Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus posterior cervical foraminotomy in the treatment of brachialgia: the Leeds spinal unit experience (2008-2013)

Comparison of anterior spinal fusion and posterior cervical foraminotomy for cervical spondylotic radiculopathy in terms of postoperative recovery of upper-limb motor deficits

This study compared postoperative motor recovery between anterior spinal fusion (ASF) and posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF) in patients with cervical spondylotic radiculopathy (CSR) who had motor deficits. From a database maintained by surgeons across 27 institutions, 227 patients undergoing primary ASF or PCF for CSR without myelopathy were evaluated. Among these, 106 patients with upper-limb motor deficits (manual muscle testing [MMT] grade 0-3) were observed for at least 12 months post-surgery. Data on preoperative and postoperative MMT grades were collected at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery and at the final follow-up. The recovery of motor function was compared between the ASF and PCF groups using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression analysis. While the overall excellent recovery rates (MMT grade ≥ 2) at the final follow-up were similar between the ASF and PCF group (74 % vs. 86 %, p = 0.15), the PCF group showed significantly faster motor recovery at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively, with recovery rates of 43 %, 63 %, and 82 %, respectively, compared to 18 %, 46 %, and 54 % in the ASF group (HR = 1.62, p = 0.031). These findings suggest that PCF may offer a quicker recovery of motor function and could be a more suitable surgical procedure than ASF for patients with CSR and motor deficits.

Rapid qualitative analysis of recruitment obstacles in the FORVAD (Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy surgery versus Anterior Cervical Discectomy surgery in the treatment of cervical brachialgia) randomised, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The number of surgical trials is increasing but such trials can be complex to deliver and pose specific challenges. A multi-centre, Phase III, RCT comparing Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy versus Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion in the Treatment of Cervical Brachialgia (FORVAD Trial) was unable to recruit to target. A rapid qualitative study was conducted during trial closedown to understand the experiences of healthcare professionals who participated in the FORVAD Trial, with the aim of informing future research in this area.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 18 healthcare professionals who had participated in the FORVAD Trial. Interviews explored participants' experiences of the FORVAD trial. A rapid qualitative analysis was conducted, informed by Normalisation Process Theory.

RESULTS

Four main themes were generated in the data analysis: (1) individual vs. community equipoise; (2) trial set-up and delivery; (3) identifying and approaching patients; and (4) timing of randomisation. The objectives of the FORVAD trial made sense to participants and they supported the idea that there was clinical or collective equipoise regarding the two FORVAD interventions; however, many surgeons had treatment preferences and lacked individual equipoise. The site which had most recruitment success had adopted a more structured process for identification and recruitment of patients, whereas other sites that adopted more "ad hoc" screening strategies struggled to identify patients. Randomisation on the day of surgery caused both medico-legal and practical concerns at some sites.

CONCLUSIONS

Organisation and implementation of a surgical trial in neurosurgery is complex and presents many challenges. Sites often reported low recruitment and discussed the logistical issues of conducting a complex surgical RCT. Future trials in neurosurgery may need to offer more flexibility and time during set-up to maximise opportunities for larger recruitment numbers. Rapid qualitative analysis informed by Normalisation Process Theory was able to quickly identify key issues with trial implementation so rapid qualitative analysis may be a useful approach for teams conducting qualitative research in trials.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN, ISRCTN reference: 10,133,661. Registered 23rd November 2018.

Clinical and cost-effectiveness of PCF versus ACD in the treatment of cervical brachialgia (FORVAD trial)

BACKGROUND

Cervical radiculopathy occurs when a nerve root is compressed in the spine, if symptoms fail to resolve after 6 weeks surgery may be indicated. Anterior Cervical Discectomy (ACD) is the commonest procedure, Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy (PCF) is an alternative that avoids the risk of damage to anterior neck structures. This prospective, Phase III, UK multicentre, open, individually randomised controlled trial was performed to determine whether PCF is superior to ACD in terms of improving clinical outcome as measured by the Neck Disability Index (NDI) 52 weeks post-surgery.

METHOD

Following consent to participate and collection of baseline data, subjects with cervical brachialgia were randomised to ACD or PCF in a 1:1 ratio on the day of surgery. Clinical outcomes were assessed on day 1 and patient reported outcomes on day 1 and weeks 6, 12, 26, 39 and 52 post-operation. A total of 252 participants were planned to be randomised. Statistical analysis was limited to descriptive statistics. Health economic outcomes were also described.

RESULTS

The trial was closed early (n = 23). Compared to baseline, the median (interquartile range (IQR)) NDI score at 52 weeks reduced from 44.0 (36.0, 62.0) to 25.3 (20.0, 42.0) in the PCF group and increased from 35.6 (34.0, 44.0) to 45.0 (20.0, 57.0) in the ACD group. ACD may be associated with more swallowing, voice and other complications and was more expensive; neck and arm pain scores were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

The trial was closed early, therefore no definitive conclusions on clinical or cost-effectiveness could be made.

Degenerative Cervical Disc Herniation: Prevalence of Affected Cervical Level in a Hispanic Population in Puerto Rico

BACKGROUND

In the literature, degenerative cervical disc herniation is considered to occur more frequently at the C5-C6 and C6-C7 levels. This study aimed to evaluate the operated cervical level prevalence among patients with degenerative cervical disc herniation in a Hispanic Puerto Rico population.

METHODS

The University of Puerto Rico Neurosurgery database was used to identify patients who underwent anterior cervical discectomy for degenerative cervical disc herniation during a 15-year period from January 1, 2006 until December 31, 2020. Operated cervical levels for each patient were analyzed.

RESULTS

During the study period, 409 patients were operated on for degenerative cervical disc herniation. Two hundred-eight patients (50.8%) had disc herniations at more than 1 cervical level for 663 treated levels. The most prevalent cervical levels in this Hispanic population were C5-C6 (34.8%) and C4-C5 (28.1%). The C6-C7 level was involved in 18.9% of the operated levels, and the C3-C4 level in 17.3%. The C7-T1 level was involved in only 0.6% of the operated levels, and the C2-3 level in 0.3%. The cohort included 51.3% of men and 48.7% of women, with a men-to-women ratio of 1.05:1. The median age of females was 56.5 (range 26-82) and 59.0 (range 31-85) for males. Operated cervical discs were most common between the ages of 48 and 66 years for either sex.

CONCLUSIONS

In a Hispanic Puerto Rico population, the most prevalent operated degenerative cervical disc levels were C5-C6 and C4-C5.

Posterior cervical foraminotomy versus anterior cervical discectomy for Cervical Brachialgia: the FORVAD RCT

Background

Posterior cervical foraminotomy and anterior cervical discectomy are routinely used operations to treat cervical brachialgia, although definitive evidence supporting superiority of either is lacking.

Objective

The primary objective was to investigate whether or not posterior cervical foraminotomy is superior to anterior cervical discectomy in improving clinical outcome.

Design

This was a Phase III, unblinded, prospective, United Kingdom multicentre, parallel-group, individually randomised controlled superiority trial comparing posterior cervical foraminotomy with anterior cervical discectomy. A rapid qualitative study was conducted during the close-down phase, involving remote semistructured interviews with trial participants and health-care professionals.

Setting

National Health Service trusts.

Participants

Patients with symptomatic unilateral cervical brachialgia for at least 6 weeks.

Interventions

Participants were randomised to receive posterior cervical foraminotomy or anterior cervical discectomy. Allocation was not blinded to participants, medical staff or trial staff. Health-care use from providing the initial surgical intervention to hospital discharge was measured and valued using national cost data.

