Health outcome assessment before and after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for radiculopathy: a prospective analysis

Clinicosocial determinants of hospital stay following cervical decompression: A public healthcare perspective and machine learning model

OBJECTIVE

Post-operative length of hospital stay (LOS) is a valuable measure for monitoring quality of care provision, patient recovery, and guiding hospital resource management. But the impact of patient ethnicity, socio-economic deprivation as measured by the indices of multiple deprivation (IMD), and pre-existing health conditions on LOS post-anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) is under-researched in public healthcare settings.

METHODS

From 2013 to 2023, a retrospective study at a single center reviewed all ACDF procedures. We analyzed 14 non-clinical predictors-including demographics, comorbidities, and socio-economic status-to forecast a categorized LOS: short (≤2 days), medium (2-3 days), or long (>3 days). Three machine learning (ML) models were developed and assessed for their prediction reliability.

RESULTS

2033 ACDF patients were analyzed; 79.44 % had a LOS ≤ 2 days. Significant predictors of LOS included patient sex (HR:0.81[0.74-0.88], p < 0.005), IMD decile (HR:1.38[1.24-1.53], p < 0.005), smoking (HR:1.24[1.12-1.38], p < 0.005), DM (HR:0.70[0.59-0.84], p < 0.005), and COPD (HR:0.66, p = 0.01). Asian patients had the highest mean LOS (p = 0.003). Testing on 407 patients, the XGBoost model achieved 80.95 % accuracy, 71.52 % sensitivity, 85.76 % specificity, 71.52 % positive predictive value, and a micro F1 score of 0.715. This model is available at: https://acdflos.streamlit.app.

CONCLUSIONS

Utilizing non-clinical pre-operative parameters such as patient ethnicity, socio-economic deprivation index, and baseline comorbidities, our ML model effectively predicts postoperative LOS for patient undergoing ACDF surgeries. Yet, as the healthcare landscape evolves, such tools will require further refinement to integrate peri and post-operative variables, ensuring a holistic decision support tool.

An observational study of quality of motion in the aging cervical spine: sequence of segmental contributions in dynamic fluoroscopy recordings

BACKGROUND

The term 'physiological motion of the spine' is commonly used although no proper definition exists. Previous work has revealed a consistent sequence of cervical segmental contributions in 80-90% of young healthy individuals. Age has been shown to be associated with a decreased quantity of motion. Therefore, it is of interest to study whether this sequence persists throughout aging. The aim of this prospective cohort study is to investigate if the consistent sequence of cervical segmental contributions in young asymptomatic individuals remains present in elderly asymptomatic individuals.

METHODS

In this prospective cohort study, dynamic flexion to extension cinematographic recordings of the cervical spine were made in asymptomatic individuals aged 55-70 years old. Individuals without neck pain and without severe degenerative changes were included. Two recordings were made in each individual with a 2-to-4-week interval (T1 and T2). Segmental rotation of each individual segment between C4 and C7 was calculated to determine the sequence of segmental contributions. Secondary outcomes were segmental range of motion (sRoM) and sagittal alignment.

RESULTS

Ten individuals, with an average age of 61 years, were included. The predefined consistent sequence of segmental contributions was found in 10% of the individuals at T1 and 0% at T2. sRoM and total range of motion (tRoM) were low in all participants. There was no statistically significant correlation between sagittal alignment, degeneration and sRoM in the respective segments, nor between cervical lordosis and tRoM.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that aging is associated with loss of the consistent motion pattern that was observed in young asymptomatic individuals. The altered contribution of the cervical segments during extension did not appear to be correlated to the degree of degeneration or sagittal alignment. Trial registration clinicaltrials.gov NCT04222777, registered 10.01.2020.

Post-Operative Physical Therapy Following Cervical Spine Surgery: Analysis of Patient-Reported Outcomes

Introduction Post-operative physical therapy (PT) following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgery is often performed to improve a patient's functional ability and reduce neck pain. However, current literature evaluating the benefits of post-operative PT using patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is limited and remains inconclusive. Here we compare post-operative improvement between patients who did and did not undergo formal PT after ACDF using Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) scores. Methods A retrospective observational study examining patients who underwent one- or two-level primary ACDF or cervical disc replacement (CDR) at an academic orthopedic hospital and who had PROMIS scores recorded pre-operatively and through two-year follow-up. Patients were stratified according to whether or not they attended formal postoperative PT. PROMIS scores and patient demographics were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test, Fisher's exact test, chi-square test of independence, and Student's t-test within and between cohorts. Results Two hundred and twenty patients were identified. Demographic differences between PT and no PT groups include age (PT 54.1 vs. no PT 49.5, p=0.005) and BMI (PT 28.1 vs. no PT 29.8, p=0.028). The only significant difference in post-operative PROMIS scores was in physical health scores at three months post-operatively (no PT 43.9 vs. PT 39.1, p=0.008). Physical health scores improved from baseline to one-year follow-up in both cohorts (PT +3.5, p=0.025; no PT +6.6, p=0.008). There were no significant differences when comparing improvements in physical health scores between groups at six months and one year. Conclusion In conclusion, there was no significance to support the benefits of post-operative PT as measured by PROMIS scores. No significant differences in PROMIS were observed between groups from pre-operative baseline scores to six-month and one-year follow-ups.

