Neurologic recovery after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Lehmann CL
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3908984 | biostudies-other | 2014 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundCervical radiculopathy is characterized by dysfunction of the nerve root usually caused by a cervical disk herniation. The most important symptom is pain, radiating from the neck to the arm. When conservative treatment fails, surgical treatment is indicated to relieve symptoms. During the last decades, multiple fusion techniques have been developed, although without clinical evidence for added value of fusion over non-fusion.MethodsThe surgical procedure of anterior cervical discectomy without fusion is performed step by step, leading to removal of the entire intervertebral disk.ConclusionAnterior cervical discectomy without fusion is a safe and effective treatment for cervical disk herniation.
| S-EPMC5486609 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAnterior cervical discectomy and fusion is a standard surgical treatment for cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy, but reoperations sometimes are performed to treat complications of fusion such as pseudarthrosis and adjacent-segment degeneration. A cervical disc arthroplasty is designed to preserve motion and avoid the shortcomings of fusion. Available evidence suggests that a cervical disc arthroplasty can provide pain relief and functional improvements similar or superior to an anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. However, there is controversy regarding whether a cervical disc arthroplasty can reduce the frequency of reoperations.Questions/purposesWe performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion regarding (1) the overall frequency of reoperation at the index and adjacent levels; (2) the frequency of reoperation at the index level; and (3) the frequency of reoperation at the adjacent levels.MethodsPubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched to identify RCTs comparing cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion and reporting the frequency of reoperation. We also manually searched the reference lists of articles and reviews for possible relevant studies. Twelve RCTs with a total of 3234 randomized patients were included. Eight types of disc prostheses were used in the included studies. In the anterior cervical discectomy and fusion group, autograft was used in one study and allograft in 11 studies. Nine of 12 studies were industry sponsored. Pooled risk ratio (RR) and associated 95% CI were calculated for the frequency of reoperation using random-effects or fixed-effects models depending on the heterogeneity of the included studies. A funnel plot suggested the possible presence of publication bias in the available pool of studies; that is, the shape of the plot suggests that smaller negative or no-difference studies may have been performed but have not been published, and so were not identified and included in this meta-analysis.ResultsThe overall frequency of reoperation at the index and adjacent levels was lower in the cervical disc arthroplasty group (6%; 108/1762) than in the anterior cervical discectomy and fusion group (12%; 171/1472) (RR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.36-0.80; p = 0.002). Subgroup analyses were performed according to secondary surgical level. Compared with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, cervical disc arthroplasty was associated with fewer reoperations at the index level (RR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.37-0.68; p < 0.001) and adjacent levels (RR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.37-0.74; p < 0.001).ConclusionsCervical disc arthroplasty is associated with fewer reoperations than anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, indicating that it is a safe and effective alternative to fusion for cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy. However, because of some limitations, these findings should be interpreted with caution. Additional studies are needed.Level of evidenceLevel I, therapeutic study.
| S-EPMC4814433 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Retrospective cohort study.To identify factors that are independently associated with increased surgical drain output in patients who have undergone ACDF.Surgical drains are typically placed after ACDF to reduce the risk of complications associated with neck hematoma. The orthopedic literature has repeatedly challenged the use of surgical drains after many procedures, and there are currently no guidelines for determining which patients are most likely to benefit from drain placement after ACDF.Consecutive patients who underwent elective ACDF with surgical drain placement at a single academic institution between January 2011 and February 2013 were identified using billing records. Patient information was abstracted from the medical record. Patients were categorized on the basis of normal or increased total drain output, with increased drain output defined as total drain output 50th percentile (30 mL) or more. A multivariate logistic regression was used to determine which factors were independently associated with increased drain output.A total of 151 patients with ACDF met inclusion criteria. Total drain output was in the range from 0 mL to 265 mL. The average drain output for this cohort was 42.3 ± 45.5 mL (mean ± standard deviation). Among all patients in the study, 80 patients had increased drain output (drain output ?50th percentile or 30 mL).Multivariate analysis identified 3 independent predictors of increased drain output: age 50 years or more (odds ratio [OR] = 3.9), number of levels (2 levels, OR = 2.7; 3-4 levels, OR = 17.0), and history of smoking (OR = 2.8). One patient developed a postoperative neck hematoma while a drain was in place.Patients with the factors associated with increased drain output identified in the earlier text may benefit most from surgical drain placement after ACDF. Nonetheless, neck hematoma is still possible even with drain use.3.