Main outcome measures

The primary outcome measure was clinical outcome, as measured by patient-reported Neck Disability Index score 52 weeks post operation. Secondary outcome measures included complications, reoperations and restricted American Spinal Injury Association score over 6 weeks post operation, and patient-reported Eating Assessment Tool-10 items, Glasgow-Edinburgh Throat Scale, Voice Handicap Index-10 items, PainDETECT and Numerical Rating Scales for neck and upper-limb pain over 52 weeks post operation.

Results

The target recruitment was 252 participants. Owing to slow accrual, the trial closed after randomising 23 participants from 11 hospitals. The qualitative substudy found that there was support and enthusiasm for the posterior cervical FORaminotomy Versus Anterior cervical Discectomy in the treatment of cervical brachialgia trial and randomised clinical trials in this area. However, clinical equipoise appears to have been an issue for sites and individual surgeons. Randomisation on the day of surgery and processes for screening and approaching participants were also crucial factors in some centres. The median Neck Disability Index scores at baseline (pre surgery) and at 52 weeks was 44.0 (interquartile range 36.0-62.0 weeks) and 25.3 weeks (interquartile range 20.0-42.0 weeks), respectively, in the posterior cervical foraminotomy group (n = 14), and 35.6 weeks (interquartile range 34.0-44.0 weeks) and 45.0 weeks (interquartile range 20.0-57.0 weeks), respectively, in the anterior cervical discectomy group (n = 9). Scores appeared to reduce (i.e. improve) in the posterior cervical foraminotomy group, but not in the anterior cervical discectomy group. The median Eating Assessment Tool-10 items score for swallowing was higher (worse) after anterior cervical discectomy (13.5) than after posterior cervical foraminotomy (0) on day 1, but not at other time points, whereas the median Glasgow-Edinburgh Throat Scale score for globus was higher (worse) after anterior cervical discectomy (15, 7, 6, 6, 2, 2.5) than after posterior cervical foraminotomy (3, 0, 0, 0.5, 0, 0) at all postoperative time points. Five postoperative complications occurred within 6 weeks of surgery, all after anterior cervical discectomy. Neck pain was more severe on day 1 following posterior cervical foraminotomy (Numerical Rating Scale - Neck Pain score 8.5) than at the same time point after anterior cervical discectomy (Numerical Rating Scale - Neck Pain score 7.0). The median health-care costs of providing initial surgical intervention were £2610 for posterior cervical foraminotomy and £4411 for anterior cervical discectomy.

Conclusions

The data suggest that posterior cervical foraminotomy is associated with better outcomes, fewer complications and lower costs, but the trial recruited slowly and closed early. Consequently, the trial is underpowered and definitive conclusions cannot be drawn. Recruitment was impaired by lack of individual equipoise and by concern about randomising on the day of surgery. A large prospective multicentre trial comparing anterior cervical discectomy and posterior cervical foraminotomy in the treatment of cervical brachialgia is still required.

Trial registration

This trial is registered as ISRCTN10133661.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 21. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Comparison of the Outcomes of Microendoscopic Cervical Foraminotomy versus Full-endoscopic Cervical Foraminotomy for the Treatment of Cervical Radiculopathy

This study aimed to compare the outcomes of microendoscopic cervical foraminotomy (MECF) versus full-endoscopic cervical foraminotomy (FECF) for treating cervical radiculopathy (CR).A retrospective study was performed on patients with CR treated using MECF (n = 35) or FECF (n = 89). A 16-mm tubular retractor and endoscope was used for MECF, while a 4.1-mm working channel endoscope was used for FECF. Patient background and operative data were collected. The numerical rating scale (NRS) and the Neck Disability Index scores were recorded preoperatively and at 1 year postoperatively. Postoperative subjective satisfaction was also assessed.Although the NRS, and NDI scores, as well as postoperative satisfaction at 1 year considerably improved in both groups, one of the background data (number of operated vertebral level) was significantly different. Therefore, we separately analyzed single- and two-level CR. In single-level CR, operation time, intraoperative bleeding, postoperative stay, NDI after 1 year, and reoperation rate were statistically superior in FECF group. In two-level CR, the postoperative stay was statistically superior in FECF group. Three postoperative hematomas were observed in the MECF group, while none was observed in the FECF group.Operative outcomes did not significantly differ between groups. We did not observe postoperative hematoma in FECF even without placement of a postoperative drain. Therefore, we recommend FECF as the first option for the treatment of CR as it has a better safety profile and is minimally invasive.

Comparison of Single-level Cervical Radiculopathy Outcomes Between Posterior Endoscopic Cervical Decompression and Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: Mid-term Results

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the mid-term results and technical possibilities of posterior endoscopic cervical decompression (PECD) in the treatment of cervical radiculopathy.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

PECD has been used in the treatment of cervical radiculopathy for the past decades; there is a paucity of studies directly comparing its outcomes with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for patients with single-level cervical radiculopathy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From January 2016 to December 2018, clinical and radiologic data of 42 patients were collected. Patients were followed for a mean of 40.6 months (range: 30-54 mo) after surgery. Changes in cervical lordosis and degeneration of adjacent segments were analyzed. Dysphagia was assessed using the Bazaz score, and clinical outcomes were analyzed using the Neck Disability Index and visual analog scoring system.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in neurological outcomes between the two groups. Significant between-group differences in postoperative dysphagia were observed ( P < 0.05). There were significant differences in postoperative segmental Cobb angles and disc height between the two groups ( P < 0.05). Degenerative changes in the adjacent segments occurred in 5 patients in the ACDF group and 1 patient in the PECD group ( P < 0.05); no revision surgery was needed.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical outcomes of PECD for patients with unilateral radiculopathy were satisfactory. On the premise of a strict selection of indications, we consider this technique to be a safe supplement and alternative to ACDF for patients with unilateral cervical radiculopathy. Longer follow-up periods are required to confirm these observations.

Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of a Comparative Study of Anterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion with Partial Pediculotomy, Partial Vertebrotomy (PPPV) Posterior Endoscopic Cervical Decompression (PECD) for Cervical Foraminal Pathology

Background and Objectives: The purpose was to compaSre medium-term clinical and radiological outcomes of Partial Pediculotomy, Partial Vertebrotomy (PPPV) Posterior Endoscopic Cervical Decompression (PECD) surgery versus Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) for patients with cervical disc herniations and foraminal pathologies. Materials and Methods: A prospective registry of patients who had undergone either PPPV PECD surgery or ACDF surgery for cervical disc herniation or foraminal pathologies under a single fellowship-trained spine surgeon was performed. The baseline characteristics and operative details including complications were recorded for all included patients. The clinical outcomes evaluated include VAS, MJOA, motor score, and NDI and MacNab's score. The radiological parameters in neutral-measured facet length, facet area, disc height, C2-C7 angle, neck tilt angle, T1 slope and thoracic inlet angle were also evaluated. Results: A total of 55 patients (29 PPPV PECD, 26 ACDF) were included, with mean follow-up periods of 21.9 and 32.3 months, respectively. Each cohort was noted to have a single case of surgical complication. Statistically significant changes of facet area (49.05 ± 14.50%) and facet length (52.71 ± 15.11%) were noted in the PPPV PECD group. At neutral alignment of the neck on a lateral X-ray, compared to ACDF, PPPV PECD had a statistically significant change in neck tilt angle (-11.68 ± 17.35°) and T1 slope angle (-11.69 ± 19.58°). Whilst both PPPV PECD and ACDF had significant improvements in VAS, MJOA and NDI postoperatively, PPPV PECD was found to be superior across all above scores at various follow-up timepoints compared to its ACDF counterparts. Conclusions: PPPV PECD surgery achieved a satisfactory radiological correction of neck alignment and significantly improved clinical outcomes at medium-term follow-up for our cohort of patients, highlighting its feasibility in treating patients with cervical disc herniations and foraminal pathologies.

