Literature DB >> 26198705

Correlation between cervical lordosis and adjacent segment pathology after anterior cervical spinal surgery.

Soo Eon Lee1, Tae-Ahn Jahng2, Hyun Jib Kim3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the incidence and risk factors for adjacent segment pathology (ASP) after anterior cervical spinal surgery.
METHODS: Fourteen patients (12 male, mean age 47.1 years) who underwent single-level cervical disk arthroplasty (CDA group) and 28 case-matched patients (24 male, mean age 53.6 years) who underwent single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF group) were included. Presence of radiologic ASP (RASP) was based on observed changes in anterior osteophytes, disks, and calcification of the anterior longitudinal ligament on lateral radiographs.
RESULTS: The mean follow-up period was 43.4 months in the CDA group and 44.6 months in the ACDF group. At final follow-up, ASP was observed in 5 (35.7%) CDA patients and 16 (57.1%) ACDF patients (p = 0.272). The interval between surgery and ASP development was 33.8 months in the CDA group and 16.3 months in the ACDF group (p = 0.046). The ASP risk factor analysis indicated postoperative cervical angle at C3-7 being more lordotic in non-ASP patients in both groups. Restoration of lordosis occurred in the CDA group regardless of the presence of ASP, but heterotopic ossification development was associated with the presence of ASP in the CDA group. And the CDA group had significantly greater clinical improvements than those in the ACDF group when ASP was present.
CONCLUSION: In both CDA and ACDF patients, RASP developed, but CDA was associated with a delay in ASP development. A good clinical outcome was expected in CDA group, even when ASP developed. Restoration of cervical lordosis was an important factor in anterior cervical spine surgery.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion; Cervical disk arthroplasty; Heterotopic ossification; Lordosis; Range of motion

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26198705     DOI: 10.1007/s00586-015-4132-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  28 in total

1.  Strain on intervertebral discs after anterior cervical decompression and fusion.

Authors:  S Matsunaga; S Kabayama; T Yamamoto; K Yone; T Sakou; K Nakanishi
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1999-04-01       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  Effects of a cervical disc prosthesis on maintaining sagittal alignment of the functional spinal unit and overall sagittal balance of the cervical spine.

Authors:  Seok Woo Kim; Jae Hyuk Shin; Jose Joefrey Arbatin; Moon Soo Park; Yung Khee Chung; Paul C McAfee
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2007-08-25       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 3.  Arthroplasty versus fusion in single-level cervical degenerative disc disease: a Cochrane review.

Authors:  Toon F M Boselie; Paul C Willems; Henk van Mameren; Rob A de Bie; Edward C Benzel; Henk van Santbrink
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2013-08-01       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  Adjacent-level degeneration after cervical disc arthroplasty versus fusion.

Authors:  Carlos Valencia Maldonado; Ricardo Díaz-Romero Paz; Claudia Balhen Martin
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-07-28       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Remodeling of adjacent spinal alignments following cervical arthroplasty and anterior discectomy and fusion.

Authors:  Sung Bae Park; Tae-Ahn Jahng; Chun Kee Chung
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-08-30       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Symptomatic adjacent segment disease after cervical total disc replacement: re-examining the clinical and radiological evidence with established criteria.

Authors:  Pierce D Nunley; Ajay Jawahar; David A Cavanaugh; Charles R Gordon; Eubulus J Kerr; Phillip Andrew Utter
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2013-01-11       Impact factor: 4.166

7.  Experimental cervical spondylosis in the mouse.

Authors:  S Miyamoto; K Yonenobu; K Ono
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1991-10       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  Preliminary clinical experience with the Bryan Cervical Disc Prosthesis.

Authors:  Jan Goffin; Adrian Casey; Pierre Kehr; Klaus Liebig; Bengt Lind; Carlo Logroscino; Vincent Pointillart; Frank Van Calenbergh; Johannes van Loon
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 4.654

9.  A prospective randomized comparison between the cloward procedure and a carbon fiber cage in the cervical spine: a clinical and radiologic study.

Authors:  Ludek Vavruch; Rune Hedlund; Davood Javid; Waclaw Leszniewski; Adel Shalabi
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2002-08-15       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 10.  Adjacent segment degeneration and adjacent segment disease: the consequences of spinal fusion?

Authors:  Alan S Hilibrand; Matthew Robbins
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2004 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 4.166

View more
  17 in total

1.  The Michel Benoist and Robert Mulholland yearly European spine journal review: a survey of the "surgical and research" articles in the European spine journal, 2015.

Authors:  Robert C Mulholland
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-01-05       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Cervical cages placed bilaterally in the facet joints from a posterior approach significantly increase foraminal area.

Authors:  Kris Siemionow; Piotr Janusz; Pawel Glowka
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-02-11       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Heterotopic ossification is related to change in disc space angle after Prestige-LP cervical disc arthroplasty.

Authors:  Lingyun Hu; Jianying Zhang; Hao Liu; Yang Meng; Yi Yang; Guangzhou Li; Chen Ding; Beiyu Wang
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2019-07-05       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  The application of a new type of titanium mesh cage in hybrid anterior decompression and fusion technique for the treatment of continuously three-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

Authors:  Xiaowei Liu; Yu Chen; Haisong Yang; Tiefeng Li; Haidong Xu; Bin Xu; Deyu Chen
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-11-24       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Heterotopic ossification and clinical outcome in nonconstrained cervical arthroplasty 2 years after surgery: the Norwegian Cervical Arthroplasty Trial (NORCAT).

Authors:  Jarle Sundseth; Eva Astrid Jacobsen; Frode Kolstad; Ruth O Sletteberg; Oystein P Nygaard; Lars Gunnar Johnsen; Are Hugo Pripp; Hege Andresen; Oddrun Anita Fredriksli; Erling Myrseth; John A Zwart
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-04-09       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Clinical and radiological outcome at 10 years of follow-up after total cervical disc replacement.

Authors:  Christoph Mehren; Franziska Heider; Christoph J Siepe; Bernhard Zillner; Ralph Kothe; Andreas Korge; H Michael Mayer
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-07-04       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  The Changes in Cervical Biomechanics After CTDR and Its Association With Heterotopic Ossification: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Nicholas Hui; Kevin Phan; Mei-Yi Lee; Jack Kerferd; Telvinderjit Singh; Ralph J Mobbs
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2020-06-03

8.  In-Depth Analysis on Influencing Factors of Adjacent Segment Degeneration After Cervical Fusion.

Authors:  Chaojie Yu; Xiaoping Mu; Jianxun Wei; Ye Chu; Bin Liang
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2016-12-14

Review 9.  The prevalence of heterotopic ossification among patients after cervical artificial disc replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Lingde Kong; Qinghua Ma; Fei Meng; Junming Cao; Kunlun Yu; Yong Shen
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 1.817

10.  Clinical and radiographic outcomes of cervical disc arthroplasty with Prestige-LP Disc: a minimum 6-year follow-up study.

Authors:  Junfeng Zeng; Hao Liu; Xin Rong; Beiyu Wang; Yi Yang; Xinlin Gao; Tingkui Wu; Ying Hong
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2018-08-07       Impact factor: 2.362

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.