BACKGROUND: As the number of cervical spine procedures performed continues to increase, the need for revision surgery is also likely to increase. Surgeons need to understand the etiology of post-surgical changes, as well as have a treatment algorithm when evaluating these complex patients. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: This study aims to review the rates and etiology of revision cervical spine surgery as well as describe our treatment algorithm. METHODS: We used a narrative and literature review. We performed a MEDLINE (PubMed) search for "cervical" and "spine" and "revision" which returned 353 articles from 1993 through January 22, 2014. Abstracts were analyzed for relevance and 32 articles were reviewed. RESULTS: The rates of revision surgery on the cervical spine vary by the type and extent of procedure performed. Patient evaluation should include a detailed history and review of the indication for the index procedure, as well as lab work to rule out infection. Imaging studies including flexion/extension radiographs and computed tomography are obtained to evaluate potential pseudarthrosis. Magnetic resonance imaging is helpful to evaluate the disc, neural elements, soft tissue, and to differentiate scar from infection. Sagittal alignment should be corrected if necessary. CONCLUSIONS: Recurrent or new symptoms after cervical spine reconstruction can be effectively treated with revision surgery after identifying the etiology, and completing the appropriate workup.
BACKGROUND: As the number of cervical spine procedures performed continues to increase, the need for revision surgery is also likely to increase. Surgeons need to understand the etiology of post-surgical changes, as well as have a treatment algorithm when evaluating these complex patients. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: This study aims to review the rates and etiology of revision cervical spine surgery as well as describe our treatment algorithm. METHODS: We used a narrative and literature review. We performed a MEDLINE (PubMed) search for "cervical" and "spine" and "revision" which returned 353 articles from 1993 through January 22, 2014. Abstracts were analyzed for relevance and 32 articles were reviewed. RESULTS: The rates of revision surgery on the cervical spine vary by the type and extent of procedure performed. Patient evaluation should include a detailed history and review of the indication for the index procedure, as well as lab work to rule out infection. Imaging studies including flexion/extension radiographs and computed tomography are obtained to evaluate potential pseudarthrosis. Magnetic resonance imaging is helpful to evaluate the disc, neural elements, soft tissue, and to differentiate scar from infection. Sagittal alignment should be corrected if necessary. CONCLUSIONS: Recurrent or new symptoms after cervical spine reconstruction can be effectively treated with revision surgery after identifying the etiology, and completing the appropriate workup.
Authors: Kwang-Sup Song; Piyaskulkaew Chaiwat; Han Jo Kim; Addisu Mesfin; Sang-Min Park; K Daniel Riew Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2013-12-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Brandon D Lawrence; Alan S Hilibrand; Erika D Brodt; Joseph R Dettori; Darrel S Brodke Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2012-10-15 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Hong Xing Shen; Jacob M Buchowski; Jin S Yeom; Gabriel Liu; Nan Lin; K Daniel Riew Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2010-04-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: S Tim Yoon; Robin E Hashimoto; Annie Raich; Christopher I Shaffrey; John M Rhee; K Daniel Riew Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2013-10-15 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Daniel Murrey; Michael Janssen; Rick Delamarter; Jeffrey Goldstein; Jack Zigler; Bobby Tay; Bruce Darden Journal: Spine J Date: 2008-09-06 Impact factor: 4.166
Authors: Jack E Zigler; Rick Delamarter; Dan Murrey; Jeffrey Spivak; Michael Janssen Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2013-02-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Samantha R Horn; Peter G Passias; Aaron Hockley; Renaud Lafage; Virginie Lafage; Hamid Hassanzadeh; Jason A Horowitz; Cole A Bortz; Frank A Segreto; Avery E Brown; Justin S Smith; Daniel M Sciubba; Gregory M Mundis; Michael P Kelley; Alan H Daniels; Douglas C Burton; Robert A Hart; Frank J Schwab; Shay Bess; Christopher I Shaffrey; Richard A Hostin; Christopher P Ames Journal: J Spine Surg Date: 2018-12
Authors: Roland D Donk; Hisse Arnts; Wim I M Verhagen; Hans Groenewoud; Andre Verbeek; Ronald H M A Bartels Journal: Acta Neurochir (Wien) Date: 2017-09-08 Impact factor: 2.216