| S-EPMC3991728 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is one of the most common spinal procedures, frequently used for the treatment of cervical spine degenerative diseases. It was first described in 1958. Interestingly, to our knowledge, 3-level ACDF has not been previously published as a peer-reviewed video case with a detailed description of intraoperative microsurgical anatomy. In this video, we present the case of a 33-year-old male who presented with a combination of myelopathy (hyperreflexia and long tract signs in the upper and lower extremities) and bilateral radiculopathy of the upper extremities. He had been previously treated conservatively with physical therapy and pain management for 6 months without success. We performed 3-level microsurgical ACDF from C4 to C7. All 3 levels were decompressed, and bone allografts were placed to achieve intervertebral body fusion. A titanium plate was utilized from C4 to C7 for internal fixation. The patient was discharged home on the first postoperative day. His pain, numbness and tingling resolved, as well as his myelopathy. No perioperative complications were encountered. Herein we present the surgical anatomy of our operative technique including certain technical tips. Written consent was obtained directly from the patient.
| S-EPMC8112558 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionAnterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is a commonly performed procedure for the treatment of degenerative cervical disease. With continued increase in U.S. healthcare expenditure, surgeons have begun to more closely examine the benefits of performing ACDF in an outpatient setting to increase efficiency, reduce the overall financial burden on patients/providers, and provide streamlined care for these patients. The purpose of this study was to analyze outcomes following outpatient ACDF for the treatment of myelopathy.Methods14,490 patients who had undergone ACDF for myelopathy from 2010 to 2018 were included in this retrospective study, of which 2956 (20.40%) patients were considered to have undergone outpatient surgery. Pearson chi-squared tests and Fischer's Exact Tests were used to analyze differences in categorical variables of demographics, preoperative comorbidities, and postoperative complications, while Mann-Whitney-U-Tests were used to compare mean values of continuous variables. Coarsened-exact-matching (CEM) was implemented to control for baseline differences in demographics and comorbidities, and post-matching diagnostics included multivariate and univariate imbalance measure assessment. Outcomes were compared between the CEM-matched inpatient and outpatients ACDF cohorts.ResultsUpon CEM-matching (L1-statistic <0.001), the outpatient cohort (n = 2610, 25.13%) demonstrated significantly lower rates of any complication (p < 0.001), minor complications (p = 0.001), urinary tract infections (p = 0.029), blood transfusions (p < 0.001), major complications (p < 0.001), deep incisional surgical site infections (p = 0.017), ventilator dependence (p = 0.027), cardiac arrest (p = 0.028), unplanned reoperations (p = 0.001), and mortality (p = 0.006) in the 30-day postoperative period when compared to inpatient controls (n = 7774, 74.87%).ConclusionACDF has been a target amongst spinal procedures as a prime candidate for outpatient surgery. However, no previous reports have described complication rates and perioperative parameters in the sub-population of outpatient ACDF patients with myelopathy. In addition to shorter times from admission to operating room, operative time, and LOS, our study also demonstrated lower rates of major and overall complications in outpatient ACDF's for myelopathy in comparison to their inpatient counterparts. Performing ACDF's for myelopathy in an outpatient setting may help to curb costs, improve outcomes, and serve as a valuable learning resource for graduate medical education with rapid turnovers and shorter operative times.
