Anna Hermansen1, Rune Hedlund, Ludek Vavruch, Anneli Peolsson. 1. Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. Anneli.Peolsson@liu.se
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Ten- to 13-year follow-up of a prospective randomized study. OBJECTIVE: To compare the 10- to 13-year outcomes of anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) with a cervical intervertebral fusion cage (CIFC), and the Cloward procedure (CP) using a broad clinical and patient-centered assessment. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA.: There are few prospective studies and none with a follow-up of 10 years or more. METHODS: Patient questionnaires completed 10 years or more after ACDF. Seventy-three patients (77%) responded. Radiographs were obtained at 2 years. RESULTS: Apart from greater fulfillment of preoperative expectation (P = 0.01) and less headache (P = 0.005) in the CIFC group compared with the CP group, there were no significant differences in the outcomes of the two surgical methods. Pain intensity improved in comparison with preoperative levels in both the CIFC and CP groups (P < 0.0001), but the Neck Disability Index (NDI) only improved in the CIFC group (P = 0.04). Only those with a healed fusion benefited from an improved NDI (P = 0.02). There was no deterioration in pain intensity or NDI after the 2-year follow-up. CONCLUSION: The outcomes of the two surgical methods, with a few exceptions, were equal at 10- to 13-year follow-up, and there was no deterioration in outcome after the 2-year follow-up. Pain intensity improved more than disability, which may indicate that further improvement of physical function requires early more extensive postoperative rehabilitation. Despite persisting disability, repeat surgery was relatively uncommon.
RCT Entities:
STUDY DESIGN: Ten- to 13-year follow-up of a prospective randomized study. OBJECTIVE: To compare the 10- to 13-year outcomes of anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) with a cervical intervertebral fusion cage (CIFC), and the Cloward procedure (CP) using a broad clinical and patient-centered assessment. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA.: There are few prospective studies and none with a follow-up of 10 years or more. METHODS:Patient questionnaires completed 10 years or more after ACDF. Seventy-three patients (77%) responded. Radiographs were obtained at 2 years. RESULTS: Apart from greater fulfillment of preoperative expectation (P = 0.01) and less headache (P = 0.005) in the CIFC group compared with the CP group, there were no significant differences in the outcomes of the two surgical methods. Pain intensity improved in comparison with preoperative levels in both the CIFC and CP groups (P < 0.0001), but the Neck Disability Index (NDI) only improved in the CIFC group (P = 0.04). Only those with a healed fusion benefited from an improved NDI (P = 0.02). There was no deterioration in pain intensity or NDI after the 2-year follow-up. CONCLUSION: The outcomes of the two surgical methods, with a few exceptions, were equal at 10- to 13-year follow-up, and there was no deterioration in outcome after the 2-year follow-up. Pain intensity improved more than disability, which may indicate that further improvement of physical function requires early more extensive postoperative rehabilitation. Despite persisting disability, repeat surgery was relatively uncommon.