Combined cervical laminoplasty and foraminotomy for coexistence of cervical myelopathy and unilateral radiculopathy: case series and preliminary results

BACKGROUND

The clinical outcomes and radiographic changes of a one-stage procedure combining cervical laminoplasty and unilateral cervical foraminotomy for patients with coexisting cervical myelopathy and unilateral radiculopathy were evaluated.

METHODS

Seven patients (two females and five males) with coexisting cervical myelopathy and unilateral cervical radiculopathy were included in this study. The mean age was 58.4 years (range 45-77 years). Cervical laminoplasty and unilateral cervical foraminotomy were performed on the recruited patients in a single stage. The quantitative clinical changes between the preoperative and 6-month postoperative assessment were analyzed using the Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score, the JOA Cervical Myelopathy Evaluation Questionnaire (JOA-CMEQ), visual analog scale (VAS), and Neck Disability Index (NDI). Moreover, the preoperative and 6-month postoperative radiographic changes were assessed using the C2-7 angle and range of motion (ROM) between flexion and extension angle.

RESULTS

There were significant differences in QOL in the JOA-CMEQ between the groups. Furthermore, the postoperative VAS values in the arms and hands generally improved, although not significantly, between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The aforementioned surgical procedure may be safe and efficient for patients with coexisting cervical myelopathy and radiculopathy.

Cervical Radiculopathy: Focus on Factors for Better Surgical Outcomes and Operative Techniques

For patients with cervical radiculopathy, most studies have recommended conservative treatment as the first-line treatment; however, when conventional treatment fails, surgery is considered. A better understanding of the prognosis of cervical radiculopathy is essential to provide accurate information to the patients. If the patients complain of persistent and recurrent arm pain/numbness not respond to conservative treatment, or exhibit neurologic deficits, surgery is performed using anterior or posterior approaches. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) has historically been widely used and has proven to be safe and effective. To improve surgical outcomes of ACDF surgery, many studies have been conducted on types of spacers, size/height/position of cages, anterior plating, patients' factors, surgical techniques, and so forth. Cervical disc replacement (CDR) is designed to reduce the incidence of adjacent segment disease during long-term follow-up by maintaining cervical spine motion postoperatively. Many studies on excellent indications for the CDR, proper type/size/shape/height of the implants, and surgical techniques were performed. Posterior cervical foraminotomy is a safe and effective surgical option to avoid complications associated with anterior approach and fusion surgery. Most recent literature demonstrated that all three surgical techniques for patients with cervical radiculopathy have clear advantages and disadvantages and reveal satisfactory surgical outcomes under a proper selection of patients and application of appropriate surgical methods. For this, it is important to fully understand the factors for better surgical outcomes and to adequately practice the operative techniques for patients with cervical radiculopathy.

Minimally invasive posterior cervical foraminotomy versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for cervical radiculopathy: a meta-analysis

With the recent development of minimally invasive techniques, minimally invasive posterior cervical foraminotomy (MIS-PCF) has become increasingly popular as a minimally invasive method to treat cervical radiculopathy. However, there are still controversies about whether MIS-PCF is superior to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). The purpose of this study is to evaluate the therapeutic effects of MIS-PCF and ACDF on unilateral cervical radiculopathy without myelopathy. We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Scopus comprehensively using the terms related to MIS-PCF. Two reviewers independently evaluated the potential studies, and extracted and analyzed the data of operation time, hospital stay, neck disability index (NDI) score, visual analog scale for neck pain (VAS-neck) and arm pain (VAS-arm) scores, reoperation rate, and complications. Seven studies with 1175 patients were included. The study population was 53.5% male, with a mean age of 48.9. MIS-PCF presented a significantly shorter postoperative hospitalization time compared to ACDF, while the operation time, complication/reoperation rate, and VAS-arm, VAS-neck, and NDI scores were comparable between the two cohorts. In North America, the average cost of MIS-PCF is lower than ACDF. Thus, we suggest that MIS-PCF is an alternative to ACDF for selected patients.

Minimally Invasive Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy Versus Anterior Cervical Fusion and Arthroplasty: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES

Patients with lateral cervical disc and foraminal pathology can be treated with anterior and posterior approaches including anterior cervical discectomy and fusion(ACDF), cervical total disc arthroplasty(TDA), and minimally invasive posterior cervical foraminotomy(MIS-PCF). Although MIS-PCF may have some advantages over the anterior approaches, few comparative studies and meta-analyses have been done to assess superiority.

METHODS

This study includes a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis of studies directly comparing minimally invasive posterior cervical foraminotomy to either anterior cervical discectomy and fusion or cervical total disc arthroplasty.

RESULTS

In comparing patients undergoing ACDF and MIS-PCF, operative time ranged from 68 to 97.8 minutes in the ACDF group compared to 28 to 93.9 minutes in the MIS-PCF group. Mean postoperative length of stay ranged from 33.84 to 112.8 hours in the ACDF group compared to 13.68 to 83.6 hours in the MIS-PCF group. The total complication rates were 3.72% in the ACDF group and 3.73% in the MIS-PCF group. A random-effects model meta-analysis was carried out which failed to show a statistically significant difference in the complication rate between the two procedures(OR .91; 95% CI 0.13, 6.43; P = .92, I² = 59%). The total reoperation rate was 3.5% in the ACDF group and 5.4% in the MIS-PCF group. A random-effects model meta-analysis was carried out which failed to show a statistically significant difference in the reoperation rate between the two procedures(OR .66; 95% CI 0.33, 1.33; P = .25, I² = 0). In comparing patients undergoing TDA and MIS-PCF, operative time ranged from 90.3 to 106.7 minutes in the TDA group compared to 77.4 to 93.9 minutes in the MIS-PCF group. Mean postoperative length of stay ranged from 103.2 to 165.6 hours in the TDA group and 93.6 to 98.4 hours in the MIS-PCF group. The complication rate ranged from 23.5 to 28.6% in the TDA group and 0 to 14.3% in the MIS-PCF group. The overall reoperation rates were 2.6% in the TDA group and 10.2% in the MIS-PCF group.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no clear superiority between MIS-PCF and ACDF/TDA in terms of operative time, postoperative length of stay, or rate of complications/reoperations. Further studies with increased follow-up intervals >48 months, and higher sample sizes are necessary to determine the true superiority of MIS-PCF and anterior neck approaches in treatment of lateral disc and foraminal pathology.

Comparative analysis of three types of minimally invasive posterior cervical foraminotomy for foraminal stenosis, uniportal endoscopy, biportal endoscopy, and microsurgery: Radiologic and mid-term clinical outcomes

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Fully endoscopic cervical spine surgery: What does the future hold?

Fully endoscopic cervical spine surgery is an emerging novel approach to address cervical spinal pathology. Techniques, both anterior and posterior have been adapted to address various cervical pathologies. The primary goal of these procedures like other open techniques is to surgically decompress the canal centrally and/or along the foramen. The narrative review aims to provide the reader an overview of the rapidly advancing field of endoscopic cervical spinal surgery and evaluate whether these newer approaches could potentially reduce the cost and the risk associated with instrumented cervical fusion.