Evaluation of Health-related Quality of Life Improvement in Patients Undergoing Cervical Versus Shoulder Surgery

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of outcomes in cervical spine and shoulder arthroscopy patients.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to assess differential improvements in health-related quality of life for cervical spine surgery compared with shoulder surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

An understanding of outcome differences between different types of orthopedic surgeries is helpful in counseling patients about expected postoperative recovery. This study compares outcomes in patients undergoing cervical spine surgery with arthroscopic shoulder surgery using computer-adaptive Patient-reported Outcome Information System scores.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients undergoing cervical spine surgery (1-level or 2-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, cervical disc replacement) or arthroscopic shoulder surgery (rotator cuff repair±biceps tenodesis) were grouped. Patient-reported Outcome Information System scores of physical function, pain interference, and pain intensity at baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 months were compared using paired t tests.

RESULTS

Cervical spine (n=127) and shoulder (n=91) groups were similar in sex (25.8% vs. 41.8% female, P =0.731) but differed in age (51.6±11.6 vs. 58.60±11.2, P <0.05), operative time (148.3±68.6 vs. 75.9±26.9 min, P <0.05), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASAs) (2.3±0.6 vs. 2.0±0.5, P =0.001), smoking status (15.7% vs. 4.4%, P =0.008), and length of stay (1.1±1.0 vs. 0.3±0.1, P =0.000). Spine patients had worse physical function (36.9 ±12.6 vs. 49.4±8.6, P <0.05) and greater pain interference (67.0±13.6 vs. 61.7±4.8, P =0.001) at baseline. Significant improvements were seen in all domains by 3 months for both groups, except for physical function after shoulder surgery. Spine patients had greater physical function improvements at all timepoints (3.33 vs. -0.43, P =0.003; 4.81 vs. 0.08, P =0.001; 6.5 vs. -5.24, P =<0.05). Conversely, shoulder surgery patients showed better 6-month improvement in pain intensity over spine patients (-8.86 vs. -4.46, P =0.001), but this difference resolved by 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Cervical spine patients had greater relative early improvement in physical function compared with shoulder patients, whereas pain interference and intensity did not significantly differ between the 2 groups after surgery. This will help in counseling patients about relative difference in recovery and improvement between the 2 surgery types.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Marijuana Use and its Effect on Clinical Outcomes and Revision Rates in Patients Undergoing Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

To determine if (1) preoperative marijuana use increased complications, readmission, or reoperation rates following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), (2) identify if preoperative marijuana use resulted in worse patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and (3) investigate if preoperative marijuana use affects the quantity of opioid prescriptions in the perioperative period.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

A growing number of states have legalized recreational and/or medical marijuana, thus increasing the number of patients who report preoperative marijuana use. The effects of marijuana on clinical outcomes and PROMs in the postoperative period are unknown.

METHODS

All patients 18 years of age and older who underwent primary one- to four-level ACDF with preoperative marijuana use at our academic institution were retrospectively identified. A 3:1 propensity match was conducted to compare patients who used marijuana versus those who did not. Patient demographics, surgical characteristics, clinical outcomes, and PROMs were compared between groups. Multivariate regression models measured the effect of marijuana use on the likelihood of requiring a reoperation and whether marijuana use predicted inferior PROM improvements at the one-year postoperative period.

RESULTS

Of the 240 patients included, 60 (25.0%) used marijuana preoperatively. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified marijuana use (odds ratio=5.62, P <0.001) as a predictor of a cervical spine reoperation after ACDF. Patients who used marijuana preoperatively had worse one-year postoperative Physical Component Scores of the Short-Form 12 (PCS-12) ( P =0.001), Neck Disability Index ( P =0.003), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Arm ( P =0.044) and VAS Neck ( P =0.012). Multivariate linear regression found preoperative marijuana use did not independently predict improvement in PCS-12 (β=-4.62, P =0.096), Neck Disability Index (β=9.51, P =0.062), Mental Component Scores of the Short-Form 12 (MCS-12) (β=-1.16, P =0.694), VAS Arm (β=0.06, P =0.944), or VAS Neck (β=-0.44, P =0.617).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative marijuana use increased the risk of a cervical spine reoperation after ACDF, but it did not significantly change the amount of postoperative opioids used or the magnitude of improvement in PROMs.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Levwl III.

