J. and Hao, D.J. (2020) Is Laminectomy and Fusion the Better Choice than Laminoplasty for Multilevel Cervical Myelopathy with Signal Changes on Magnetic Resonance Imaging? A Comparison of Two Posterior Surgeries. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 21, Article No. 423.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-03435-7
[18] Daher, M., Nassar, J.E., McDonald, C.L., Balmaceno-Criss, M., Diebo, B.G. and Daniels, A.H. (2024) Laminoplasty versus Laminectomy and Posterior Fusion for Cervical Myelopathy: A Meta-Analysis of Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes. Spine, 49, 1311-1321.
https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000005041
[19] Karademir, M., Kucuk, A., Ulutabanca, H., et al. (2017) The Comparison of Hemilaminectomy and Laminoplasty Procedures in the Surgical Treatment of Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy. Turkish Neurosurgery, 27, 74-84.
[20] Nori, S., Shiraishi, T. and Aoyama, R. (2020) Comparison between Muscle-Preserving Selective Laminectomy and Laminoplasty for Multilevel Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy. Annals of Translational Medicine, 8, 160-160.
https://doi.org/10.21037/atm.2019.11.132
[21] Su, X., Lv, Z., Chen, Z., Wang, K., Zhu, C., Chen, H., et al. (2020) Comparison of Accuracy and Clinical Outcomes of Robot-Assisted versus Fluoroscopy-Guided Pedicle Screw Placement in Posterior Cervical Surgery. Global Spine Journal, 12, 620-626.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2192568220960406
[22] Mo, Z., Li, D., Zhang, R., Chang, M., Yang, B. and Tang, S. (2018) Comparison of Three Fixation Modalities for Unilateral Open-Door Cervical Laminoplasty: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis. Neurosurgical Review, 43, 813-823.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10143-018-1035-0
[23] 陈天天, 张勋, 孟凡超, 等. 颈后路不同手术方式治疗多节段脊髓型颈椎病的研究进展[J]. 医学综述, 2021, 27(15): 3039-3044.
[24] Wang, X., Zhao, Y., Lu, X., Zhao, X., Fan, Z., Qi, D., et al. (2021) Comparison of Imaging Parameters between a New Cervical Full Lamina Back Shift Spinal Canal Enlargement Technique and Single Open‐door Laminoplasty for Multisegment Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy. Orthopaedic Surgery, 13, 1496-1504.
https://doi.org/10.1111/os.13033
[25] 周帅, 周非非, 赵衍斌, 等. 颈后路经肌间隙入路“升顶式”椎管扩大椎板成形术后早期颈椎矢状面平衡的变化[J]. 中国脊柱脊髓杂志, 2021, 31(12): 1121-1128.
[26] 郭洪録. 颈椎后路Hybrid手术治疗多节段脊髓型颈椎病疗效观察[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 荆州: 长江大学, 2021.
[27] Zhou, X., Cai, P., Li, Y., Wang, H., Xia, S. and Wang, X. (2017) Posterior or Single-Stage Combined Anterior and Posterior Approach Decompression for Treating Complex Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy Coincident Multilevel Anterior and Posterior Compression. Clinical Spine Surgery: A Spine Publication, 30, E1343-E1351.
https://doi.org/10.1097/bsd.0000000000000437
[28] Yadav, Y., Ratre, S., Swamy, M., Parihar, V. and Bajaj, J. (2020) Endoscopic Anterior Cervical Discectomy (Disc Preserving). Neurology India, 68, 1310-1312.
https://doi.org/10.4103/0028-3886.304078
[29] Ma, Y., Xin, Z., Kong, W., Zhang, L., Du, Q. and Liao, W. (2022) Transcorporeal Decompression Using a Fully-Endoscopic Anterior Cervical Approach to Treat Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: Surgical Design and Clinical Application. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 23, Article No. 1031.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-022-06001-5
[30] Dong, Y. and Yu, Y. (2024) The Clinical Efficacy of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion under Three-Dimensional Microscopy. World Neurosurgery, 190, 309-310.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2024.07.182
[31] Mummaneni, P.V., Bisson, E.F., Michalopoulos, G., Mualem, W.J., El Sammak, S., Wang, M.Y., et al. (2024) Comparing Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy with Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion in Radiculopathic Patients: An Analysis from the Quality Outcomes Database. Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, 41, 56-68.
https://doi.org/10.3171/2024.2.spine221280
[32] Zou, T., Wang, P., Chen, H., Feng, X. and Sun, H. (2022) Minimally Invasive Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy versus Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion for Cervical Radiculopathy: A Meta-Analysis. Neurosurgical Review, 45, 3609-3618.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10143-022-01882-5
[33] Ruetten, S., Komp, M., Merk, H. and Godolias, G. (2007) A New Full-Endoscopic Technique for Cervical Posterior Foraminotomy in the Treatment of Lateral Disc Herniations Using 6.9-Mm Endoscopes: Prospective 2-Year Results of 87 Patients. MINMinimally Invasive Neurosurgery, 50, 219-226.
https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2007-985860
[34] Sun, X., Wang, C., Kong, Q., Zhang, B., Feng, P., Liu, J., et al. (2023) Channel-Assisted Cervical Key Hole Technology Combined with Ultrasonic Bone Osteotome versus Posterior Percutaneous Endoscopic Cervical Foraminotomy: A Clinical Retrospective Study. International Orthopaedics, 48, 547-553.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-023-05991-8
[35] Toll, B.J. and Whitmore, R.G. (2023) Commentary: Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion versus Microendoscopic Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy for Unilateral Cervical Radiculopathy: A 1-Year Cost-Utility Analysis. Neurosurgery, 93, e59-e60.
https://doi.org/10.1227/neu.0000000000002494
[36] Akiyama, M. and Koga, H. (2020) Early Experience of Single Level Full Endoscopic Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy and Comparison with Microscope-Assisted Open Surgery. Journal of Spine Surgery, 6, 391-396.
https://doi.org/10.21037/jss-20-491
[37] Zhong, Z., Hu, Q., Huang, L., Zhang, S. and Zhou, M. (2023) Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy: An Outcome Comparison with the Full-Endoscopic Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy. Clinical Spine Surgery: A Spine Publication, 37, 23-30.
https://doi.org/10.1097/bsd.0000000000001507
[38] Wang, D., Xu, J., Zhu, C., Zhang, W. and Pan, H. (2023) Comparison of Outcomes between Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic and Percutaneous Posterior Endoscopic Cervical Keyhole Surgeries. Medicina, 59, Article 437.
https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina59030437
[39] Kim, J., Heo, D.H., Lee, D.C. and Chung, H.T. (2021) Biportal Endoscopic Unilateral Laminotomy with Bilateral Decompression for the Treatment of Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy. Acta Neurochirurgica, 163, 2537-2543.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-021-04921-0
[40] Zhao, X., Ma, Y., Ma, H., Zhang, X. and Zhou, H. (2022) Clinical Efficacy of Posterior Percutaneous Endoscopic Unilateral Laminotomy with Bilateral Decompression for Symptomatic Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy. Orthopaedic Surgery, 14, 876-884.
https://doi.org/10.1111/os.13237
[41] 张春霖, 张银鹤, 严旭, 等. 内镜下颈椎管成形术治疗脊髓型颈椎病[J]. 中华骨科杂志, 2017, 37(2): 89-95.