Intraoperative image guidance for cervical spine surgery

Intraoperative image-guidance in spinal surgery has been influenced by various technological developments in imaging science since the early 1990s. The technology has evolved from simple fluoroscopic-based guidance to state-of-art intraoperative computed tomography (iCT)-based navigation systems. Although the intraoperative navigation is more commonly used in thoracolumbar spine surgery, this newer imaging platform has rapidly gained popularity in cervical approaches. The purpose of this manuscript is to address the applications of advanced image-guidance in cervical spine surgery and to describe the use of intraoperative neuro-navigation in surgical planning and execution. In this review, we aim to cover the following surgical techniques: anterior cervical approaches, atlanto-axial fixation, subaxial instrumentation, percutaneous interfacet cage implantation as well as minimally invasive posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF) and unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression. The currently available data suggested that the use of 3D navigation significantly reduces the screw malposition, operative time, mean blood loss, radiation exposure, and complication rates in comparison to the conventional fluoroscopic-guidance. With the advancements in technology and surgical techniques, 3D navigation has potential to replace conventional fluoroscopy completely.

Reprint of: Safe Route for Cervical Approach: Partial Pediculotomy, Partial Vertebrotomy Approach for Posterior Endoscopic Cervical Foraminotomy and Discectomy

BACKGROUND

Cervical radiculopathy is a common cervical spine condition. However, a paucity of data is available on the effect of partial pediculotomy and partial vertebrotomy (PPPV) for posterior endoscopic cervical foraminotomy (PECF) to treat cervical radiculopathy. We investigated the radiological and clinical outcomes of this approach.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective evaluation of 30 patients with cervical radiculopathy who had undergone PPPV PECF. Pre- and postoperative radiographs were performed to evaluate for stability, and computed tomography (CT) was used to evaluate the foraminal dimensions and area in the sagittal view. Three-dimensional reconstruction of the area of decompression was also performed. The clinical outcomes were evaluated using the visual analog scale, Oswestry disability index, and the MacNab criteria.

RESULTS

No complications or recurrence developed in our PPPV PECF cohort during the study period. At the preoperative, 1-week postoperative, 3-month postoperative, and final follow-up examinations, the mean visual analog scale scores and mean Oswestry disability index showed significant improvement (score, 7.6, 3.0, 2.1, and 1.7, respectively; P < 0.05; and score, 73.9, 28.1, 23.3, and 21.5, respectively; P < 0.05). All the patients scored good to excellent using the MacNab criteria. The radiological findings showed that PPPV PECF resulted in a significant increase in decompression in the foramen area for all CT-measured parameters compared with the mean preoperative values: 1) the sagittal area increased 60.1 ± 23.1 mm²; 2) the craniocaudal length increased 4.0 ± 1.54 mm; and 3) the ventrodorsal length increased 4.0 ± 1.97 mm; Also, the 3-dimensional CT scan reconstruction decompression area had increased 996 ± 266 mm² (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

PPPV PECF is a safe route for decompression of the cervical spine with good clinical and radiological outcomes.

Posterior endoscopic cervical foramiotomy and discectomy: clinical and radiological computer tomography evaluation on the bony effect of decompression with 2 years follow-up

PURPOSE

Cervical radiculopathy is a common disabling cervical spine condition. Open anterior and posterior approaches are the conventional surgical treatment approaches with good clinical outcomes. However, the soft tissue damage in these procedures can lead to increase perioperative morbidity. Endoscopic spine surgery provides more soft tissue preservation than conventional approaches. We investigate the radiological and clinical outcomes of posterior endoscopic cervical foraminotomy and discectomy.

METHODS

A prospective clinical and radiological study with retrospective evaluation were done for 25 patients with 29 levels of cervical radiculopathy who underwent posterior endoscopic cervical discectomy from November 2016 to December 2018. Clinical outcomes of Visual Analogue Scale, Neck Disability Index and MacNab's score were evaluated at pre-operative, post-operative 1 week, 3 months and final follow-up. Preoperative and post-operative final follow-up flexion and extension roentgenogram were evaluated for cervical stability assessment. Pre-operative and post-operative computer tomography cervical spine evaluation of foraminal length in ventro-dorsal, cephalad-caudal dimensions, sagittal foraminal area and using 3D CT reconstruction coronal decompression area were done.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine levels of cervical radiculopathy underwent posterior endoscopic cervical decompression. The mean follow-up was 29.6 months, and the most common levels affected were C5/6 and C6/7. There was a complication rate of 12% with 2 cases of neurapraxia and one case of recurrent of prolapsed disc. There was no revision surgery in our series. There was significant clinical improvement in Visual Analogue Scale and Neck Disability Index. Prospective comparative study between preoperative and final follow-up mean improvement in VAS score was 5.08 ± 1.75, and NDI was 45.1 ± 13.3. Ninety-two percent of the patients achieved good and excellent results as per MacNab's criteria. Retrospective evaluation of the radiological data showed significant increments of foraminal dimensions: (1) sagittal area increased 21.4 ± 11.2 mm², (2) CT Cranio Caudal length increased 1.21 ± 1.30 mm and (3) CT ventro-dorsal length increased 2.09 ± 1.35 mm and (4) 3D CT scan reconstruction coronal decompression area increased 536 ± 176 mm², p < 0.05.

CONCLUSION

Uniportal posterior endoscopic cervical foraminotomy and discectomy are safe, efficient and precise choreographed set of technique in the treatment of cervical radiculopathy. It significantly improved clinical outcomes and achieved the objective of increasing in the cervical foramen size in our cohort of patients.

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus posterior cervical foraminotomy for the treatment of single-level unilateral cervical radiculopathy: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To compare the effectiveness and safety of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF) for patients diagnosed with single-level unilateral cervical radiculopathy.

METHODS

Relevant studies comparing ACDF with PCF for cervical radiculopathy were searched in an electronic database. After data extraction and quality assessment of included studies, a meta-analysis was done by using the RevMan 5.3 software. The random effects model was used if there was heterogeneity between studies; otherwise, the fixed effects model was used.

RESULTS

A total of 3 randomized controlled trials (RCT) and 12 retrospective studies including 52705 patients were included in the meta-analysis. There were no significant differences in Neck Disability Index (NDI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and patients' satisfaction (P > 0.05) between treatment groups. The complication rate of the PCF group was equivalent compared with the ACDF group (P = 0.60), but the reoperation rate following PCF was on the higher side (P = 0.02). Data analysis also showed that the PCF group was associated with shorter operation time (P = 0.001) and shorter length of hospital stay (P = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with single-level unilateral cervical radiculopathy, PCF has comparable effectiveness and complication rate compared with ACDF. It seems that PCF is a sufficient alternative procedure with shorter operation time, shorter length of hospital stay, and less total hospital cost for the treatment of cervical radiculopathy. However, the higher reoperation rate following PCF should be also taken into consideration.

Degree of satisfaction following full-endoscopic cervical foraminotomy

Background

Foraminotomy has been reported to be effective for the treatment of cervical radiculopathy (CR). Foraminotomy has been performed by an open approach or minimally invasive approach using a microscope or endoscope. A review of the literature has revealed that both the open and minimally invasive approach provide good clinical results. Since the introduction of full-endoscopic cervical foraminotomy (FECF) followed by microendoscopic cervical foraminotomy, we adopted FECF in 2016. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the degree of satisfaction following FECF for CR.

Methods

A total of 109 consecutive patients underwent FECF for CR. All operations were performed at Iwai Orthopaedic Medical Hospital. Patient background information and operative data were collected. The numerical rating scale (NRS) score for the arm was assessed preoperatively and postoperatively at the time of discharge from the hospital. The satisfaction score was also recorded at discharge and the 3 months after the operation.