The Effect of the Preoperative Severity of Neck Pain on Patient-Reported Outcome Measures and Minimum Clinically Important Difference Achievement After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion

OBJECTIVE

To compare patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) scores and minimum clinically important difference (MCID) achievement rates among patients undergoing single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in patients with varying severity of preoperative visual analog scale (VAS) neck score.

METHODS

Patients with ACDF were grouped: severity of preoperative VAS neck score ≤8 or >8. Demographic/perioperative variables and PROMs (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function [PROMIS PF] score, 12-Item Short Form [SF-12] Mental Component Score [MCS], VAS neck/arm score, and Neck Disability Index [NDI]) were collected preoperatively/postoperatively. MCID attainment comparison by grouping was evaluated using χ² analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 137 patients were included (103 VAS neck preoperative score ≤8; 34 VAS neck preoperative score >8). The VAS neck preoperative score ≤8 cohort did not improve: 6 weeks PROMIS-PF score, 6 weeks SF-12 Physical Component Score [PCS], 12 weeks/1 year/2 years SF-12 MCS, 2 years VAS neck score, and 1 years/2 years VAS arm score (P ≤ 0.015, all). VAS neck preoperative score >8 did not improve: 6 weeks/12 weeks/2 years PROMIS-PF score, all time points SF-12 PCS, 6 weeks/12 weeks/1 year/2 years SF-12 MCS, and 2 years VAS arm score (P ≤ 0.013, all). VAS neck preoperative score >8 had inferior PROMIS-PF scores all time points except 1 year (P ≤ 0.036, all), lower SF-12 PCS 6 weeks/6 months (P ≤ 0.043, both), inferior SF-12 MCS at preoperative to 6 months (P ≤ 006, all), higher VAS neck score from preoperative to 6 months (P ≤ 0.018), higher VAS arm score preoperative/12 weeks/6 months (P ≤ 0.020, all), and higher NDI at preoperative/12 weeks/6 months (P ≤ 0.030, all). MCID attainment rates for VAS neck preoperative score >8 were greater for NDI 2 years (P = 0.040), lower for PROMIS-PF score 2 years, and overall (P = 0.018), lower for SF-12 MCS 12 weeks (P = 0.046), lower for VAS neck score 12 weeks to 1 year and overall (P ≤ 0.032, all), and lower for VAS arm score 6 weeks/1 year (P ≤ 0.030, both).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with single-level ACDF presenting with greater baseline neck pain showed poorer physical function/pain/disability/mental health at preoperative/intermediate postoperative time points, but had comparable long-term PROMs by 2 years. MCID attainment was lower among patients with greater preoperative neck pain; MCID among the VAS neck score >8 cohort were only significantly inferior for neck pain.

Comparison of Two-level Cervical Disc Replacement Versus Two-level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion in the Outpatient Setting

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of two-level cervical disc replacement (CDR) in the outpatient setting.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Despite growing interest in CDR, limited data exist evaluating the safety of two-level CDR in the outpatient setting.

METHODS

The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database was queried for all two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and CDR procedures between 2015 and 2018. Demographics, comorbidities, and 30-day postoperative complication rates of outpatient two-level CDR were compared to those of inpatient two-level CDR and outpatient two-level ACDF. Radiographic data are not available in the NSQIP.

RESULTS

A total of 403 outpatient CDRs were compared to 408 inpatient CDRs and 4134 outpatient ACDFs. Outpatient CDR patients were older and more likely to have pulmonary comorbidities compared to inpatient CDR (P < 0.03). Outpatient CDR patients were less likely to have an American Society of Anesthesiologists class ≥2 and have hypertension compared to outpatient ACDF patients (P < 0.0001). Outpatient CDR had a lower 30-day readmission rate (0.5% vs. 2.5%, P = 0.02) and lower 30-day reoperation rate (0% vs. 1%, P = 0.047) compared to inpatient CDR. Outpatient CDR had a lower readmission rate (0.5% vs. 2.1%, P = 0.03) compared to outpatient ACDF, but there was no difference in reoperation rates between the two procedures (0% vs. 0.8%, P = 0.07). Outpatient CDR had an overall complication rate of 0.2%, inpatient CDR had a complication rate of 0.9%, and outpatient ACDF had a complication rate of 1.3%. These differences were not significant.

