Background:  Cervical spine stenosis is one of the most common degenerative changes of cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) and results in severe dysfunction of the cervical spinal cord. The conventional treatment of such degenerative cervical spine conditions is anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Strut graft remains the gold standard in ACDF with excellent patient recovery but has many shortcomings. Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages have recently become popular as a replacement for strut grafts in patients undergoing ACDF. Objective:  This study was carried out to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of autologous bone grafts versus PEEK cages in patients undergoing ACDF surgery. Materials and Methods:  It was a randomized controlled trial conducted at the Neurosurgery Department Punjab Institute of Neurosciences for three years. Patients who consented to be a part of this study and fulfilled our predefined inclusion criteria were recruited and randomized into 2 groups. One group underwent ACDF with auto bone graft whereas the other group underwent ACDF with PEEK cage. Results:  A total of 198 subjects were included in this study. The mean age was calculated as 47.60 ± 9.17 years in the PEEK cage group and 46.74 ± 8.87 years in the Autologous bone graft group. Males accounted for 59.6% of the study population.  The fusion rate was found to be higher in the PEEK cage group with a p-value of 0.002. Conclusion:  PEEK cages are superior to strut grafts as they have lesser morbidity after ACDF surgery in patients with CSM.

Objective:  To determine the chances of adjacent segment disease (ASD) and risk factors after posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). Material and Methods: 110 patients of both genders with degenerative lumbar instability at L4/5 level were included in my study. We did PLIF in all our patients and followed our patients for one year. The following parameters were measured: the degree of lumbar lordosis, the degree lumbosacral angle, the disc space height and their dynamic angulation and the displacement of L3 over L4. We checked the outcome with the help of the Japanese orthopedic association (JOA) and Oswestry disability index (ODI). We divided the patients into groups A and B; group A includes patients with progression of degeneration at the proximal level (L3-L4), while group B with no progression of disease at proximal level. Results:  The 86 patients (78.18%) were in group A, and 24 patients (21.88%) were in group B. There were no significant difference in radiological parameters of both groups; lumbosacral angle of lordosis, L3 laminar inclination angle, preoperative degenerative changes at proximal level, L4–L5 lordosis and BMD before surgery. The clinically and statistically significant differenceswere of the age of the patients falling in two groups. We found that at the completion of study ODI and JOA were not significantly different in both groups (P >0.05). Conclusion:  Degenerative lumbar disease is an age related disease with no significant effect of radiological degenerations on the final outcome of our patients.No other possible risk factor has a significant effect on outcome.

Objective: To see outcome, accuracy and expected complications in passing lateral mass screws in patients with cervical spine injury, degenerative disease at the cervical spine level and neoplastic lesions. Materials and Methods: In this study, 35 patients were included and 205 screws passed in lateral mass patients'age ranged from 12-70 years (25 males and 10 females) with trauma to the cervical spine, degenerative disease at the cervical spine level and Intradural extramedullary benigntumors and extradural malignant neoplasm.Patients less than 12 years and more than 65 years of age,patients with traumatic ruptured disc causingspinal cord compression anteriorly and operated for cervical spine were excluded from our study.In all patients,we did lateral mass fixation with polyaxial screws and rods under fluoroscopic assistance.For assessment of screws trajectory and position, CT scan cervical spine with 3D reconstruction was performed on a first post op day to confirm screw orientation and direction and for fascet, foraminal, foramen transversarium violations. Results: All screws were passed by using Megrel's trajectories. Not a single patient had nerve root, cord injury nor vertebral artery injury. One patient had screw pullouts requiring reoperation.12 to 14mm size screws were used under fluoro guidance. On postoperative CT cervical spine with 3D reconstruction shows no breach or violations of any foramen transversarium, nerve root injury or neural foramen penetration by screws. In all patients polyaxial screw/rod construct was used. Two patients had complications; one patient adjacent-level disc herniation for which anterior surgery was done and 2nd patient there were still compression over the spinal cord for which laminectomy extended to that level. Conclusion: Cervical spine lateral mass fixation with polyaxial screws is a safe and effective technique in expert hands under fluoroscopic assistance.