Results

In total 109 patients, the mean age was 51.3 years; 22.9% were female and 77.1% were male. The cervical level most frequently operated on was C6/7, followed by C5/6. The mean hospital stay was 4.7 days. The mean operation time was 61.7 minutes. The estimated blood loss was 0 to 10 mg in all cases. One patient exhibited temporary postoperative muscle weakness, although he recovered within 1 year. There was one case of dural tear, and no cases of nerve root injury or surgical site infection. There was one case of reoperation by microendoscopic surgery in 3 months due to insufficient improvement. Preoperative NRS scores for the arm was 4.6 and it improved significantly postoperatively to 2.1 for the entire study group. The mean satisfaction score at discharge was 7.5. The mean score at 3 months after the operations was 7.4.

Conclusions

Degree of satisfaction following FECF for CR was high 3 months after the operation.

Safe Route for Cervical Approach: Partial Pediculotomy, Partial Vertebrotomy Approach for Posterior Endoscopic Cervical Foraminotomy and Discectomy

INTRODUCTION

Cervical radiculopathy is a common cervical spine condition. There is a paucity of literature discussing the effect of partial pediculotomy and partial vertebrotomy for posterior endoscopic cervical foraminotomy (PPPV PECF) on cervical radiculopathy. We investigated the radiologic and clinical outcomes of this approach.

METHODS

This was a retrospective evaluation of 30 cases with cervical radiculopathy who underwent PPPV PECF. Preoperative, postoperative roentgenogram for evaluation of stability, computed tomography (CT) evaluation of foraminal dimensions, and area in sagittal view was performed. Three-dimensional reconstruction area of decompression evaluation was performed. Clinical outcomes of the visual analog scale, Oswestry Disability Index, and Macnab score were evaluated.

RESULTS

There was no complication and recurrence in our PPPV PECF cohort during the study period. At preoperative, 1 week postoperative, and 3 months postoperative and final follow-up, the mean visual analog scale score had significant improvement, with scores of 7.6, 3.0, 2.1, and 1.7, respectively, P < 0.05, and also the mean Oswestry Disability Index, with scores of 73.9, 28.1, 23.3, and 21.5 respectively, P < 0.05. Macnab criteria showed all patients scoring good and excellent. Radiologic results showed PPPV PECF had a significant increase in decompression in the foramen area in all CT-measured parameters, as compared with the mean preoperative values; 1) sagittal area increased 60.1 ± 23.1 mm², 2) CT craniocaudal length increased 4.0 ± 1.54 mm, 3) CT ventrodorsal length increased 4.0 ± 1.97 mm, and 4) 3-dimensional CT scan reconstruction decompression area increased 996 ± 266 mm², P < 0.05.

CONCLUSIONS

PPPV PECF is a safe route of decompression of cervical spine with good clinical and radiologic outcome.

Comparison of outcomes following minimally invasive and open posterior cervical foraminotomy: description of minimally invasive technique and review of literature

Although minimally invasive posterior cervical foraminotomy (MIS-PCF) is frequently employed in the treatment of cervical radiculopathy, there are very few studies directly comparing outcomes between MIS-PCF and open posterior cervical foraminotomy and between MIS-PCF and percutaneous endoscopic (full-endoscopic) posterior cervical foraminotomy (FE-PCF). This study includes a description of technique and systematic review of literature and analysis of clinical studies comparing outcomes between MIS-PCF and open posterior cervical foraminotomy and between MIS-PCF and FE-PCF. Six comparative studies, including one randomized controlled trial were included in analysis. Average operative time ranged from 60.5 to 171 minutes in the open group and 77.65 to 115 minutes in the MIS group. Mean intraoperative blood loss ranged from 43.5 to 246 cc in the open group and 42 to 138 cc in the MIS group. Average postoperative length of stay ranged from 58.6 to 304.8 hours in the open group and 20 to 273.6 hours in the MIS group. Two studies reported significantly increased VAS-N (Neck) scores postoperatively in patients undergoing open cervical foraminotomies, however both studies reported that the differences lost statistical significance with longer follow-up. There were no significant differences in complications or reoperations between open and MIS groups. One retrospective cohort study was included in analysis that compared MIS-PCF and FE-PCF. Postoperatively at 24 months, mean NDI and VAS-N were significantly lower after FE-PCF than MIS-PCF. There was no significant change in VAS-A (Arm) between the two groups. Direct comparative studies between MIS-PCF and open cervical foraminotomy are limited in number. Although, there is a significant heterogeneity in studies comparing open and MIS-PCF there appears to be a trend of decreased hospital length of stay and postoperative analgesic usage in the minimally invasive cohort.

Perioperative complications of inpatient and outpatient single-level posterior cervical foraminotomy: a comparative retrospective study

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF) is a relatively safe procedure for the treatment of cervical radiculopathy. Though most often performed as an inpatient procedure, there is an increasing number of patients treated in an outpatient setting.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare the perioperative complication rates associated with inpatient and outpatient single-level PCF.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Retrospective database study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Patients with cervical radiculopathy who underwent inpatient or outpatient single-level PCF between 2007 to the first quarter of 2016.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) was used as a broad measure of comorbidity. Surgical complications included cervical nerve root injury, dural tear, wound complications, infection, dysphagia, cervicalgia, and revision surgery. Medical complications included pulmonary embolism and lower limb deep vein thrombosis, acute myocardial infarction, acute respiratory failure, pneumonia, sepsis, and urinary complications.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective review of patients who received single-level PCF from 2007 to the first quarter of 2016 as either outpatients or inpatients using the Humana subset of the PearlDiver Patient Record Database. The incidence of perioperative medical and surgical complications was queried using relevant International Classification of Diseases (ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM) and Current Procedural Terminology codes. Multivariate logistic regression analysis, adjusted for age, gender, and CCI, was performed to calculate odds ratios (ORs) of complications among inpatients relative to outpatients treated with PCF. Propensity score matching was done, and comparisons were made for postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Throughout the time period, 1,469 and 1,192 patients received inpatient and outpatient single-level PCF, respectively. The mean CCIs±standard deviation of inpatient and outpatient groups undergoing PCF were 2.83±3.11 and 1.46±2.21, respectively (p<.001). After propensity score matching, patients who received PCF in an inpatient setting showed significantly higher rates of wound complications (OR=1.53, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.04-2.23; p=.029), infection (OR=1.91, CI=1.15-3.15; p=.012), acute respiratory failure (OR=2.50, CI=1.23-5.08; p=.011), and urinary tract infections and incontinence (OR=2.11, CI=1.32-3.38; p=.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Outpatient single-level PCF was associated with a lower rate of perioperative medical and surgical complications. The PCF in the outpatient setting can potentially be a safe procedure for the treatment of cervical radiculopathy with appropriate patient selection.

Minimally Invasive Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy as an Alternative to Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion for Unilateral Cervical Radiculopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical outcomes, complications, and reoperations of minimally invasive posterior cervical foraminotomy (MI-PCF) for unilateral cervical radiculopathy without myelopathy, in comparison to anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

ACDF is a standard treatment for cervical radiculopathy secondary to lateral disc herniation or foraminal stenosis. Recent studies have suggested MI-PCF to be an effective alternative to ACDF. However, concern for reoperation and whether similar improvements in clinical outcomes can be achieved has led to a debate in the literature.