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this is the largest multicenter study examining the safety of two-level outpatient CDR procedures. Outpatient two-level CDR was associated with similarly safe outcomes when compared to inpatient two-level CDR and outpatient two-level ACDF. This suggests that two-level CDR can be performed safely in the outpatient setting.Level of Evidence: 3.

Comparative study of curative effect of spinal endoscopic surgery and anterior cervical decompression for cervical spondylotic myelopathy

Background

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical efficacy of endoscopic cervical spinal surgery with anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) in the treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM).

Methods

A total of forty-six CSM patients who were admitted to the Medical School of Chinese PLA and treated with endoscopic spine surgery or ACDF from January 2015 to June 2017 were collected. The patients were divided into the spinal endoscopy group and the ACDF group, according to the operation methods. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss and hospitalization stay of the two groups were recorded and compared. Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score before operation, three months, and one year after operation were recorded for intra-group and inter-group comparison. The improvement rates of JOA were compared between the two groups to evaluate the clinical efficacy.

Results

There were twenty-two cases in the spinal endoscopy group and twenty-four cases in the ACDF group. The mean operation lasting time, intraoperative blood loss and hospitalization stay in the spinal endoscopy group were significantly lower than those in the ACDF group (P<0.05). The postoperative JOA score of the two groups were significantly higher than those before the operation (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in the JOA score before operation, three months and one year after operation between the two groups (P>0.05). The improvement rates in the spinal endoscopy group were not significantly different compared to those in the ACDF group (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in the excellent rate (81.8% vs. 83.3%) between the spinal endoscopy group and the ACDF group (P>0.05).

Conclusions

The short-term efficacy of spinal endoscopic surgery and ACDF was equal in the treatment of CSM. The spinal endoscopic surgery was significantly superior to ACDF in reducing the operation time, the intraoperative blood loss and the hospitalization stay.

Predicting Surgical Complications in Adult Patients Undergoing Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Using Machine Learning

Objective

Machine learning algorithms excel at leveraging big data to identify complex patterns that can be used to aid in clinical decision-making. The objective of this study is to demonstrate the performance of machine learning models in predicting postoperative complications following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).

Methods

Artificial neural network (ANN), logistic regression (LR), support vector machine (SVM), and random forest decision tree (RF) models were trained on a multicenter data set of patients undergoing ACDF to predict surgical complications based on readily available patient data. Following training, these models were compared to the predictive capability of American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification.

Results

A total of 20,879 patients were identified as having undergone ACDF. Following exclusion criteria, patients were divided into 14,615 patients for training and 6,264 for testing data sets. ANN and LR consistently outperformed ASA physical status classification in predicting every complication (p < 0.05). The ANN outperformed LR in predicting venous thromboembolism, wound complication, and mortality (p < 0.05). The SVM and RF models were no better than random chance at predicting any of the postoperative complications (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

ANN and LR algorithms outperform ASA physical status classification for predicting individual postoperative complications. Additionally, neural networks have greater sensitivity than LR when predicting mortality and wound complications. With the growing size of medical data, the training of machine learning on these large datasets promises to improve risk prognostication, with the ability of continuously learning making them excellent tools in complex clinical scenarios.

Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Outcomes over 10 Years: A Prospective Study

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort study with >10-year follow-up.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the long-term, >10-year clinical outcomes of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and to compare outcomes based on primary diagnosis of disc herniation, stenosis or advanced degenerative disc disease (DDD), number of levels treated, and preexisting adjacent level degeneration.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

ACDF is a proven treatment for patients with stenosis and disc herniation and results in significantly improved short- and intermediate-term outcomes. Motion preservation treatments may result in improved long-term outcomes but need to be compared to long-term ACDF outcomes reference.

METHODS

Patients who had disc herniation, stenosis, and DDD and underwent ACDF with or without decompression were prospectively enrolled and followed for a minimum of 10 years with outcome assessment at various intervals. All 159 consecutive patients had autogenous tricortical iliac crest bone graft and plate instrumentation used. Outcomes included visual analog scale for neck and arm pain. pain drawing, Oswestry Disability Index, and self-assessment of procedure success. Preoperative adjacent-level disc degeneration, pseudarthrosis, and secondary operations were analyzed.

