Literature DB >> 23526906

A case of cervical metastases in a patient with preexisting cervical disc replacement and fusion after 2-year symptom-free interval: when do we need interdisciplinary diagnostics?

Markus Melloh1, Thomas Barz.   

Abstract

Recurrent cervical symptoms frequently occur after cervical disc replacement and fusion. To date, no algorithm for the diagnostic assessment of these symptoms has been established. We present a case report and review of the literature to illustrate the need for interdisciplinary diagnostics in recurrent cervicobrachialgia without pathological cervical imaging. The hospital chart, medical history, physical examination, and imaging of a single patient were reviewed. A 53-year-old man with preexisting cervical disc replacement and fusion presented with a new episode of cervicobrachialgia after a 2-year symptom-free interval. Cervical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) showed no pathological findings. Six months later the patient reported increasing symptoms including numbness and weakness of the right arm. Repeated cervical MRI and thoracic computed tomography revealed cervical metastases with intraspinal tumor growth and an underlying extensive small cell bronchial carcinoma. In recurrent cervicobrachialgia, without pathological cervical imaging, interdisciplinary diagnostics are needed. Basic diagnostic tests may assist to exclude severe non-vertebrogenic pathologies.

Entities:  

Year:  2012        PMID: 23526906      PMCID: PMC3592761          DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1327810

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Evid Based Spine Care J        ISSN: 1663-7976


Introduction

Recent years have seen growing numbers of cervical disc replacements and fusions due to improved surgical techniques.1,2,3 Diagnostics and differential diagnostics have been highly standardized;4 however, recurrent cervical symptoms frequently occur.5 Possible vertebrogenic causes lie within the treated or adjacent segments (Table 1).6. Primarily, local diagnostics of these causes are required (Table 2); yet, no algorithm for the diagnostic assessment of recurrent cervical symptoms has been established to date.7 This bears the risk that non-vertebrogenic causes of cervical symptoms are diagnosed at a late stage.
Table 1

Causes of vertebrogenic symptoms after cervical disc replacement/fusion.

Adjacent segment degeneration
New or persisting central or foraminal stenosis
Pseudarthrosis
Vertebral fracture
Cage/prosthesis migration
Prosthesis loosening
Facet joint degeneration
Wear-induced granuloma
Misalignment
Nonphysiological load and movement patterns
Table 2

Local diagnostics for recurrent or persistent vertebrogenic symptoms after cervical disc replacement/fusion.

Standard and oblique view x-ray
Functional x-ray
Computed tomography (CT)
Myelography
CT-myelography
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)
Contrast MRI
Dynamic examination with image intensifier
Scintigraphy
Positron-emission tomography-CT
Electroneurography/electromyography
Somatosensory evoked potential test
Magnetic evoked potential test
Psychological exploration
Facet joint and nerve root blocks
Discography

Report of a Case

A 53-year-old nonsmoking man presented to our outpatient clinic with a new episode of cervicobrachialgia after a 2-year symptom-free interval. Two years ago, because of bilateral foraminal stenosis at C5/6 and C6/7 with increasing cervicobrachialgia, decompression and fusion at the severest level C5/6 (Pina Titan Cage 8 mm 14 × 16 mm) and disc replacement at C6/7 (Prodisc-C XL 8 mm) had been performed due to different degenerative changes. In the preoperative routine check-up the patient had presented without a history of a malignant comorbidity. In the further course he had been symptom free. Routine cervical x-ray had shown a stable fusion and a beginning kyphosis of the disc prosthesis (Fig. 1). Two years after surgery the patient reported recurrent cervicobrachialgia; however, cervical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) including STIR sequences showed no pathological findings except for incipient foraminal stenosis at levels C3/4 and C4/5 due to uncovertebral arthrosis (Fig. 2). Therefore, no further imaging or invasive investigations such as computed tomography (CT)-myelography were indicated.
Fig. 1

(a) Postoperative cervical x-ray, lateral view. (b) Postoperative cervical x-ray, anteroposterior view.

Fig. 2

A 2-year postoperative cervical MRI, T2-weighted sagittal view.

(a) Postoperative cervical x-ray, lateral view. (b) Postoperative cervical x-ray, anteroposterior view. A 2-year postoperative cervical MRI, T2-weighted sagittal view. During the next 6 months his symptoms got worse with increasing numbness and weakness of the right arm. Repeated cervical MRI revealed bone metastases of the fourth and fifth vertebrae with intraspinal tumor growth (Fig. 3). Thoracic x-ray and CT demonstrated an extensive small cell bronchial carcinoma (Figs. 4,5). Beginning paraparesis required immediate treatment comprising debulking, radiotherapy as well as etoposide and cisplatin chemotherapy. Subsequent to deterioration of his general state of health, the patient died 2 weeks after the cancer diagnosis of cardiopulmonary decompensation.
Fig. 3

(a) A 2.5-year postoperative cervical MRI, T2-weighted sagittal view. (b) A 2.5-year postoperative cervical MRI, T1-weighted axial view.

Fig. 4

A 2.5-year postoperative thoracic x-ray, anteroposterior view.

