Literature DB >> 34296024

Clinical and radiographic outcomes using third-generation bioactive glass as a bone graft substitute for multi-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion-a retrospective case series study.

Gilberto Gomez1,2, L Erik Westerlund1,2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Bioactive glasses have unique bone forming properties that have been used as a bone graft substitute for anterior cervical discectomy and fusions (ACDFs). Bone graft substitutes are used for achieving fusion while simultaneously avoiding donor site morbidity of iliac crest autograft. In this study, our principal intention is to assess the clinical and radiographic outcomes in patients with multi-level cervical disc disease undergoing ACDF using a third-generation bioactive glass as a bone graft substitute.
METHODS: A retrospective case series study was performed of patients who underwent primary multi-level instrumented fusions for degenerative cervical disc disease with bioactive glass bone graft substitute between May 2016 and December 2017 by a single fellowship-trained spine surgeon. All patients were treated with a porous PEEK interbody spacer and with a third-generation bioactive glass synthetic bone graft substitute. Patients were assessed pre-operatively, immediately following surgery, and at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. Accepted standard outcome measures were applied to evaluate preoperative and postoperative metrics, including Visual Analog Scale neck pain and arm pain, and Neck Disability Index. Dynamic lateral radiographs were used to assess sagittal alignment, disc space height, arthrodesis status, osseous integration, and implant migration. Sagittal plane angulation was measured by Cobb's criteria.
RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients underwent multi-level instrumented fusions: seventeen (43%) were two-level; 12 (31%) were three-level; 9 (23%) were four-level; and 1 (3%) was five-levels. All patients were followed for a minimum of 6 months for mean of 16.0 months (range, 6 to 36 months); none were lost to follow-up. Significant improvements from preoperative scores in Neck Disability Index scores as well as neck and arm visual analog scale pain scores were realized. All patients either maintained or improved their neurological status. Radiographically, all patients were fused by 6 months postoperatively and showed improvement in fusion segment lordosis (Pre-Post and Pre-Final P<0.001), C2-C7 lordosis angle (Pre-Post and Pre-Final P<0.001), T1 slope (Pre-Post P=0.01, Pre-Final P=0.07) and maintenance of disc height (Post-Final P=0.02). There were no adverse events, infections, or reoperations.
CONCLUSIONS: Third-generation bioactive glass synthetic graft is a viable alternative to allograft or autograft in the setting of multi-level instrumented fusions for achieving improved clinical and radiographic outcomes. 2021 Journal of Spine Surgery. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF); bioactive glass; bone graft substitute; degenerative cervical disc disease

Year:  2021        PMID: 34296024      PMCID: PMC8261568          DOI: 10.21037/jss-20-645

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Spine Surg        ISSN: 2414-4630


  30 in total

1.  Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Single-level Anterior Cervical Arthrodesis: A Prospective Trial Comparing Allograft to a Reduced Dose of rhBMP-2.

Authors:  John K Burkus; Randall F Dryer; Paul M Arnold; Kevin T Foley
Journal:  Clin Spine Surg       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 1.876

2.  The patient-specific functional scale: validation of its use in persons with neck dysfunction.

Authors:  M D Westaway; P W Stratford; J M Binkley
Journal:  J Orthop Sports Phys Ther       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 4.751

3.  Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Outcomes over 10 Years: A Prospective Study.

Authors:  Glenn R Buttermann
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2018-02-01       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 4.  Safety and effectiveness of bone allografts in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion surgery.

Authors:  Larry E Miller; Jon E Block
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2011-11-15       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Bioactive glass as a bone substitute for spinal fusion in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a comparative study with iliac crest autograft.

Authors:  Brice Ilharreborde; Etienne Morel; Franck Fitoussi; Ana Presedo; Philippe Souchet; Georges-François Penneçot; Keyvan Mazda
Journal:  J Pediatr Orthop       Date:  2008 Apr-May       Impact factor: 2.324

6.  Comparison of revision surgeries for one- to two-level cervical TDR and ACDF from 2002 to 2011.

Authors:  Sreeharsha V Nandyala; Alejandro Marquez-Lara; Steven J Fineberg; Kern Singh
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2014-04-03       Impact factor: 4.166

7.  What is the most accurate radiographic criterion to determine anterior cervical fusion?

Authors:  K Daniel Riew; Jae Jun Yang; Dong-Gune Chang; Sang-Min Park; Jin S Yeom; Jae Sung Lee; Eui-Chan Jang; Kwang-Sup Song
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2018-07-07       Impact factor: 4.166

8.  The Neck Disability Index: a study of reliability and validity.

Authors:  H Vernon; S Mior
Journal:  J Manipulative Physiol Ther       Date:  1991-09       Impact factor: 1.437

9.  Robinson anterior cervical fusion comparison of the standard and modified techniques.

Authors:  S E Emery; M J Bolesta; M A Banks; P K Jones
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1994-03-15       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  Outcomes and revision rates following multilevel anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.

Authors:  Joseph L Laratta; Hemant P Reddy; Kelly R Bratcher; Katlyn E McGraw; Leah Y Carreon; R Kirk Owens
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2018-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.