RESULTS

For all diagnostic groups, significant outcomes improvement was seen at all follow-up periods for all scales relative to preoperative scores. Outcomes were not related to age, gender, number of levels treated, and minimally to preexisting degeneration at the adjacent level. The use of narcotic pain medication decreased substantially. Neurological deficits almost all resolved. Patient self-reported success ranged from 85% to 95%. Over the long term, additional surgery for pseudarthrosis (10%) occurred in the early follow-up period, and for adjacent segment degeneration (21%), which occurred linearly during the >10-year follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

ACDF leads to significantly improved outcomes for all primary diagnoses and was sustained for >10 years' follow-up. Secondary surgeries were performed for pseudarthrosis repair and for symptomatic adjacent-level degeneration.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2.

Anesthesia Duration as an Independent Risk Factor for Early Postoperative Complications in Adults Undergoing Elective ACDF

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the presence of any potential associations between anesthesia time with postoperative outcome and complications following elective anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).

METHODS

Patients who underwent elective ACDF were identified in the American College of Surgeons National Quality Improvement Program database. Patient demographics, medical comorbidities, and perioperative and postoperative complications up to 30 days were analyzed by univariate and multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 3801 patients undergoing elective ACDF were identified. Patients were subdivided into quintiles of anesthesia time: Group 1, 48 to 129 minutes (n = 761, 20%); Group 2, 129 to 156 minutes (n = 760, 20%); Group 3, 156 to 190 minutes (n = 760, 20%); Group 4, 190 to 245 minutes (n = 760, 20%); and Group 5, 245 to 1025 minutes (n = 760, 20%). Univariate analysis showed significantly higher rates of any complication (P < .0001), pulmonary complication (P < .0001), intra-/postoperative blood transfusions (P < .0001), sepsis (P = .017), wound complications (P = .002), total length of stay >5 days (P < .0001), and return to operating room (P = .006) in the highest quintile compared to those of other groups. Multivariate regression analysis revealed that prolonged anesthesia was an independent factor for increased odds of overall complications (odds ratio [OR] = 2.71, P = .012), venous thromboembolism (OR = 2.69, P = .011), and return to the operating room (OR = 2.92, P = .004). The 2 groups with the longest anesthesia durations (quintiles 4 and 5) had increased total length of stay more than 5 days (for quintile 4, OR = 3.10, P = .0004; for quintile 5, OR = 3.61, P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

Prolonged anesthesia duration is associated with increased odds of complication, venous thromboembolism, increased length of stay, and return to the operating room.

Trends in the Treatment of Single and Multilevel Cervical Stenosis: A Review of the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Database

BACKGROUND

In order to identify any changes in the utilization of new and old techniques, we investigated trends in the operative management of cervical stenosis by orthopaedic surgeons applying for board certification.

METHODS

We queried the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery database from 1998 to 2013 to identify all of the cervical spine procedures for stenosis that had been performed by candidates taking Part II of the licensing examination. Longitudinal trends were determined for the utilized approach, the individual procedures that had been performed, and whether a motion-preserving technique had been employed.

RESULTS

There were 5,068 cervical spine procedures performed by 1,025 candidates. Procedure totals remained relatively constant until 2011, when a sudden increase of 280% (202 to 768 procedures) was noted. This trend continued, reaching a 460% increase (202 to 1,131 procedures) compared with 2010. The number of candidates only rose by 150% (42 to 105) over the entire study period. The proportion of procedures performed via an anterior approach saw a bimodal distribution; early on, this approach predominated over posterior procedures and was largely driven by the number of corpectomies that were performed. From 2004 to 2011, posterior procedures became more prevalent, but there was a sharp decline in 2011, driven by the large number of anterior cervical discectomies and fusions that were performed. This remained constant through 2013. Lastly, motion-preserving techniques, which included total disc replacement and laminoplasty, had modest increases in utilization from 2005 to 2007. This increased prevalence was short-lived, and it steadily declined through 2014 to <5% utilization.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of candidates performing cervical spine procedures increased more than twofold over a 16-year period. This reflects a larger proportion of the orthopaedic graduates who subspecialize in spine surgery. While the number of surgeons performing spine surgery has increased, the sheer number of procedures that each surgeon performed greatly outpaced the increased number of surgeons. Motion-preserving techniques had their peak utilization in 2007, and have since decreased to <5%, in contrast to fusion techniques, which predominate, comprising >90% of the performed procedures.

