The object of this study is to compare radiographic outcomes of anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) versus cervical disc replacement using the Bryan Cervical Disc Prosthesis (Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Memphis, TN) in terms of range of motion (ROM), Functional spinal unit (FSU), overall sagittal alignment (C2-C7), anterior intervertebral height (AIH), posterior intervertebral height (PIH) and radiographic changes at the implanted and adjacent levels. The study consisted of 105 patients. A total of 63 Bryan disc were placed in 51 patients. A single level procedure was performed in 39 patients and a two-level procedure in the other 12. Fifty-four patients underwent ACDF, 26 single level cases and 28 double level cases. The Bryan group had a mean follow-up 19 months (12-38). Mean follow-up for the ACDF group was 20 months (12-40 months). All patients were evaluated using static and dynamic cervical spine radiographs as well as MR imaging. All patients underwent anterior cervical discectomy followed by autogenous bone graft with plate (or implantation of a cage) or the Bryan artificial disc prosthesis. Clinical evaluation included the visual analogue scale (VAS), and neck disability index (NDI). Radiographic evaluation included static and dynamic flexion-extension radiographs using the computer software (Infinitt PiviewSTAR 5051) program. ROM, disc space angle, intervertebral height were measured at the operative site and adjacent levels. FSU and overall sagittal alignment (C2-C7) were also measured pre-operatively, postoperatively and at final follow-up. Radiological change was analyzed using chi(2) test (95% confidence interval). Other data were analyzed using the mixed model (SAS enterprises guide 4.1 versions). There was clinical improvement within each group in terms of VAS and NDI scores from pre-op to final follow-up but not significantly between the two groups for both single (VAS p=0.8371, NDI p=0.2872) and double (VAS p=0.2938, NDI p=0.6753) level surgeries. Overall, ROM and intervertebral height was relatively well maintained during the follow-up in the Bryan group compared to ACDF. Regardless of the number of levels operated on, significant differences were noted for overall ROM of the cervical spine (p<0.0001) and all other levels except at the upper adjacent level for single level surgeries (p=0.2872). Statistically significant (p<0.0001 and p=0.0172) differences in the trend of intervertebral height measurements between the two groups were noted at all levels except for the AIH of single level surgeries at the upper (p=0.1264) and lower (p=0.7598) adjacent levels as well as PIH for double level surgeries at the upper (p=0.8363) adjacent level. Radiological change was 3.5 times more observed for the ACDF group. Clinical status of both groups, regardless of the number of levels, showed improvement. Although clinical outcomes between the two groups were not significantly different at final follow-up, radiographic parameters, namely ROM and intervertebral heights at the operated site, some adja...
The object of this study is to review the early clinical results and radiographic outcomes following insertion of the Bryan Cervical Disc Prosthesis (Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Memphis, TN), together with its effect on maintaining sagittal alignment of the functional spinal unit (FSU) and overall sagittal balance of the cervical spine for the treatment of single-level or two-level symptomatic disc disease. Forty-seven patients with symptomatic single or two-level cervical disc disease who received the Bryan Cervical Artificial Disc were reviewed prospectively. A total of 55 Bryan disc were placed in 47 patients. A single-level procedure was performed in 39 patients and a two-level procedure in the other eight. Radiographic and clinical assessments were made preoperatively and at 1.5, 3, 6, 9, 12, and 18 and up to 33 months postoperatively. Mean follow-up duration was 24 months, ranging from 13 to 33 months. Periods were categorized as early follow up (1.5-3 months) and late follow up (6-33 months). The visual analogue scale (VAS), neck disability index(NDI), Odom's criteria were used to assess pain and clinical outcomes. Static and dynamic radiographs were measured by hand and computer to determine the range of motion (ROM), the angle of the functional segmental unit (FSU), and the overall cervical alignment (C2-7 Cobb angle). With all of these data, we evaluated the change of the preoperative lordosis (or kyphosis) of the FSU and Overall sagittal balance of the cervical spine during the follow-up period. There was a statistically significant improvement in the VAS score from 7.0 +/- 2.6 to 2.0 +/- 1.5 (paired-t test, P = 0.000), and in the NDI from 21.5 +/- 5.5 to 4.5 +/- 3.9 (paired-t test P = 0.000). All of the patients were satisfied with the surgical results by Odom's criteria. The postoperative ROM of the implanted level was preserved without significant difference from preoperative ROM of the operated level. Only 36% of patients with a preoperative lordotic sagittal orientation of the FSU were able to maintain lordosis following surgery. However, the overall sagittal alignment of the cervical spine was preserved in 86% of cases at the final follow up. Interestingly, preoperatively kyphotic FSU resulted in lordotic FSU in 13% of patients during the late follow-up, and preoperatively kyphotic overall cervical alignment resulted in lordosis in 33% of the patients postoperatively. Clinical results are encouraging, with significant improvement seen in the Bryan Cervical Artificial disc. The Bryan disc preserves motion of the FSU. Although the preoperative lordosis (or kyphosis) of the FSU could not always be maintained during the follow-up period, the overall sagittal balance of the cervical spine was usually preserved.
Purpose The management of cervical facet dislocation injuries remains controversial. The main purpose of this investigation was to identify whether a surgeon's geographic location or years in practice influences their preferred management of traumatic cervical facet dislocation injuries. Methods A survey was sent to 272 AO Spine members across all geographic regions and with a variety of practice experience. The survey included clinical case scenarios of cervical facet dislocation injuries and asked responders to select preferences among various diagnostic and management options. Results A total of 189 complete responses were received. Over 50% of responding surgeons in each region elected to initiate management of cervical facet dislocation injuries with an MRI, with 6 case exceptions. Overall, there was considerable agreement between American and European responders regarding management of these injuries, with only 3 cases exhibiting a significant difference. Additionally, results also exhibited considerable management agreement between those with ≤ 10 and > 10 years of practice experience, with only 2 case exceptions noted. Conclusion More than half of responders, regardless of geographical location or practice experience, identified MRI as a screening imaging modality when managing cervical facet dislocation injuries, regardless of the status of the spinal cord and prior to any additional intervention. Additionally, a majority of surgeons would elect an anterior approach for the surgical management of these injuries. The study found overall agreement in management preferences of cervical facet dislocation injuries around the globe.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.