Literature DB >> 11795752

Anterior BAK instrumentation and fusion: complete versus partial discectomy.

Paul C McAfee1, Guy A Lee, Ira L Fedder, Bryan W Cunningham.   

Abstract

Beginning in January 1994, a prospective, clinical study was done comparing the effectiveness of complete anterior (Group 1) versus partial reamed channel discectomies (Group 2) in 100 consecutive patients who had anterior BAK instrumentation and fusion using autogenous iliac crest bone graft. At 2 or more years of followup, all patients in Group 1 who had complete operative disc removal achieved solid arthrodesis. There were no revision surgeries. However, in Group 2, there were seven patients who had a pseudarthrosis and an additional patient with early postoperative cage displacement, which resulted in eight patients in Group 2 requiring revision surgery. The differences in operative preparation of the disc space for BAK instrumentation surgery resulting in complications proved to be significant. The use of interbody titanium cages dramatically increases the biomechanical efficacy of anterior fusions. Original proponents of cages advocated removing a cylindrical channel of disc material using a drill. A prospective review of 100 patients who had complete versus partial discectomy revealed 14% of patients in Group 2 eventually had a pseudarthrosis develop.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11795752     DOI: 10.1097/00003086-200201000-00007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  9 in total

Review 1.  [Interbody metal implants ("cages") for lumbar fusion].

Authors:  G Freiherr von Salis-Soglio; R Scholz; K Seller
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 1.087

2.  Surgical versus non-surgical treatment of chronic low back pain: a meta-analysis of randomised trials.

Authors:  T Ibrahim; I M Tleyjeh; O Gabbar
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2006-11-21       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 3.  Bioresorbable polymers: heading for a new generation of spinal cages.

Authors:  P I J M Wuisman; T H Smit
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-11-15       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 4.  Surgery for degenerative lumbar spondylosis.

Authors:  J N A Gibson; G Waddell
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2005-10-19

5.  Percutaneous posterior-lateral lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative disc disease using a B-Twin expandable spinal spacer.

Authors:  Lizu Xiao; Donglin Xiong; Qiang Zhang; Jin Jian; Husan Zheng; Yuhui Luo; Juanli Dai; Deren Zhang
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-09-26       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Clinical and radiological outcome of anterior-posterior fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for symptomatic disc degeneration: a retrospective comparative study of 133 patients.

Authors:  Antonio A Faundez; James D Schwender; Yair Safriel; Thomas J Gilbert; Amir A Mehbod; Francis Denis; Ensor E Transfeldt; Jill M Wroblewski
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-01-06       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Prospective randomized controlled trial of The Stabilis Stand Alone Cage (SAC) versus Bagby and Kuslich (BAK) implants for anterior lumbar interbody fusion.

Authors:  William Lavelle; Robert F McLain; Candace Rufo-Smith; David P Gurd
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2014-12-01

8.  Osteogenic differentiation of bone marrow stromal cells is hindered by the presence of intervertebral disc cells.

Authors:  Samantha C W Chan; Adel Tekari; Lorin M Benneker; Paul F Heini; Benjamin Gantenbein
Journal:  Arthritis Res Ther       Date:  2015-12-25       Impact factor: 5.156

9.  Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Techniques, Pearls and Pitfalls.

Authors:  Young-Hoon Kim; Kee-Yong Ha; Kee-Won Rhyu; Hyung-Youl Park; Chang-Hee Cho; Hun-Chul Kim; Hyo-Jin Lee; Sang-Il Kim
Journal:  Asian Spine J       Date:  2020-10-14
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.