METHODS

We comprehensively searched PubMed, CINAHL Plus, and SCOPUS utilizing terms related to MI-PCF. Two independent reviewers assessed potential studies and extracted data on clinical outcome scores (neck disability index [NDI], visual analog scale [VAS]-neck, and VAS-arm), reoperation proportion, and complications. Studies included were on noncentral cervical pathology, published in the last 10 years, had a sample size of >10 patients, and reported data on minimally invasive techniques for posterior cervical foraminotomy. Heterogeneity and publication bias analyses were performed. The pooled proportions of each outcome were compared to those of ACDF obtained from two previously published studies.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies were included with data of 1216 patients. The study population was 61.8% male, with a mean age of 51.57 years, and a mean follow-up of 30 months. MI-PCF resulted in a significantly greater improvement in VAS-arm scores compared to ACDF, and similar improvements in VAS-neck and NDI scores. Proportions of complications and reoperations were similar between the two cohorts. The most common complications were transient neuropraxia, wound-related, and durotomy.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that MI-PCF may be utilized as a safe and effective alternative to ACDF in patients with unilateral cervical radiculopathy without myelopathy, without concern for increased reoperations or complications.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Comparison of Anterior Cervical Foraminotomy and Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy for Treating Single Level Unilateral Cervical Radiculopathy

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE

To compare clinical and radiological outcomes after two surgical procedures.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion is the gold standard treatment for cervical radiculopathy. Cervical foraminotomy is an alternative decompressive treatment option to preserve segmental motion and avoid fusion-related complications. Anterior cervical foraminotomy (ACF) and posterior cervical foraminotmy (PCF) has been introduced to achieve foraminal decompression. The objective of this study was to compare long-term clinical and radiological outcomes after two surgical procedures for the treatment of single-level cervical radiculopathy.

METHODS

A retrospective review of patients undergoing ACF or PCF for the treatment of single-level unilateral cervical radiculopathy from 2010 to 2012 was performed. Demographic, perioperative, and clinical outcomes of 40 patients for each group were collected from the electronic medical records. Clinical outcomes were assessed by visual analog scores, while disc height (DH), cervical lordosis (CL), and C2-7 sagittal vertical axis (C2-7 SVA) data were obtained from pre- and postoperative radiography data.

RESULTS

Both groups showed similar clinical improvements after surgery. Radiographically, the ACF groups showed profound decrease in DH only at the first month after surgery, and there was no significant change in DH after 1 year. The PCF group showed no significant changes in DH at follow-up. With respect to CL, ACF showed a significant decrease. There was no statistically significant change in C2-7 SVA before or after surgery in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Both ACF and PCF showed significant clinical improvement of radiculopathy. In the ACF group, the DH decreased, and CL decreased during the early postoperative period. Radiological parameters were preserved in the PCF group after surgery. However, this group showed greater intraoperative bleeding and revision rates. Care should be taken to manage complications according to the specific surgical treatment.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

MIS approaches in the cervical spine

Minimally invasive surgical approaches for the treatment of spinal pathologies have accelerated over the past three decades and resulted in superior functional outcomes with less complications. Yet cervical pathologies have been slower to gain traction for multiple anatomical factors and its "high-risk" profile. Various minimally invasive techniques for cervical disease have now been described and validated in long-term studies with comparable outcomes to traditional open approaches and concomitant reduction in morbidity and socioeconomic costs. Transnasal operations can be used to treat ventral upper cervical disease, circumventing traditional and morbid transoral approaches. Posterior-based focused treatments for radiculopathy and myelopathy such as tubular-guided foraminotomies and unilateral laminotomies for bilateral cord decompression have also been described and becoming increasingly less invasive. Cervical fusions can now be performed percutaneously through modified, stand-alone facet joint cages that can be packed with allogeneic bone graft. These advances have been facilitated by the development of intraoperative imaging technologies (intraoperative CT) and 3-dimensional stereotactic navigation software. While this review focuses on these procedures and evidence-based outcomes data, the future for MIS applications in cervical spine surgery will continue to evolve over the coming years with wider indications and technological adjuncts.

Does the Neck Pain, Function, or Range of Motion Differ After Anterior Cervical Fusion, Cervical Disc Replacement, and Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy?

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate clinical and radiologic results as well as biomechanical changes after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), cervical disc replacement (CDR), and posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF) and/or discectomy in individuals with unilateral single-level cervical radiculopathy.

METHODS

A total of 97 patients received surgical treatment for unilateral intolerable radiculopathy between February 2012 and August 2017. Clinical outcomes included Neck Disability Index (NDI), visual analogue scale (VAS) for neck and arm pain, and modified Odom's criteria. Range of motion (ROM) of the whole cervical (C-ROM), operated segment (S-ROM), and upper and lower adjacent segment (U-ROM and L-ROM) were measured.

RESULTS

A total of 55 ACDFs, 21 CDRs, and 21 PCFs were performed. Clinical improvement in NDI and VAS scores were significant after surgery; however, there was no statistical significance among groups. Satisfaction rate (based on Odom's criteria) of PCF (76.2%) was inferior to that of ACDF (90.9%) and CDR (90.5%) without statistical difference. S-ROM, U-ROM, and L-ROM were slightly better in the CDR and PCF groups, without statistical significance. C-ROM significantly increased in CDR group (P = 0.04) and slightly increased in PCF group (P = 0.27). In the ACDF group, C-ROM decreased (P = 0.21) and on the contrary, the U-ROM and L-ROM increased (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

ACDF, CDR, and PCF resulted in pain relief and improvement in neck function for patients with unilateral radiculopathy. Comparatively, ACDF provides the lowest reoperation rate. CDR is effective in ameliorating cervical ROMs. PCF has a greater probability of reoperation; however, ROM after surgery is better than with ACDF.

Comparison of clinical outcomes in anterior cervical discectomy versus foraminotomy for brachialgia

AIM

The choice between anterior cervical discectomy & fusion (ACD) or posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF) for the treatment of cervical brachialgia is controversial. This study aimes to compare clinical outcomes between these two operative inteventions for brachialgia.

METHODS

Retrospective review of prospectively collected data was performed. Patients receiving a primary ACD or PCF to treat brachialgia, in a single tertiary neurosurgical unit were included. Surgical details, and patient reported outcomes (COMI-Neck questionnaire) were extracted from a prospectively maintained spinal procedure database. Minimum clinically important difference (MCID) was defined as a change in COMI score of -2 at 12 months. The student t-test, Chi-square test, and linear regression were used to compare groups.

RESULTS

Between June 2011 ad February 2016 there were 634 ACD procedures (Median age 49; 321 Male), and 54 PCF procedures (Median age 50; 37 Male) perfomed for brachialgia. Age, ASA and pre-operative COMI were similar between the groups (p > .05). Complete outcome data was recorded at twelve months in 312 ACD and 36 PCF patients. Both ACD and PCF were associated with an improvement in COMI at 3 and 12 months (all p < .01). Mean change in COMI at 3 months was -2.38 for ACD, versus -2.31 for PCF (p = .88); at twelve months it was -2.94 for ACD, versus -2.67 for PCF (p = .55). MCID was seen in 59% of ACD cases, versus 58% of PCF cases at twelve months (p = .91).

CONCLUSION

There was no significant difference between outcomes in the ACD and PCF groups. This is supportive of published literature. The proposed multicenter RCTs may inform further.

Morphometric Analysis for Surgical Treatment of Cervical Discopathy by Posterior Laminoforaminotomy: Radiologic Study and Technical Note

BACKGROUND

The main concern with the posterior approach is the risk of postoperative segmental instability. The most commonly cited rule is that removal of the medial half of the articular facet provides adequate surgical exposure and has no effect on stability. The aim of this study was to define the areas of the articular processes in the cervical spine that can be safely removed.

METHODS

Computed tomography scans of 50 cervical spines were analyzed. Measurements were analyzed for bone removal assuming the standard technique of posterior laminoforaminotomy. The width of the facet was measured at the level of the widest dimension. The height of the articular process was taken from the bottom (in the case of inferior process) or top (in the case of superior process) of the process.

