Single level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus dynamic cervical implant: clinical and radiological outcome

被引:0
作者
Ahmed, Omar El Farouk [1 ]
Galal, Ahmed [1 ]
机构
[1] Ain Shams Univ, Fac Med, Dept Neurosurg, Cairo, Egypt
关键词
Dynamic cervical implant; DCI; Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion; Cervical disc disease; Adjacent segment disease; DISC DISEASE; STABILIZATION; ARTHROPLASTY; FIXATION;
D O I
10.1186/s41983-020-0153-0
中图分类号
Q189 [神经科学];
学科分类号
071006 ;
摘要
Background Although anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is considered a gold standard approach for surgical management of cervical disc herniation syndromes, the use of dynamic cervical implant (DCI) provided a novel technique that aims at reconstruction of the anterior column while facilitating controlled neck motion and reducing stress across the facet joints. Aim of the work The objective of this study is to evaluate the clinical and radiological outcome of the DCI surgery in comparison to that achieved with ACDF using a conventional polyethylethylketone (PEEK) cage. Materials and methods This is a retrospective comparative study of 30 patients, with single level cervical degenerative disc disease (DDD), managed by the authors, either by DCI (n = 15) or ACDF (n = 15). Clinical and radiologic outcomes were assessed at 1, 3, and 12 months postoperatively. Clinical scoring systems included the Visual Analog Scale for Neck (VAS-N) and Arm (VAS-A), the Neck Disability Index score (NDI), as well as the evaluation of incidence of complications and neurological deterioration postoperatively. Radiographic evaluation included the assessment of postoperative cervical implant fusion, as well as evaluating the incidence of implant migration. Study duration was for two years from October 2016 to October 2018. Results Both the ACDF and DCI groups showed significant clinical improvement at 12 months postoperatively regarding the clinical outcome including VAS-A, VAS-N, and NDI values (P = 0.001), while there was no significant difference on comparing between the two groups as regard the VAS-N, the VAS-A, and the NDI at 1,3 and 12 months after surgery. The ACDF group however showed better rate of implant fusion at 12 months postoperatively in contrast to the DCI group (80% and 26,7%, respectively) also, the ACDF group showed a lower rate of implant subsidence at 12 months after surgery (P = 0.002). Besides, the incidence of implant migration was relatively high in the DCI group (20%). Conclusion The clinical results for DCI arthroplasty for the management of single-level cervical DDD are equivalent to those for ACDF; however, though providing an immediate dynamic stability, DCI is associated with a low fusion rate, higher rates of implant subsidence, and relatively high implant migration rate. Larger series and further studies should be considered with longer follow-up periods giving special attention to these issues.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 17 条
[1]   LATE RADIOGRAPHIC FINDINGS AFTER ANTERIOR CERVICAL FUSION FOR SPONDYLOTIC MYELORADICULOPATHY [J].
BABA, H ;
FURUSAWA, N ;
IMURA, S ;
KAWAHARA, N ;
TSUCHIYA, H ;
TOMITA, K .
SPINE, 1993, 18 (15) :2167-2173
[2]   Comparative fixation methods of cervical disc arthroplasty versus conventional methods of anterior cervical arthrodesis: serration, teeth, keels, or screws? Laboratory investigation [J].
Cunningham, Bryan W. ;
Hu, Nianbin ;
Zorn, Candace M. ;
McAfee, Paul C. .
JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-SPINE, 2010, 12 (02) :214-220
[3]   Radiculopathy and myelopathy at segments adjacent to the site of a previous anterior cervical arthrodesis [J].
Hilibrand, AS ;
Carlson, GD ;
Palumbo, MA ;
Jones, PK ;
Bohlman, HH .
JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 1999, 81A (04) :519-528
[4]  
HUSKISSON EC, 1982, J RHEUMATOL, V9, P768
[5]  
Ishihara Hirokazu, 2004, Spine J, V4, P624, DOI 10.1016/j.spinee.2004.04.011
[6]   Comparative Analysis of 3 Different Construct Systems for Single-level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Stand-alone Cage, Iliac Graft Plus Plate Augmentation, and Cage Plus Plating [J].
Lee, Chang-Hyun ;
Hyun, Seung-Jae ;
Kim, Min Jeong ;
Yeom, Jin Sup ;
Kim, Wook Ha ;
Kim, Ki-Jeong ;
Jahng, Tae-Ahn ;
Kim, Hyun-Jib ;
Yoon, Sang Hoon .
JOURNAL OF SPINAL DISORDERS & TECHNIQUES, 2013, 26 (02) :112-118
[7]   Clinical and radiologic comparison of dynamic cervical implant arthroplasty versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the treatment of cervical degenerative disc disease [J].
Li, Zhonghai ;
Yu, Shunzhi ;
Zhao, Yantao ;
Hou, Shuxun ;
Fu, Qiang ;
Li, Fengning ;
Hou, Tiesheng ;
Zhong, Hongbin .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NEUROSCIENCE, 2014, 21 (06) :942-948
[8]   Stress Analysis of the Interface Between Cervical Vertebrae End Plates and the Bryan, Prestige LP, and ProDisc-C Cervical Disc Prostheses An In Vivo Image-Based Finite Element Study [J].
Lin, Chia-Ying ;
Kang, Heesuk ;
Rouleau, Jeffrey P. ;
Hollister, Scott J. ;
La Marca, Frank .
SPINE, 2009, 34 (15) :1554-1560
[9]   Dynamic cervical stabilization: a multicenter study [J].
Matge, Guy ;
Buddenberg, Peter ;
Eif, Marcus ;
Schenke, Holger ;
Herdmann, Joerg .
EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2015, 24 (12) :2841-2847
[10]   Stabilization with the Dynamic Cervical Implant: a novel treatment approach following cervical discectomy and decompression [J].
Matge, Guy ;
Berthold, Christophe ;
Gunness, Vimal Raj Nitish ;
Hana, Ardian ;
Hertel, Frank .
JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-SPINE, 2015, 22 (03) :237-245