An Outcome Study of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion among Iranian Population

Background and Aim. First-line treatment strategy for managing cervical disc herniation is conservative measures. In some cases, surgery is indicated either due to signs/symptoms of severe/progressive neurological deficits, or because of persistence of radicular pain despite 12 weeks of conservative treatment. Success for treatment of cervical disc herniation using ACDF has been successfully reported in the literature. We aim to determine the outcome of ACDF in treatment of cervical disc herniation among Iranians. Methods and Materials/Patients. In a retrospective cohort study, we evaluated 68 patients who had undergone ACDF for cervical disc herniation from March 2006 to March 2011. Outcome tools were as follows: (1) study-designed questionnaire that addressed residual and/or new complaints and subjective satisfaction with the operation; (2) recent (one week prior to the interview) postoperative VAS for neck and upper extremity radicular pain; (3) Japanese Orthopaedic Association Myelopathy Evaluation Questionnaire (JOACMEQ) (standard Persian version); and (4) follow-up cervical Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and lateral X-ray. Results. With mean follow-up time of 52.93 (months) ± 31.89 SD (range: 13-131 months), we had success rates with regard to ΔVAS for neck and radicular pain of 88.2% and 89.7%, respectively. Except QOL functional score of JOAMEQ, 100% success rate for the other 4 functional scores of JOAMEQ was achieved. Conclusion. ACDF is a successful surgical technique for the management of cervical disc herniation among Iranian population.

Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: Practice Patterns Among Greek Spinal Surgeons

Background

A web-based survey was conducted among Greek spinal surgeons to outline the current practice trends in regard to the surgical management of patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for degenerative cervical spine pathology. Various practice patterns exist in the surgical management of patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy for degenerative pathology. No consensus exists regarding the type of the employed graft, the necessity of implanting a plate, the prescription of an external orthotic device, and the length of the leave of absence in these patients.

Methods

A specially designed questionnaire was used for evaluating the criteria for surgical intervention, the frequency of fusion employment, the type of the graft, the frequency of plate implantation, the employment of an external spinal orthosis (ESO), the length of the leave of absence, and the prescription of postoperative physical therapy. Physicians’ demographic factors were assessed including residency and spinal fellowship training, as well as type and length in practice.

Results

Eighty responses were received. Neurosurgeons represented 70%, and orthopedic surgeons represented 30%. The majority of the participants (91.3%) considered fusion necessary. Allograft was the preferred type of graft. Neurosurgeons used a plate in 42.9% of cases, whereas orthopedic surgeons in 100%. An ESO was recommended for 87.5% of patients without plates, and in 83.3% of patients with plates. The average duration of ESO usage was 4 weeks. Physical therapy was routinely prescribed postoperatively by 75% of the neurosurgeons, and by 83.3% of the orthopedic surgeons. The majority of the participants recommended 4 weeks leave of absence.

Conclusions

The vast majority of participants considered ACDF a better treatment option than an ACD, and preferred an allograft. The majority of them employed a plate, prescribed an ESO postoperatively, and recommended physical therapy to their patients.

Long Term Societal Costs of Anterior Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) versus Cervical Disc Arthroplasty (CDA) for Treatment of Cervical Radiculopathy

BACKGROUND

Current literature suggests that anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) have comparable clinical outcomes for the treatment of cervical radiculopathy. Given similar outcomes, an understanding of differences in long-term societal costs can help guide resource utilization. The purpose of this study was to compare the relative long-term societal costs of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) to cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) for the treatment of single level cervical disc disease by considering upfront surgical costs, lost productivity, and risk of subsequent revision surgery.

METHODS

We completed an economic and decision analysis using a Markov model to evaluate the long-term societal costs of ACDF and CDA in a theoretical cohort of 45-65 year old patients with single level cervical disc disease who have failed nonoperative treatment.

RESULTS

The long-term societal costs for a 45-year old patient undergoing ACDF are $31,178 while long-term costs for CDA are $24,119. Long-term costs for CDA remain less expensive throughout the modeled age range of 45 to 65 years old. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that CDA remains less expensive than ACDF as long as annual reoperation rate remains below 10.5% annually.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on current data, CDA has lower long-term societal costs than ACDF for patients 45-65 years old by a substantial margin. Given reported reoperation rates of 2.5% for CDA, it is the preferred treatment for cervical radiculopathy from an economic perspective.

WITHDRAWN: Arthroplasty versus fusion in single-level cervical degenerative disc disease

Background

There is ongoing debate about whether fusion or arthroplasty is superior in the treatment of single level cervical degenerative disc disease. Mainly because the intended advantage of arthroplasty over fusion, that is, the prevention of symptoms due to adjacent segment degeneration in the long term, is not confirmed yet. Until sufficient long‐term results become available, it is important to know whether results of one of the two treatments are superior to the other in the first one to two years.

Objectives

To assess the effects of arthroplasty versus fusion for radiculopathy or myelopathy, or both due to single level cervical degenerative disc disease.