Fig. 5

A 2.5-year postoperative thoracic CT, axial view.

(a) A 2.5-year postoperative cervical MRI, T2-weighted sagittal view. (b) A 2.5-year postoperative cervical MRI, T1-weighted axial view. A 2.5-year postoperative thoracic x-ray, anteroposterior view. A 2.5-year postoperative thoracic CT, axial view.

Discussion

Good-to-excellent clinical results with a low complication rate are reported for ventral cervical fusion and disc replacement.8,9,10 This applies likewise to disc replacement in combination with fusion.11,12 Yet, postoperative cervicobrachialgia is not uncommon.5,13,14 Especially after a symptom-free interval of 2 years recurrent cervical symptoms are often believed to result from vertebrogenic causes. Metal artifacts complicate the evaluation of MRI and CT scans.15,16,17 The absence of neurological deficits demands a nonsurgical treatment leading to a successful outcome in most patients.6 However, recurrent cervicobrachialgia without pathological cervical imaging requires interdisciplinary diagnostics. To our knowledge, there is only one report of a similar case in the literature. Pillai et al 18 presented the case of a patient developing metastases at the site of the arthroplasty 1 year after fusion at C3/4 to caution spine surgeons about the possibility that metastases might occur at the site of a cervical fusion and that a metastatic tumor should be accounted for in the differential diagnosis of recurrent cervicobrachialgia. Potential nonvertebrogenic causes of cervicobrachialgia are given in Table 3. Basic diagnostic tests, such as thoracic x-ray, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein, and electrocardiogram may assist to exclude severe nonvertebrogenic pathologies. These tests are highly recommended in cases without pathological cervical imaging.
Table 3

Potential nonvertebrogenic causes of cervicobrachialgia.

Migraine
Herpes zoster
Toothache
Torticolli spasticus
Oral and maxillofacial tumors
Pancoast tumor
Breast cancer
Spastic esophagus
Hiatus hernia
Pneumothorax
Pleuritis
Pulmonary embolism
Myocarditis
Angina pectoris/myocardial infarction
Aortic aneurysm
Peripheral artery disease with ischemia
Sudeck atrophy
Carpal/radial/cubital tunnel, pronator teres, scalenus, thoracic outlet syndrome
Epicondylitis humeri
Serogenetic polyneuritis
Basilar impression and similar skeletal deformities
Neuralgic shoulder amyotrophy
Shoulder impingement syndrome/omarthritis/omarthrosis
Polymyalgia rheumatica
Neurotic disorders

Conclusion

This case illustrates the need for interdisciplinary diagnostics in recurrent cervicobrachialgia without pathological cervical imaging. Basic diagnostic tests may assist to exclude severe nonvertebrogenic pathologies.
  19 in total

1.  Cervical spinal disc replacement.

Authors:  V Denaro; R Papalia; L Denaro; A Di Martino; N Maffulli
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2009-06

2.  Metastasis development at the site of cervical spine arthrodesis.

Authors:  Promod Pillai; Ehud Mendel; Abhik Ray-Chaudhury; Wayne Slone; Mario Ammirati; Antonio E Chiocca
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  2009-06-24       Impact factor: 2.216

3.  Magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of adjacent segments after cervical disc arthroplasty: magnet strength and its effect on image quality. Clinical article.

Authors:  Ivan J Antosh; John G DeVine; Clyde T Carpenter; Brian J Woebkenberg; Stephen M Yoest
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2010-12

4.  Magnetic resonance imaging of titanium anterior cervical spine plating systems.

Authors:  T Tominaga; H Shimizu; K Koshu; T Kayama; T Yoshimoto
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 4.654

Review 5.  An analysis of failures in primary cervical anterior spinal cord decompression and fusion.

Authors:  K Shinomiya; A Okamoto; M Kamikozuru; K Furuya; I Yamaura
Journal:  J Spinal Disord       Date:  1993-08

Review 6.  Historical review of cervical arthroplasty.

Authors:  Hoang Le; Issada Thongtrangan; Daniel H Kim
Journal:  Neurosurg Focus       Date:  2004-09-15       Impact factor: 4.047

7.  The rationale of postoperative radiographs after cervical anterior discectomy with stand-alone cage for radicular pain.

Authors:  Ronald H M A Bartels; Tjemme Beems; Pieter J Schutte; André L M Verbeek
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2010-03

8.  Early results and review of the literature of a novel hybrid surgical technique combining cervical arthrodesis and disc arthroplasty for treating multilevel degenerative disc disease: opposite or complementary techniques?

Authors:  Giuseppe M V Barbagallo; Roberto Assietti; Leonardo Corbino; Giuseppe Olindo; Pietro V Foti; Vittorio Russo; Vincenzo Albanese
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-05-05       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 9.  The indications for lumbar and cervical disc replacement.

Authors:  Paul C McAfee
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2004 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 4.166

10.  Clinical results and development of heterotopic ossification in total cervical disc replacement during a 4-year follow-up.

Authors:  Petr Suchomel; Lubomír Jurák; Vladimír Benes; Radim Brabec; Ondrej Bradác; Shamel Elgawhary
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-12-25       Impact factor: 3.134

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.