| S-EPMC7920123 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) has emerged as an alternative to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for the treatment of cervical pathologies. Studies are on-going to assess the long term outcomes of CDA. This study assessed the safety and efficacy of the Prestige(®) LP Disc at 84-months follow up. METHODS:Prospective data from 280 CDA patients with single-level cervical disc disease with radiculopathy or myelopathy were compared with 265 historical control ACDF patients. Clinical and radiographic follow up was completed pre-operatively, intraoperatively, and at intervals up to 84 months. RESULTS:Follow-up rate was 75.9% for CDA and 70.0% for ACDF patients. Statistical improvements (p < 0.001) in Neck Disability Index (NDI), neck/arm pain, and SF-36 were achieved by 1.5 months in both groups and maintained through 84 months. At 84 months, 86.1% of CDA versus 80.1% of ACDF patients achieved NDI success, (?15-point improvement over baseline). Mean NDI score improvements exceeded 30 points in both groups. SF-36 PCS/MCS mean improvements were 13.1±11.9/8.2±12.3 points for CDA and 10.7±11.8/8.3±13.6 points for ACDF. Neurological success was 92.8% for CDA and 79.7% for ACDF patients. The rate of Overall Success was 74.9% for CDA and 63.2% for ACDF. At 84 months, 17.5% of CDA and 16.6% of ACDF patients had a possibly implant- or implant-surgical procedure-related adverse event. Eighteen (6.4%) CDA and 29 (10.9%) ACDF patients had a second surgery at the index level. In CDA patients, mean angular motion at the target level was maintained at 24 (7.5°) and 84 (6.9°) months. Bridging bone was reported in 5.9%/9.5%/10.2%/13.0% of CDA patients at 24/36/60/84 months. Change in mean preoperative angulation of the adjacent segment above/below the index level was1.06±4.39/1.25±4.06 for CDA and (-0.23)±5.37/1.25±5.07 for ACDF patients. At 84 months, 90.9% of CDA and 85.6% of ACDF patients were satisfied with the results of their treatment. CONCLUSIONS:Prestige LP maintained significantly improved clinical outcomes and segmental motion; statistical superiority of CDA was concluded for overall success. This investigational device exemption study was sponsored by Medtronic Spinal and Biologics, Memphis, TN. Study approved by the Hughston Sports Medicine Center Institutional Review Board on January 7, 2005. Clinical trial registered at clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00667459. All participants signed an informed consent.
| S-EPMC4943164 | biostudies-literature
Project description:STUDY DESIGN:Systemic review and meta-analysis. OBJECTIVES:To review and compare surgical outcomes for patients undergoing stand-alone anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) versus cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) for the treatment of cervical spine disease. METHODS:A systematic search was performed on PubMed, Medline, and the Cochrane Library. Comparative trials measuring outcomes of patients undergoing CDA and stand-alone ACDF for degenerative spine disease in the last 10 years were selected for inclusion. After data extraction and quality assessment, statistical analysis was performed with R software metafor package. The random-effects model was used if there was heterogeneity between studies; otherwise, the fixed-effects model was used. RESULTS:In total, 12 studies including 859 patients were selected for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Patients undergoing stand-alone ACDF had a statistically significant increase in postoperative segmental angles (mean difference 0.85° [95% confidence interval = 0.35° to 1.35°], P = .0008). Patients undergoing CDA had a decreased rate of developing adjacent segmental degeneration (risk ratio = 0.56 [95% confidence interval = -0.06 to 1.18], P = .0745). Neck Disability Index, Japanese Orthopedic Association score, Visual Analogue Scale of the arm and neck, as well as postoperative cervical angles were similar between the 2 treatments. CONCLUSIONS:When compared with CDA, stand-alone ACDF offers similar clinical outcomes for patients and leads to increased postoperative segmental angles. We encourage further blinded randomized trials to compare rates of adjacent segmental degeneration and other postoperative outcomes between these 2 treatments options.
| S-EPMC7645085 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveSymptomatic cervical disc disease (SCDD) is a common degenerative disease, and Discover artificial cervical disc, a new-generation nonconstrained artificial disk, has been developed and performed gradually to treat it. We performed this meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety between Discover cervical disc arthroplasty (DCDA) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for SCDD.MethodsAn exhaustive literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials that compared DCDA with ACDF for patients suffering SCDD. A random-effect model was used. Results were reported as standardized mean difference or risk ratio with 95% confidence interval.ResultsOf 33 articles identified, six studies were included. Compared with ACDF, DCDA demonstrated shorter operation time (P < 0.0001), and better range of motion (ROM) at the operative level (P < 0.00001). But no significant differences were observed in blood loss, neck disability index (NDI) scores, neck and arm pain scores, Japanese orthopaedic association (JOA) scores, secondary surgery procedures and adverse events (P > 0.05). Subgroup analyses did not demonstrated significant differences.ConclusionIn conclusion, DCDA presented shorter operation time, and better ROM at the operative level. However, no significant differences were observed in blood loss, NDI scores, neck and arm pain scores, JOA scores, secondary surgery procedures and adverse events between the two groups. Additionally, more studies of high quality with mid- to long-term follow-up are required in future.
