Author:
Wu Junjie,Yan Baofeng,Mutalifu Nurehemaiti,Guan Qi,Bai Chao,Li Jianglong,Luan Xinping
Abstract
Abstract
Background
There is a lack of research to determine the efficacy of cervical perivascular sympathectomy (CPVS) in children with cerebral palsy (CP).
Objective
This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of CPVS in children with CP and analyze the associated influential factors.
Methods
Using the method of retrospective cohort studies, children who underwent CPVS were included in the CPVS group, whereas those who underwent selective posterior rhizotomy (SPR) were included in the SPR group. The Communication Function Classification System (CFCS) and Teacher Drooling Scale (TDS) were used to evaluate the communication function and salivation in the two groups before and 12 months after surgery and compare the surgical efficiency between the two groups, and the factors affecting the efficacy were screened by binary logistic regression.
Results
The study included 406 patients, 202 in the CPVS group and 204 in the SPR group. No significant differences were observed in the baseline characteristics (p > 0.05). The surgical efficacy of the CPVS group (47.01%) was significantly higher than that in the SPR group (9.81%) (χ2 = 71.08, p < 0.001). Binary logic regression analysis showed that preterm birth and Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS) grade were influencing factors of surgical efficacy. Eighteen patients developed postoperative complications.
Conclusion
CPVS is a safe and effective surgery for cerebral palsy. Preterm birth and GMFCS grade are independent factors affecting the efficacy of surgery.
Funder
National Natural Science Foundation of China
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Neurology (clinical),General Medicine,Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health
Reference28 articles.
1. Pearson TS, Pons R, Ghaoui R, Sue CM (2019) Genetic mimics of cerebral palsy. Mov Disord 34:625–636
2. Einspieler C, Bos AF, Krieber-Tomantschger M et al (2019) Cerebral palsy: early markers of clinical phenotype and functional outcome. J Clin Med 8
3. Rosenbaum P, Paneth N, Leviton A et al (2007) A report: the definition and classification of cerebral palsy April 2006. Dev Med Child Neurol Suppl 109:8–14
4. Reid SM, McCutcheon J, Reddihough DS, Johnson H (2012) Prevalence and predictors of drooling in 7- to 14-year-old children with cerebral palsy: a population study. Dev Med Child Neurol 54:1032–1036
5. Parkes J, Hill N, Platt MJ, Donnelly C (2010) Oromotor dysfunction and communication impairments in children with cerebral palsy: a register study. Dev Med Child Neurol 52:1113–1119