Search methods

We searched the following databases for randomised controlled trials (RCTs): CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 2), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and EBMR. Additionally, we searched the System for Information on Grey Literature (SIGLE), subheading Biological and Medical Sciences, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) database on medical devices, and Clinicaltrials.gov to identify trials in progress. We also screened the reference list of all selected papers. Date of search: 25 May 2011.

Selection criteria

We included RCTs that directly compared any type of cervical fusion with any type of arthroplasty, with at least one year of follow‐up. Primary outcomes were arm pain, neck pain, neck‐related functional status, patient satisfaction, neurological outcome, and global health status. Secondary outcomes were the presence of (radiological) fusion, revision surgery at the treated level, secondary surgery on adjacent levels, segmental mobility of treated and adjacent levels, and work status.

Data collection and analysis

Study selection was performed independently by three review authors, and 'Risk of bias' assessment and data extraction were performed by two review authors. In case of missing data or insufficient information for a judgement about risk of bias, we tried to contact the study authors or the study sponsor. The data were entered into RevMan by one review author and subsequently checked by a second review author. We assessed the quality of evidence using GRADE. We analysed heterogeneity and performed sensitivity analyses for the pooled analyses.

Main results

We included nine studies (2400 participants), five of which had a low risk of bias. Eight of these studies were industry sponsored. The most important results showed low‐quality evidence for a small but significant difference in alleviation of arm pain at one to two years in favour of arthroplasty (mean difference (MD) ‐1.54; 95% confidence interval (CI) ‐2.86 to ‐0.22; 100‐point scale). A small study effect could not be ruled out for this outcome in the sensitivity analyses. This means that smaller studies (or small published subsets of larger studies) showed larger differences for this outcome, which may indicate publication bias. Also, moderate‐quality evidence showed a small difference in neck‐related functional status at one to two years in favour of arthroplasty (MD ‐2.79; 95% CI ‐4.73 to ‐0.85; 100‐point scale) and a small difference in neurological outcome in favour of arthroplasty (risk ratio (RR) 1.05; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.09). These two outcomes were robust to sensitivity analyses. For none of the primary outcomes, was a clinically relevant difference shown. Additionally, there was high‐quality evidence for a large, statistically significant difference in segmental mobility at one to two years (measured as degrees segmental range of motion) at the treated level (MD 6.90; 95% CI 5.45 to 8.35). There was low‐quality evidence that there was no statistically significant difference in secondary surgery at the adjacent levels at one to two years (RR 0.60; 95% CI 0.35 to 1.02). The latter was not robust to sensitivity analyses.

Authors' conclusions

There was a tendency for clinical results to be in favour of arthroplasty; often these were statistically significant. However, differences in effect size were invariably small and not clinically relevant for all primary outcomes. Significance was often gained or lost in the varying sensitivity analyses, probably owing to the relatively small number of studies, in combination with the small differences that were found. Given the fact that all of the included studies were not blinded, this could be due to patient or carer expectations. However, at this time both treatments can be seen as valid options with respect to results at a maximum of one to two years. Given the current absence of truly long‐term results, use of these mobile disc prostheses should still be limited to clinical trials. There was high‐quality evidence that the goal of preservation of segmental mobility in arthroplasty was met. A statistically significant effect on the incidence of secondary symptoms at adjacent levels, the primary goal of arthroplasty over fusion, was not found at one to two years. If there was a protective effect, this should become clearer over time. A future update, when studies with 'truly long‐term' results (five years or more) become available, should focus on this issue.

A herniated disc in the neck often causes radiating pain, numbness, and weakness in muscles of the neck, shoulders, arms, and hands. It may also lead to symptoms in the trunk and legs.

When there is no or insufficient relief of symptoms with non‐surgical treatment, surgery can be an option. Traditional 'fusion' surgery involves fusion of the two bones of the spine (the vertebrae) that form the disc space. Motion between these two vertebrae is then no longer possible.

It has been suggested that this may cause the adjacent parts of the spine to become more mobile, as compensation. This in turn might accelerate normal wear and tear in these parts of the spine, which could lead to new symptoms. At present this is not confirmed.

Mobile disc prostheses have been introduced in an effort to reduce the amount of new symptoms at the longer term after surgery by preserving motion between the vertebrae involved. Long‐term results are not available yet. However, it is important to know whether disc arthroplasty is at least as effective as fusion in relieving symptoms, the primary aim of surgery.

In this review we have searched for all studies in which the patient receives one of these two possible treatments at random.

