Literature DB >> 21372655

Two-level noncontiguous versus three-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a biomechanical comparison.

Michael A Finn1, Mical M Samuelson, Frank Bishop, Kent N Bachus, Darrel S Brodke.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Biomechanical study.
OBJECTIVE: To determine biomechanical forces exerted on intermediate and adjacent segments after two- or three-level fusion for treatment of noncontiguous levels. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Increased motion adjacent to fused spinal segments is postulated to be a driving force in adjacent segment degeneration. Occasionally, a patient requires treatment of noncontiguous levels on either side of a normal level. The biomechanical forces exerted on the intermediate and adjacent levels are unknown.
METHODS: Seven intact human cadaveric cervical spines (C3-T1) were mounted in a custom seven-axis spine simulator equipped with a follower load apparatus and OptoTRAK three-dimensional tracking system. Each intact specimen underwent five cycles each of flexion/extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation under a ± 1.5 Nm moment and a 100-Nm axial follower load. Applied torque and motion data in each axis of motion and level were recorded. Testing was repeated under the same parameters after C4-C5 and C6-C7 diskectomies were performed and fused with rigid cervical plates and interbody spacers and again after a three-level fusion from C4 to C7.
RESULTS: Range of motion was modestly increased (35%) in the intermediate and adjacent levels in the skip fusion construct. A significant or nearly significant difference was reached in seven of nine moments. With the three-level fusion construct, motion at the infra- and supra-adjacent levels was significantly or nearly significantly increased in all applied moments over the intact and the two-level noncontiguous construct. The magnitude of this change was substantial (72%).
CONCLUSION: Infra- and supra-adjacent levels experienced a marked increase in strain in all moments with a three-level fusion, whereas the intermediate, supra-, and infra-adjacent segments of a two-level fusion experienced modest strain moments relative to intact. It would be appropriate to consider noncontiguous fusions instead of a three-level fusion when confronted with nonadjacent disease.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21372655     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181fd5d7c

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  12 in total

1.  Hybrid Solutions for the Surgical Treatment of Multilevel Degenerative Cervical Disk Disease.

Authors:  Stefan Alexander König; Sebastian Ranguis; Uwe Spetzger
Journal:  Surg J (N Y)       Date:  2015-11-19

2.  Clinical and Radiological Comparison of Hybrid Surgery and Fusion Application with Peek Cage in Patients Undergoing Three-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy.

Authors:  Güray Bulut; Aziz Çataltepe; Mevlüt Özgür Taşkapılıoğlu
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2022-04-07       Impact factor: 1.033

3.  Clinical and Radiological Analysis of Bryan Cervical Artificial Disc Replacement for "Skip" Multi-Segment Cervical Spondylosis: Long-Term Follow-Up Results.

Authors:  Zikun Shang; Yingze Zhang; Di Zhang; Wenyuan Ding; Yong Shen
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2017-11-04

Review 4.  Multilevel cervical disc replacement versus multilevel anterior discectomy and fusion: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ting-Kui Wu; Bei-Yu Wang; Yang Meng; Chen Ding; Yi Yang; Ji-Gang Lou; Hao Liu
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 1.889

5.  A comparison of zero-profile anchored spacer (ROI-C) and plate fixation in 2-level noncontiguous anterior cervical discectomy and fusion- a retrospective study.

Authors:  Zongyu Zhang; Yawei Li; Weimin Jiang
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2018-04-17       Impact factor: 2.362

6.  Assessing the biofidelity of in vitro biomechanical testing of the human cervical spine.

Authors:  Richard A Wawrose; Forbes E Howington; Clarissa M LeVasseur; Clair N Smith; Brandon K Couch; Jeremy D Shaw; William F Donaldson; Joon Y Lee; Charity G Patterson; William J Anderst; Kevin M Bell
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2020-05-04       Impact factor: 3.102

7.  Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for noncontiguous cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

Authors:  Sun Qizhi; Li Peijia; Sun Lei; Chen Junsheng; Li Jianmin
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2016 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.251

8.  Comparison of the clinical effects of zero-profile anchored spacer (ROI-C) and conventional cage-plate construct for the treatment of noncontiguous bilevel of cervical degenerative disc disease (CDDD): A minimum 2-year follow-up.

Authors:  Yingjie Lu; Weiguo Bao; Zongyi Wang; Feng Zhou; Jun Zou; Weimin Jiang; Huilin Yang; Zhiming Zhang; Xuesong Zhu
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 1.889

9.  A comparison of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion combined with cervical disc arthroplasty and cervical disc arthroplasty for the treatment of skip-level cervical degenerative disc disease: A retrospective study.

Authors:  Ting-Kui Wu; Bei-Yu Wang; Ming-Dan Deng; Ying Hong; Xin Rong; Hua Chen; Yang Meng; Hao Liu
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 1.817

10.  Biomechanics following skip-level cervical disc arthroplasty versus skip-level cervical discectomy and fusion: a finite element-based study.

Authors:  Ting-Kui Wu; Yang Meng; Bei-Yu Wang; Xin Rong; Ying Hong; Chen Ding; Hua Chen; Hao Liu
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2019-01-31       Impact factor: 2.362

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.