• Daniel Lubelski, Andrew T Healy, Michael P Silverstein, Kalil G Abdullah, Nicolas R Thompson, K Daniel Riew, Michael P Steinmetz, Edward C Benzel, and Thomas E Mroz.
• Cleveland Clinic Center for Spine Health, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA; Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA; Department of Neurosurgery, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA.
• Spine J. 2015 Jun 1;15(6):1277-83.

Background ContextAnterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF) are both used to surgically treat patients with cervical radiculopathy and have been shown to have similar outcomes. Nonetheless, ACDF has become increasingly more commonplace compared with PCF, in part because of a pervasive belief that PCF has a higher incidence of required reoperations.PurposeTo determine the reoperation rate at the index level of ACDF versus PCF 2 years postoperatively.Study DesignA retrospective case-control.Patient SampleAll patients that underwent ACDF and PCF for radiculopathy (excluding myelopathy indications) between January 2005 and December 2011.Outcome MeasuresRevision surgery within 2 years, at the index level, was recorded.MethodsPropensity score analysis between the ACDF and PCF groups was done, matching for age, gender, race, body mass index, tobacco use, median income and insurance status, primary surgeon, level of surgery, surgery duration, and length of hospital stay.ResultsSeven hundred ninety patients met the inclusion/exclusion criteria, including 627 ACDF and 163 PCF. Before propensity matching, the PCF group was found to be significantly older and more likely to be male. After matching, there were no significant differences between groups for any baseline characteristics. Reoperation rate at the index level was 4.8% for the ACDF group and 6.4% for the PCF group (p=.7) within 2 years of the initial surgery. Using equivalence testing, based on an a priori null hypothesis that a clinically meaningful difference between the two groups would be ≥5%, we found that the absolute difference of 1.6% was significantly (p=.01) less than our hypothesized difference.ConclusionsThis study demonstrates that even after accounting for patient demographics, operative characteristics, and primary surgeon, there are no significant differences in 2-year reoperation rates at the index level between ACDF and PCF. The reoperation rates are statistically equivalent. Thus, spine surgeons can operate via the posterior approach without putting patients at increased risk for revision surgery at the index level.Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

26 keywords...

hide…