PURPOSE: Anterior cervical decompression and fusion is a well-established procedure for the treatment of cervical spinal canal stenosis. In this study, we evaluated the necessity of spinal instrumentation after four-level anterior cervical decompression and cage fusion. METHODS: From January 2006 until August 2008, 25 patients (8 females and 17 males) (mean age 63.9 ± 7.9 years) suffering from spinal stenosis C3-C7 underwent anterior decompression and interbody fusion. The patients were divided into two groups. Four-level discectomy and cage fusion was performed in all patients. In group A including nine patients, posterior instrumentation with a lateral mass screw-rod system was added, while in group B including 16 patients, additional instrumentation was not performed. The mean duration of follow-up was 48.6 months (average 25-67 months). RESULTS: Clinically, the mean value for the Neck Disability Index improved from 40 ± 23.25 at presentation to 16.31 ± 15.09 at the final follow-up. The difference between the two groups was statistically not significant. Radiologically, the criteria for solid bony fusion were achieved successfully in all patients of group A, and in 87.5 % of patients in group B. The difference between the two groups was statistically not significant. The fused segment was then evaluated in the sagittal radiographs as regards the height and the lordosis angle. The loss in the height as well as the loss in the lordosis angle was more when posterior instrumentation was not added. However, the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Stand-alone intersomatic cage fusion is an acceptable line of treatment for four-level cervical disc disease, both clinically and radiologically. Although the addition of posterior instrumentation yields better radiological results, the difference does not reach the statistical significance level.
PURPOSE: Anterior cervical decompression and fusion is a well-established procedure for the treatment of cervical spinal canal stenosis. In this study, we evaluated the necessity of spinal instrumentation after four-level anterior cervical decompression and cage fusion. METHODS: From January 2006 until August 2008, 25 patients (8 females and 17 males) (mean age 63.9 ± 7.9 years) suffering from spinal stenosis C3-C7 underwent anterior decompression and interbody fusion. The patients were divided into two groups. Four-level discectomy and cage fusion was performed in all patients. In group A including nine patients, posterior instrumentation with a lateral mass screw-rod system was added, while in group B including 16 patients, additional instrumentation was not performed. The mean duration of follow-up was 48.6 months (average 25-67 months). RESULTS: Clinically, the mean value for the Neck Disability Index improved from 40 ± 23.25 at presentation to 16.31 ± 15.09 at the final follow-up. The difference between the two groups was statistically not significant. Radiologically, the criteria for solid bony fusion were achieved successfully in all patients of group A, and in 87.5 % of patients in group B. The difference between the two groups was statistically not significant. The fused segment was then evaluated in the sagittal radiographs as regards the height and the lordosis angle. The loss in the height as well as the loss in the lordosis angle was more when posterior instrumentation was not added. However, the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Stand-alone intersomatic cage fusion is an acceptable line of treatment for four-level cervical disc disease, both clinically and radiologically. Although the addition of posterior instrumentation yields better radiological results, the difference does not reach the statistical significance level.