| S-EPMC5373642 | biostudies-literature
Project description:STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. BACKGROUND: Several studies focus on the long-term results of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgeries, but little information exists regarding how various patient-related, procedure-related, and payer-related variables may affect postoperative hospital length of stay (LOS). OBJECTIVE: To determine what factors, if any, contribute to increased hospital LOS in patients who have had an ACDF. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of 108 consecutive patients who underwent elective ACDF at a Midwest academic medical center. Extensive preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data were abstracted and analyzed to identify prognostic factors for an increased LOS. Multivariate analysis was performed to analyze the effects of patient and hospital characteristics on hospital LOS. RESULTS: 103 patients met inclusion and exclusion criteria. The mean LOS for patients undergoing ACDF was 1.98 (±1.6) days. Only 29% of patients had one level fused. The mean blood loss during surgery was 87.4 ± 99.6 mL. One subject lost 700 mL of blood. Complications, though rare, included uncontrolled postoperative pain (13%), cardiac (6%), pulmonary (4%), and urinary (3%). Covariates included in the final model were age, sex, cardiac complication, urinary complication, and pulmonary complication. Factors that contributed to increased LOS and their associated adjusted mean days were: ≥50 years of age (2.5 ± 1.2 days), female gender (2.3 ± 1.2 days), and three particular types of complications. The complications that had the largest effect on increased LOS from least to most severe were cardiac (3.5 ± 1.3 days), urinary (4.7 ± 1.3 days), and pulmonary (5.3 ± 1.3 days). CONCLUSIONS: The information presented in this study may be useful for patients, clinicians, and insurance companies, including precertification and case-management services. Our results can be instrumental in designing future prospective studies using more detailed analyses with more patients, more surgeons, and multiple institutions. [Table: see text].
| S-EPMC3604758 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundAdult spinal deformity, especially sagittal imbalance, is affecting health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) scores. There is a lack of emphasis in the comparison of cervical sagittal parameters in patients with degenerative cervical spondylolisthesis and degenerative cervical kyphosis. The aim of study is to determine the preoperative and postoperative cervical sagittal parameters in myeloradiculopathic patients with degenerative cervical spondylolisthesis and degenerative cervical kyphosis treated by anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).MethodsA retrospective medical records and radiographic study of 30 adult patients were reviewed. Fifteen patients with degenerative cervical spondylolisthesis and 15 patients with degenerative cervical kyphosis have been performed ACDF from 2010-2020. We measured the preoperative and postoperative cervical sagittal parameters: C0-C2 angle, C1-C2 angle, C2-C7 angle, C2-C7 sagittal vertical axis (SVA), T1 slope, neck tilt angle and thoracic inlet angle. Minimum follow-up period was at least 2 years.ResultsPatients in degenerative cervical kyphosis group have C2-C7 angle less than degenerative cervical spondylolisthesis group (-14.88±7.32 vs. 9.60±13.60), leading to increase the mismatch between T1 slope and C2-C7 angle in kyphotic group and hyperlordosis of C0-C2 angle and C1-C2 angle (31.13±7.68, 37.88±5.08) compare with spondylolisthesis group (13±10.20, 24.60±10.70). Whereas patients with degenerative cervical spondylolisthesis have C2-C7 SVA (33.22±13.92) more than kyphosis group (13.70±13.60). After surgery, there is significant increase of the C2-C7 angle in the kyphosis group compare before and after surgery (-14.88±7.32 vs. 4.10±11.80). While the spondylolisthesis group has no significantly different parameters compare to before surgery. However, the postoperative cervical sagittal parameters of all patients are within the normal thresholds (T1-Slope minus C2-C7 lordosis <15° and C2-C7 SVA <40 mm).ConclusionsThe study demonstrates the difference of sagittal parameters between degenerative cervical spondylolisthesis and kyphosis before and after surgery. ACDF not only provides neural decompressive procedure, but also corrects the regional cervical sagittal parameters.
| S-EPMC10982916 | biostudies-literature