• World Neurosurg · Dec 2023

    Review

    Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes for Patients with Cervical Adjacent Segment Disease Treated with Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion with Integrated Interbody Spacers.

    • Saif E Zaidi, Vishal Venkatraman, David A W Sykes, Jessica Albanese, Melissa M Erickson, Clifford L Crutcher, C Rory Goodwin, Michael W Groff, Peter Grossi, Khoi D Than, Michael M Haglund, and Muhammad M Abd-El-Barr.
    • Department of Neurosurgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA; School of Medicine, Paris Cité University, Paris, France.
    • World Neurosurg. 2023 Dec 1; 180: e514e522e514-e522.

    IntroductionAnterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is among the most common spine procedures. Adjacent segment disease (ASD), characterized by degenerative disease at an adjacent spinal level to a prior fusion, is a well-recognized and significant sequela following ACDF. Adjacent segment ACDF may be considered after the failure of non-surgical options for patients with symptomatic ASD. This study aimed to assess the incidence of dysphagia and other complications as well as radiographic outcomes in adult patients who have undergone ACDF with an integrated interbody spacer device for symptomatic ASD.MethodsThis was a retrospective review of patients who underwent ACDF for symptomatic ASD with commercially available integrated interbody spacers by three spine surgeons at an academic institution from March 2018 to April 2022. Demographic, radiographic, and postoperative data were collected, including dysphagia, device-related complications, and the need for revision surgery.ResultsThere were 48 patients (26 male, 22 female) who met inclusion criteria (mean age 59.7 years, mean body mass index 19.5 kg/m2) who underwent ACDF for symptomatic ASD (1one-level, n = 44; 2-level, n = 4). Overall, 12 patients (25%) experienced dysphagia postoperatively before the first follow-up appointment. Nine of 44 (20.4%) of 1-level ACDF patients experienced dysphagia, and 3 of 4 (75%) of 2-level ACDF patients experienced dysphagia. Three patients had severe dysphagia which prompted an otolaryngology referral. Two of those patients remained symptomatic at 6 weeks postoperatively. Of 43 patients with prior plate cage systems, none required hardware removal at the time of surgery. Preoperative global and segmental lordosis were 9.07° ± 8.36° (P = 0.22) and 3.58° ± 4.57° (P = 0.14), respectively. At 6 weeks postoperatively, global and segmental lordosis were 11.44° ± 9.06° (P = 0.54) and 5.11° ± 4.44° (P = 0.44), respectively. This constitutes a change of +2.37° and +1.53° in global and segmental lordosis, respectively. The mean anterior disc height change between preoperative and immediate postoperative time points was 6.3 ± 3.1 mm. Between the immediate postoperative and 6-week postoperative time points, the mean anterior disc height change was -1.5 ± 2.7 mm. Between the immediate postoperative and 3-month postoperative time points, the mean anterior disc height change was -3.7 ± 5.0 mm. The posterior disc height changes at the same time points were 2.5 ± 1.7 mm, -0.4 ± 1.8. and -0.5 ± 1.4 mm, respectively. This fusion rate was 50% and 70% at 6 months and 1 year post-surgery, respectively.ConclusionsACDF with integrated spacer is a viable alternative to traditional plate-cage systems for symptomatic ASD. An advantage over traditional plate-cage systems is that the removal of prior instrumentation is not needed in order to place implants. Based on a review of the literature, these standalone systems allowed for a shorter operative time and had less incidence of dysphagia than plate-cage systems for ASD after ACDF. The different standalone and plate-cage systems used in treating ASD after ACDF surgeries should be compared in prospective studies.Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…