Christopher Brenke1, Martin Dostal2, Johann Scharf3, Christel Weiß4, Kirsten Schmieder5, Martin Barth5. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, Knappschaftskrankenhaus Bochum, Ruhr-University Bochum, In der Schornau 23-25, 44892, Bochum, Germany. Christopher.Brenke@kk-bochum.de. 2. Department of Neurosurgery, University Medicine Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim of the University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. 3. Department of Neuroradiology, University Medicine Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim of the University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. 4. Department of Medical Statistics, University Medicine Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim of the University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. 5. Department of Neurosurgery, Knappschaftskrankenhaus Bochum, Ruhr-University Bochum, In der Schornau 23-25, 44892, Bochum, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE:Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is a common procedure for the treatment of cervical degenerative diseases. However, cage subsidence remains a frequent problem. We therefore investigated if cage design and site-specific bone mineral density (BMD) contribute to the rate and direction of subsidence following ACDF. METHODS: Patients were prospectively included and received two different cages (groups 1 and 2) using minimization randomization. The degree and direction of cage subsidence were determined using plain radiographs. Neck pain intensity on the visual analogue scale (VAS), the neck disability index (NDI), and the patient satisfaction index were recorded up to 12 months after surgery. RESULTS:88 patients were analysed with a mean age of 53.7 ± 11.8 years. BMD values decreased in craniocaudal direction from 302.0 ± 62.2 to 235.5 ± 38.9 mg/cm(3). Both groups showed significant height gain after the operation (both p < 0.001), followed by height loss at 3 months (both p < 0.05) and at 3-12 months after the operation (both p > 0.05). Both groups showed improvement of VAS neck pain intensity (both p < 0.05) and NDI (both p < 0.05). The direction of cage subsidence was similar, no correlations were found between cage subsidence and BMD or various clinical parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Implant geometry of both cages and variations of the operative procedure promoted a relatively high degree of cage subsidence. Further studies are necessary to identify a relation of BMD and subsidence using optimized implant geometry and by controlling additional intraoperative variables.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is a common procedure for the treatment of cervical degenerative diseases. However, cage subsidence remains a frequent problem. We therefore investigated if cage design and site-specific bone mineral density (BMD) contribute to the rate and direction of subsidence following ACDF. METHODS:Patients were prospectively included and received two different cages (groups 1 and 2) using minimization randomization. The degree and direction of cage subsidence were determined using plain radiographs. Neck pain intensity on the visual analogue scale (VAS), the neck disability index (NDI), and the patient satisfaction index were recorded up to 12 months after surgery. RESULTS: 88 patients were analysed with a mean age of 53.7 ± 11.8 years. BMD values decreased in craniocaudal direction from 302.0 ± 62.2 to 235.5 ± 38.9 mg/cm(3). Both groups showed significant height gain after the operation (both p < 0.001), followed by height loss at 3 months (both p < 0.05) and at 3-12 months after the operation (both p > 0.05). Both groups showed improvement of VAS neck pain intensity (both p < 0.05) and NDI (both p < 0.05). The direction of cage subsidence was similar, no correlations were found between cage subsidence and BMD or various clinical parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Implant geometry of both cages and variations of the operative procedure promoted a relatively high degree of cage subsidence. Further studies are necessary to identify a relation of BMD and subsidence using optimized implant geometry and by controlling additional intraoperative variables.
Entities:
Keywords:
ACDF; Bone mineral density; Cervical spine; Discectomy; Subsidence
Authors: Thomas G Lowe; Shukor Hashim; Lucas A Wilson; Michael F O'Brien; David A B Smith; Molly J Diekmann; Julie Trommeter Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2004-11-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Narayan Yoganandan; Frank A Pintar; Brian D Stemper; Jamie L Baisden; Recyi Aktay; Barry S Shender; Glenn Paskoff; Purushottam Laud Journal: Bone Date: 2006-03-31 Impact factor: 4.398
Authors: T H Lim; H Kwon; C H Jeon; J G Kim; M Sokolowski; R Natarajan; H S An; G B Andersson Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2001-04-15 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Kirsten Schmieder; Markus Wolzik-Grossmann; Ioannis Pechlivanis; Martin Engelhardt; Martin Scholz; Albrecht Harders Journal: J Neurosurg Spine Date: 2006-06
Authors: Bartosz Godlewski; Adam Bebenek; Maciej Dominiak; Grzegorz Karpinski; Piotr Cieslik; Tomasz Pawelczyk Journal: Acta Neurochir (Wien) Date: 2022-04-26 Impact factor: 2.216
Authors: Iris Noordhoek; Marvyn T Koning; Wilco C H Jacobs; Carmen L A Vleggeert-Lankamp Journal: Acta Neurochir (Wien) Date: 2018-02-21 Impact factor: 2.216
Authors: Jun Seok Lee; Dong Wuk Son; Su Hun Lee; Sung Soon Ki; Sang Weon Lee; Geun Sung Song; Joon Bum Woo; Young Ha Kim Journal: J Korean Neurosurg Soc Date: 2021-12-29