RESULTS

The mean width of the articular process ranged from 11.8 ± 1.5 mm (range, 8.3-15.7 mm) at the C2-C3 level to 14.6 ± 1.7 mm at the C6-C7 level. At the cervicothoracic junction (C7-T1 level), the mean width decreased to 14.0 ± 1.7 mm. The mean value for both sides when the inferior articular process was measured at all levels was 5.0 ± 1.4 mm (range, 4.5-5.8 mm). The mean height of the superior articular process was 7.7 ± 1.5 mm (range, 6.8-8.3 mm).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on our findings, our "5-5-7 mm rule" corresponds to the amount of bone removal for each step of the laminoforaminotomy.

Factors related to subjective satisfaction following microendoscopic foraminotomy for cervical radiculopathy

BACKGROUND

Microendoscopic foraminotomy has been reported to be effective for the treatment of cervical radiculopathy, using outcome measurement scores such as the neck disability index (NDI) and numerical rating scale (NRS). However, the scores for spine surgery do not always reflect the true subjective satisfaction of the patient. The purpose of this study was to evaluate factors related to subjective satisfaction following microendoscopic foraminotomy for cervical radiculopathy.

METHODS

The subjects consisted of consecutive patients who underwent microendoscopic foraminotomy for cervical radiculopathy. Patient background information and operative data were collected. The NDI, the NRS score for the neck, upper back, and arm, and the EuroQOL-5D (EQ-5D) were assessed preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively. Postoperative subjective satisfaction was also assessed as a direct evaluation of satisfaction, and willingness to undergo the same operation if needed was assessed as an indirect evaluation.

RESULTS

A total of 42 patients were included in this study. The mean age was 52.9 ± 11.8 years; 19.0% were female and 81.0% were male. The operation time for one level was 57.7 min and the estimated blood loss was minimal in most cases. All NDI, NRS, and EQ-5D scores improved significantly postoperatively. Univariate analyses revealed that the factors related to subjective satisfaction were younger age, non-smoking status, high preoperative NDI score, and low postoperative NRS score for the arm. Factors related to the willingness to undergo the same operation if needed were high preoperative NDI scores, high preoperative NRS scores for the arm, and low preoperative EQ-5D scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Factors related to subjective satisfaction following microendoscopic foraminotomy include younger age, non-smoking status, high preoperative NDI score, high preoperative NRS score for the arm, low preoperative EQ-5D score, and a low postoperative NRS score for the arm.

Minimally Invasive Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy: Freiburg Experience With 34 Patients

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

Assessment of outcome after minimally invasive posterior cervical foraminotomy (MI-PCF).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Surgical management of cervical radiculopathy represents a controversial area in spinal surgery. Preferred approaches include both anterior cervical discectomy and posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF). Numerous studies showed comparable results. Employing PCF eliminates risks associated with anterior approach. PCF as originally described by Spurling and Scoville necessitates extensive stripping of cervical muscles to expose the cervical spine, resulting in muscle injury, impaired muscle function, prolonged postoperative neck pain, and increased use of narcotics. There are only few studies investigating outcome after employing MI-PCF.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective review of 34 patients who underwent MI-PCF for presenting complaints, postoperative and follow-up outcome.

RESULTS

In the last follow-up the weakness resolved completely in 62.6% of patients, in 4.1% improved and in 16.5% remained unchanged. In the last follow-up 76.7% of patients originally presenting with pain reported complete resolution of pain and 10% reported partial improvement of pain. In total, 23.5% of patients were lost during follow-up as far as pain was concerned. In the last follow-up, 75% of patients achieved relative neck-pain-freedom (Visual Analog Scale≤3) at rest and 62.5% of patients under strain. The mean neck pain on Visual Analog Scale at rest was 2.13 (SD=2.42) and 3.34 (SD=3.01) under strain. In total, 93.8% (n=15) of patients would undergo the same procedure for the same achieved result.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive cervical foraminotomy is an effective procedure for decompression of cervical nerve roots regardless the type of the stenosis. Even employing minimally invasive technique still causes neck pain in the long term affecting up to 25% of patients. More randomized control studies are required to clarify the benefits of minimally invasive PCF.

Clinical and radiological results of posterior cervical foraminotomy at two or three levels: a 3-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

Single-level unilateral posterior cervical foraminotomy is regarded as a safe method. However, the outcomes of posterior cervical foraminotomy performed on two or three levels are uncertain and debated. We aimed to analyze the long-term clinical and radiological outcomes of posterior cervical foraminotomy at two or three levels.

METHODS

From September 2008 to December 2011, a total of 42 patients who underwent a posterior cervical foraminotomy at two or three levels and were followed for at least 3 years were analyzed with retrospective cohort study. Clinical assessments were performed using the visual analog scale (VAS), neck disability index (NDI) and modified MacNab criteria. Radiological evaluation included the assessment of static and dynamic lateral radiographs to identify instability, postlaminectomy kyphotic deformity, adjacent segmental degeneration (ASD), and focal degeneration.

RESULTS

The mean VAS improved from preoperative score 8.5 ± 0.3 to postoperative score 1.8 ± 0.5 significantly. The mean presenting NDI score was 32.9 ± 2.0 and the mean postoperative NDI score was 14.2 ± 1.3. Improvement of radiculopathy was displayed in 39 patients (92.9%). During radiological evaluation, no significant change in disc height related to ASD and focal degeneration was noted. However, we confirmed one patient with radiological instability and one patient with radiological postlaminectomy kyphotic deformity.

CONCLUSIONS

Posterior cervical foraminotomy at two or three levels is fairly effective for treating patients with cervical radiculopathy, and results in long-lasting pain relief and improved quality of life in nearly all patients. However, further studies of three levels that include more patients are needed.

Changes in foraminal area with anterior decompression versus keyhole foraminotomy in the cervical spine: a biomechanical investigation

OBJECTIVE

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with or without partial uncovertebral joint resection (UVR) and posterior keyhole foraminotomy are established operative procedures to treat cervical disc degeneration and radiculopathy. Studies have demonstrated reliable results with each procedure, but none have compared the change in neuroforaminal area between indirect and direct decompression techniques. The purpose of this study was to determine which cervical decompression method most consistently increases neuroforaminal area and how that area is affected by neck position.

METHODS

Eight human cervical functional spinal units (4 each of C5–6 and C6–7) underwent sequential decompression. Each level received the following surgical treatment: bilateral foraminotomy, ACDF, ACDF + partial UVR, and foraminotomy + ACDF. Multidirectional pure moment flexibility testing combined with 3D C-arm imaging was performed after each procedure to measure the minimum cross-sectional area of each foramen in 3 different neck positions: neutral, flexion, and extension.

RESULTS

Neuroforaminal area increased significantly with foraminotomy versus intact in all positions. These area measurements did not change in the ACDF group through flexion-extension. A significant decrease in area was observed for ACDF in extension (40 mm2) versus neutral (55 mm2). Foraminotomy + ACDF did not significantly increase area compared with foraminotomy in any position. The UVR procedure did not produce any changes in area through flexion-extension.

CONCLUSIONS

All procedures increased neuroforaminal area. Foraminotomy and foraminotomy + ACDF produced the greatest increase in area and also maintained the area in extension more than anterior-only procedures. The UVR procedure did not significantly alter the area compared with ACDF alone. With a stable cervical spine, foraminotomy may be preferable to directly decompress the neuroforamen; however, ACDF continues to play an important role for indirect decompression and decompression of more centrally located herniated discs. These findings pertain to bony stenosis of the neuroforamen and may not apply to soft disc herniation. The key points of this study are as follows. Both ACDF and foraminotomy increase the foraminal space. Foraminotomy was most successful in maintaining these increases during neck motion. Partial UVR was not a significant improvement over ACDF alone. Foraminotomy may be more efficient at decompressing the neuroforamen. Results should be taken into consideration only with stable spines.

