OBJECTIVEMinimally invasive posterior cervical decompression (miPCD) has been described in several case series with promising preliminary results. The object of the current study was to compare the clinical outcomes between patients undergoing miPCD with anterior cervical discectomy and instrumented fusion (ACDFi).METHODSA retrospective study of 74 patients undergoing surgery (45 using miPCD and 29 using ACDFi) for myelopathy was performed. Outcomes were categorized into short-term, intermediate, and long-term follow-up, corresponding to averages of 1.7, 7.7, and 30.9 months, respectively. Mean scores for the Neck Disability Index (NDI), neck visual analog scale (VAS) score, SF-12 Physical Component Summary (PCS), and SF-12 Mental Component Summary (MCS) were compared for each follow-up period. The percentage of patients meeting substantial clinical benefit (SCB) was also compared for each outcome measure.RESULTSBaseline patient characteristics were well-matched, with the exception that patients undergoing miPCD were older (mean age 57.6 ± 10.0 years [miPCD] vs 51.1 ± 9.2 years [ACDFi]; p = 0.006) and underwent surgery at more levels (mean 2.8 ± 0.9 levels [miPCD] vs 1.5 ± 0.7 levels [ACDFi]; p < 0.0001) while the ACDFi patients reported higher preoperative neck VAS scores (mean 3.8 ± 3.0 [miPCD] vs 5.4 ± 2.6 [ACDFi]; p = 0.047). The mean PCS, NDI, neck VAS, and MCS scores were not significantly different with the exception of the MCS score at the short-term follow-up period (mean 46.8 ± 10.6 [miPCD] vs 41.3 ± 10.7 [ACDFi]; p = 0.033). The percentage of patients reporting SCB based on thresholds derived for PCS, NDI, neck VAS, and MCS scores were not significantly different, with the exception of the PCS score at the intermediate follow-up period (52% [miPCD] vs 80% [ACDFi]; p = 0.011).CONCLUSIONSThe current report suggests that the optimal surgical strategy in patients requiring dorsal surgery may be enhanced by the adoption of a minimally invasive surgical approach that appears to result in similar clinical outcomes when compared with a well-accepted strategy of ventral decompression and instrumented fusion. The current results suggest that future comparative effectiveness studies are warranted as the miPCD technique avoids instrumented fusion.
A retrospective study of thirteen patients undergoing 5-level anterior spinal surgery for cervical myelopathy.Objective: While limited literature exists in reviewing the treatment of high cervical pathology extending caudally, we believe long segment surgery beginning at C2-3 can be accomplished with good success and is an option more patients may benefit from. We aim to describe the technique in accessing the C2-C3 disk space and efficacy of treating multilevel disease beginning at the C2 vertebral body. This includes an extensive technical report and surgical pearls.Summary of Background Data: Compression at the level of C2 can be daunting to access because of steep approach required. Few studies have described the technique in reaching the C2 level, with less information describing the efficacy of a 5-level anterior fusion starting at C2. Methods: Patients who underwent surgery between 2000 and 2016 were identified utilizing the department billing database and ICD codes. Patients age, operative indications, levels treated, length of hospital stay, fusion outcome, and operative complications were explored. Independent analysis of fusion was performed.
Results:The average length of hospital stay was 3.9 days. Eight patients reported significant improvement of hand weakness, numbness, and/or gait at 6 months follow-up. The most frequent complication was dysphagia (23%). One patient experienced recurrent symptoms secondary to nonunion, and another patient suffered a postoperative neurological worsening because of anterior spinal artery syndrome.
Conclusion:This retrospective review discusses the technique to visualize and fully decompress C2-C3 spinal segments. In addition, we explored the efficacy and perioperative risk in long segment anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.
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.