Literature DB >> 28374128

Cage deviation in the subaxial cervical spine in relation to implant position in the sagittal plane.

Klaus Christian Mende1, Sven Oliver Eicker2, Friedrich Weber3.   

Abstract

Subsidence of interbody cages is a frequently observed and relevant complication in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Only a handful of studies concentrated on the modality of subsidence and its clinical impact. We performed a retrospective analysis of ACDF patients from 2004 to 2010. Numeric analog scale (NAS) score pre-op and post-op, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) on x-rays, endplate (EP) and cage dimensions, implant position, lordotic/kyphotic subsidence patterns (>5°), and cervical alignment were recorded. Subsidence was defined as height loss >40%. Patients were grouped into single segment (SS), double segment (DS), and plated procedures. We included 214 patients. Prevalence of subsidence was 44.9% overall, 40.9% for SS, and 54.8% for DS. Subsidence presented mostly for dorsal (40.7%) and mid-endplate position (46.3%, p < 0.01); dorsal placement resulted in kyphotic (73.7%) and central placement in balanced implant migration (53.3%, p < 0.01). Larger cages (>65% EP) showed less subsidence (64.6 vs. 35.4%, p < 0.01). There was no impact of subsidence on ODI or alignment. NAS was better for subsided implants in SS (p = 0.06). Cages should be placed at the anterior endplate rim in order to reduce the risk of subsidence. Spacers should be adequately sized for the respective segment measuring at least 65% of the segment dimensions. The cage frame should not rest on the vulnerable central endplate. For multilevel surgery, ventral plating may be beneficial regarding construct stability. The reduction of micro-instability or over-distraction may explain lower NAS for subsided implants.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ACDF; Cage size; Degenerative disc disease; Outcome; Subsidence

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28374128     DOI: 10.1007/s10143-017-0850-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurosurg Rev        ISSN: 0344-5607            Impact factor:   3.042


  25 in total

Review 1.  The Oswestry Disability Index.

Authors:  J C Fairbank; P B Pynsent
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-11-15       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  Effects of anterior contralateral cervical microdiskectomy on radiological and clinical outcome.

Authors:  Halit Cavuşoğlu; Osman Türkmenoğlu; Ramazan Alper Kaya; Songül Meltem Can; Yunus Aydin
Journal:  Surg Neurol       Date:  2006-05

3.  Stand-alone cervical cages versus anterior cervical plate in 2-level cervical anterior interbody fusion patients: clinical outcomes and radiologic changes.

Authors:  Jae Keun Oh; Tae Yup Kim; Hyo Sang Lee; Nam Kyu You; Gwi Hyun Choi; Seong Yi; Yoon Ha; Keung Nyun Kim; Do Heum Yoon; Hyun Chul Shin
Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech       Date:  2013-12

4.  Impact of over distraction on occurrence of axial symptom after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.

Authors:  Jiayue Bai; Xin Zhang; Di Zhang; Wenyuan Ding; Yong Shen; Wei Zhang; Mengzhen Du
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-10-15

5.  Loss of inter-vertebral disc height after anterior cervical discectomy.

Authors:  N Haden; M Latimer; H M Seeley; R J Laing
Journal:  Br J Neurosurg       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 1.596

6.  Subsidence as of 12 months after single-level anterior cervical inter-body fusion. Is it related to clinical outcomes?

Authors:  Chang-Hyun Lee; Ki-Jeong Kim; Seung-Jae Hyun; Jin S Yeom; Tae-Ahn Jahng; Hyun-Jib Kim
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  2015-04-02       Impact factor: 2.216

7.  Clinical and radiological outcome after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with stand-alone empty polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages.

Authors:  Ehab Shiban; Karina Gapon; Maria Wostrack; Bernhard Meyer; Jens Lehmberg
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  2015-12-01       Impact factor: 2.216

8.  Risk factors for postoperative subsidence of single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: the significance of the preoperative cervical alignment.

Authors:  Young-Seok Lee; Young-Baeg Kim; Seung-Won Park
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2014-07-15       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  Outcomes of contemporary use of rectangular titanium stand-alone cages in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: cage subsidence and cervical alignment.

Authors:  Toru Yamagata; Toshihiro Takami; Takehiro Uda; Hidetoshi Ikeda; Takashi Nagata; Shinichi Sakamoto; Naohiro Tsuyuguchi; Kenji Ohata
Journal:  J Clin Neurosci       Date:  2012-10-18       Impact factor: 1.961

10.  PEEK cages versus PMMA spacers in anterior cervical discectomy: comparison of fusion, subsidence, sagittal alignment, and clinical outcome with a minimum 1-year follow-up.

Authors:  Jan-Helge Klingler; Marie T Krüger; Ronen Sircar; Evangelos Kogias; Christoph Scholz; Florian Volz; Christian Scheiwe; Ulrich Hubbe
Journal:  ScientificWorldJournal       Date:  2014-07-02
View more
  5 in total

1.  Morphometry evaluations of cervical osseous endplates based on three dimensional reconstructions.

Authors:  Hang Feng; Haoxi Li; Zhaoyu Ba; Zhaoxiong Chen; Xinhua Li; Desheng Wu
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-08-09       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Cervical endplate bone density distribution measured by CT osteoabsorptiometry and direct comparison with mechanical properties of the endplate.

Authors:  Takeshi Hara; Yukoh Ohara; Eiji Abe; Kaosu Takami; Alejandro A Espinoza Orías; Hajime Arai; Nozomu Inoue
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2021-07-15       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Radiological Assessment of the Effects of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion on Distraction of the Posterior Ligamentum Flavum in Patients with Degenerative Cervical Spines.

Authors:  Byung-Wan Choi; Min Sung Choi; Han Chang
Journal:  Clin Orthop Surg       Date:  2021-11-15

4.  Does Graft Position Affect Subsidence After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion?

Authors:  Hyun-Jun Jang; Dong-Kyu Chin; Kyung-Hyun Kim; Jeong-Yoon Park
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2020-10-12

5.  Subsidence following cervical discectomy and implant-to-bone ratio.

Authors:  Bartosz Godlewski; Adam Bebenek; Maciej Dominiak; Grzegorz Karpinski; Piotr Cieslik; Tomasz Pawelczyk
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2022-08-04       Impact factor: 2.562

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.