Cervical spinal interbody fusion with Kiel bone

Abstract

Experience with the use of the Kiel bone graft in anterior cervical interbody fusion in cervical spondylosis is reported. The survey reviews the results of operations on 73 disc spaces in 65 consecutive patients, from 2 to 5 years after the operation. We have failed to confirm that any bony fusion in the true sense occurs with Kiel bone in anterior cervical interbody fusion. However, the aims of the operations are achieved, namely removal of the disc and osteophyte, fixation of the spine to prevent compression of the neural tissues, distraction of the adjacent vertebral bodies providing increased room in the intervertebral foramina and stability of the spine.

Clinical, radiological and histological study of the failure of cervical interbody fusions with bone substitutes

“…Moreover, the patient experienced severe neck pain. These results did not coincide with previous reports, in which satisfied clinical results and stable cervical segments were achieved despite fibrous fusion in anterior cervical spine with bovine bone [18,23]. Although a plate was employed in this case, which provided immediate instability, and bovine bone had a similar structure as human cancellous bone, the fusion failure still occurred.…”

Poor results after augmenting autograft with xenograft (Surgibone) in hip revision surgery

“…However, in the Ramani et al (1975) series of Clowards fusions, 2 of 73 Surgibone dowels had to be removed because of infection. The pus in these cases was sterile, raising the possibility of a foreign body reaction.…”

Bone graft substitutes in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion

“…The medical literature regarding xenograft, which is solely osteoconductive, is incongruous. On the whole, clinical results appear to be satisfactory at least, with many authors presenting favourable data, albeit with varying accounts of complications [52,57,71,78,88,94,95]. Savolainen et al compared xenograft with autograft in 250 cervical fusions and found no significant difference in fusion rates (both 98%) or angulation deformity between the two [78].…”

“…Ramani et al noted a 'halo' appearance encaging the graft on imaging in all 65 patients on follow-up and interpreted this as fibrous tissue, but this had no clinical manifestation [71]. Similarly, Sutter et al acknowledged the appearance of a halo, but concluded that it had no clinical significance with xenograft yielding comparable results to autograft in the literature [94].…”