Clinical outcome following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with and without anterior cervical plating for the treatment of cervical disc herniation-a 25-year follow-up study

Extreme long-term clinical outcome studies following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with an autologous iliac crest with and without Caspar plating (ACDF + CP) for the treatment of radiculopathy caused by cervical disc herniation (CDH) are extremely rare. Hospital records of patients who underwent ACDF or ACDF + CP for the treatment of CDH at least 17 years ago were reviewed. Information about diagnosis, surgery, pre- and postoperative clinical process, and repeated procedure was analyzed. At final follow-up, patients were reviewed with a standardized questionnaire including the current neurological status, Neck Disability Index (NDI), Odom's criteria, a modified EQ-5D, and limitations in quality of life. One hundred twenty-two patients with a mean follow-up of 25 years were evaluated. ACDF was performed in 80 and ACDF + CP in 42 patients, respectively. At final follow-up, 81.1% of patients were free of radicular pain and had no repeated procedure. According to Odom's criteria, 86.1% of good to excellent functional recovery was noted. The mean NDI and EQ-5D was 14% and 5 points, respectively. There was no significant difference in the assessed clinical outcome parameters between patients treated with ACDF and ACDF + CP. The rate for repeated procedure due to degenerative cervical disorders was 10.7 and 7.4% due to symptomatic adjacent segment disease with 25 years. ACDF and ACDF + CP achieved a high rate radicular pain relief (89.3%) and clinical success (86.1%) for the treatment of CDH within a 25 years follow-up. No statistical difference concerning clinical outcome and rate of repeated procedure was detected.

Minimally invasive fully endoscopic two-level posterior cervical foraminotomy: technical note

Posterior cervical foraminotomy is an effective surgical treatment method for relieving radicular symptoms that result from cervical nerve root compression. Minimally invasive techniques and tubular retractor systems are available to minimize tissue retraction, but minimally invasive approaches can carry with them the surgical challenge of trying to pass instruments through a long narrow retractor that is also the port for visualizing the surgical pathology. Herein, the authors present a case of a 65-year-old man who presented with symptoms of a left C6 and C7 radiculopathy and left C5-6 and left C6-7 foraminal narrowing on MRI. A minimally-invasive fully endoscopic left C5-6 and C6-7 posterior foraminotomy was performed through a 1cm outer diameter working channel endoscopic with a 6 mm working channel. Clinicians should be aware that new minimally invasive non-fusion approaches for the treatment of cervical radiculopathy that utilize endoscopic visualization are now coming into use in clinical practice.

Comparison of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion versus Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy in the Treatment of Cervical Radiculopathy: A Systematic Review

Controversy remains over whether anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) or posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF) is superior for the treatment of cervical radiculopathy. We therefore performed a systematic review including three prospective randomized controlled trails (RCT) and seven retrospective comparative studies (RCoS) by searching PubMed and EMBASE. These studies were assessed on risk of bias according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, and the quality of evidence and level of recommendation were evaluated according to the GRADE approach. Clinical outcomes, complications, reoperation rates, radiological parameters, and cost/cost-utility were evaluated. The mean complication rate was 7% in the ACDF group and 4% in the PCF group, and the mean reoperation rate was 4% in the ACDF group and 6% in the PCF group within 2 years of the initial surgery. There was a strong level of recommendation that no difference existed in clinical outcome, complication rate and reoperation rate between the ACDF and the PCF group. There was conflicting evidence that the ACDF group had better clinical outcomes than the PCF group (one study with weak level of recommendation). PCF could preserve the range of motion (ROM) of the operated segment but did not increase the ROM of the adjacent segment (weak level of recommendation). Meanwhile, the average cost or cost-utility of the PCF group was significantly lower than that of the ACDF group (weak level of recommendation). In conclusion, the PCF was just as safe and effective as the ACDF in the treatment of cervical radiculopathy. Meanwhile, PCF might have lower medical cost than ACDF and decrease the incidence of adjacent segment disease. Based on the available evidence, PCF appears to be another good surgical approach in the treatment of cervical radiculopathy.

Study protocol for a randomised controlled multicentre study: the Foraminotomy ACDF Cost-Effectiveness Trial (FACET) in patients with cervical radiculopathy

INTRODUCTION

Cervical radiculopathy due to discogenic or spondylotic stenosis of the neuroforamen can be surgically treated by an anterior discectomy with fusion (ACDF) or a posterior foraminotomy (FOR). Most surgeons prefer ACDF, although there are indications that FOR is as effective as ACDF, has a lower complication rate and is less expensive. A head-to-head comparison of the 2 surgical techniques in a randomised controlled trial has not yet been performed. The study objectives of the Foraminotomy ACDF Cost-Effectiveness Trial (FACET) study are to compare clinical outcomes, complication rates and cost-effectiveness of FOR to ACDF.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The FACET study is a prospective randomised controlled trial conducted in 7 medical centres in the Netherlands. The follow-up period is 2 years. The main inclusion criterion is a radiculopathy of the C4, C5, C6 or C7 nerve root, due to a single-level isolated cervical foraminal stenosis caused by a soft disc and/or osteophytic component, requiring operative decompression. A sample size of 308 patients is required to test the hypothesis of clinical non-inferiority of FOR versus ACDF. Primary outcomes are: 'operative success', the measured decrease in radiculopathy assessed by the visual analogue scale and 'patient success', assessed by the modified Odom's criteria. Secondary outcomes are: Work Ability Index (single-item WAI), quality of life (EuroQol 5 Dimensions 5 level Survey, EQ-5D-5L), Neck Disability Index (NDI) and complications. An economic evaluation will assess cost-effectiveness. In addition, a budget impact analysis will be performed.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was obtained from the Institutional Ethics Committee of the University Medical Center Groningen. Results of this study will be disseminated through national and international papers. The participants and relevant patient support groups will be informed about the results of the study.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NTR5536, pre-results.

Prevalence of adjacent segment disease following cervical spine surgery: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis

Prevalence estimates of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) following cervical spine surgery varied greatly in current studies. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize the point prevalence of ASD after cervical spine surgery.

METHODS

Comprehensive electronic searches of PubMed, Embase, Web of Knowledge, and Cochrane Library databases were conducted to identify any study published from initial state to January 2016. Those reporting the prevalence of ASD after cervical surgery were included. A random-effects model was used to estimate the prevalence of radiographic ASD, symptomatic ASD, and reoperation ASD. Univariate meta-regression analyses were conducted to explore the potential associations between prevalence and length of follow-up. All analyses were performed using R version 3.2.3 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing).

RESULTS

A total of 83 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The prevalence of radiographic ASD, symptomatic ASD, and reoperation ASD after cervical surgery was 28.28% (95% confidence interval [CI], 20.96-36.96), 13.34% (95% CI, 11.06-16.00), and 5.78% (95% CI, 4.99-6.69), respectively, in a general analysis. It was found 2.79%, 1.43%, and 0.24% additions per year of follow-up in the incidence of radiographic ASD, symptomatic ASD, and reoperation ASD, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis provides some details about the prevalence of radiographic ASD, symptomatic ASD, and reoperation ASD after cervical spine surgery. However, the results of this meta-analysis should be interpreted with caution because of the heterogeneity among the studies.