We identified nine studies (2400 participants), and considered five of these to have high methodological quality. This review shows that patients who were treated with a mobile disc prosthesis had less pain radiating to the arm one to two years after surgery, and less disability owing to these complaints. However, the actual differences were very small, only between 1 and 5 points on a 100‐point scale. The overall quality of the evidence was low to moderate, which means that including new studies in future years could change these conclusions. The conclusion that mobility is in fact preserved after placement of a mobile disc prosthesis, compared to traditional 'fusion' surgery, is unlikely to change. Whether this preserved mobility will lead to fewer new symptoms in the future is uncertain based on results for the first one to two years after surgery.

Therefore, a comparison of results in the long term (five years or more) will be made when more studies with long‐term results have become available.

Graft inserter for anterior cervical fusion

The authors have developed a simple instrument for graft insertion in anterior cervical fusion. This device obviates the need for screw distraction of the adjacent vertebrae or the use of an impactor for insertion. This device simplifies graft insertion where the disc space is narrow, particularly in multilevel fusions, and reduces the risk of over-penetration of the graft.

Preoperative factors affecting length of stay after elective anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with and without corpectomy: a multivariate analysis of an academic center cohort

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study of 183 patients who underwent elective anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) at a single institution during a 2-year period.

OBJECTIVE

To determine which preoperative factors were independently associated with a prolonged hospital length of stay (LOS) after ACDF.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

ACDF has become the most common treatment modality for addressing cervical spine pathology. Extended LOS after ACDF is associated with increased costs and complications. There is a lack of conclusive data for factors affecting LOS after ACDF. This study aims to create a multivariate model to determine the association of various patient and operative characteristics with LOS after ACDF.

METHODS

Patients who underwent elective ACDF at a single academic institution between January 2011 and February 2013 were identified using billing records. Their charts were reviewed to collect variables available preoperatively such as patient demographics, comorbidities, and surgery planned. Patients were categorized as normal or extended LOS, with extended LOS defined as LOS more than the 75th percentile. A multivariate logistic regression was used to determine which factors were independently associated with extended LOS.

RESULTS

A total of 183 patients with ACDF were identified. The average LOS for this cohort was 2.0 ± 2.5 days (mean ± standard deviation). Extended LOS was defined as 3 days or more. Multivariate analysis revealed that preoperative factors independently associated with extended LOS were history of nonspinal malignancy (odds ratio [OR] = 4.9), history of pulmonary disease (OR = 4.0), and procedures that included corpectomy (OR = 4.5).

CONCLUSION

Patients with a history of nonspinal malignancy or pulmonary disease, as well as patients who underwent corpectomy, were more likely to have an extended LOS (ORs, 4.0-4.9). Of significant note, other factors that one might expect to be associated with extended LOS did not independently predict extended LOS in this analysis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Factors predictive of increased surgical drain output after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

To identify factors that are independently associated with increased surgical drain output in patients who have undergone ACDF.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Surgical drains are typically placed after ACDF to reduce the risk of complications associated with neck hematoma. The orthopedic literature has repeatedly challenged the use of surgical drains after many procedures, and there are currently no guidelines for determining which patients are most likely to benefit from drain placement after ACDF.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent elective ACDF with surgical drain placement at a single academic institution between January 2011 and February 2013 were identified using billing records. Patient information was abstracted from the medical record. Patients were categorized on the basis of normal or increased total drain output, with increased drain output defined as total drain output 50th percentile (30 mL) or more. A multivariate logistic regression was used to determine which factors were independently associated with increased drain output.

RESULTS

A total of 151 patients with ACDF met inclusion criteria. Total drain output was in the range from 0 mL to 265 mL. The average drain output for this cohort was 42.3 ± 45.5 mL (mean ± standard deviation). Among all patients in the study, 80 patients had increased drain output (drain output ≥50th percentile or 30 mL).Multivariate analysis identified 3 independent predictors of increased drain output: age 50 years or more (odds ratio [OR] = 3.9), number of levels (2 levels, OR = 2.7; 3-4 levels, OR = 17.0), and history of smoking (OR = 2.8). One patient developed a postoperative neck hematoma while a drain was in place.

CONCLUSION

Patients with the factors associated with increased drain output identified in the earlier text may benefit most from surgical drain placement after ACDF. Nonetheless, neck hematoma is still possible even with drain use.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Arthroplasty versus fusion in single-level cervical degenerative disc disease: a Cochrane review

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effects of arthroplasty versus fusion in the treatment of radiculopathy or myelopathy, or both, due to single-level cervical degenerative disc disease.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

There is ongoing debate about whether fusion or arthroplasty is superior in the treatment of single-level cervical degenerative disc disease. Mainly because the intended advantage of arthroplasty compared with fusion, prevention of symptoms due to adjacent segment degeneration in the long term, is not confirmed yet. Until sufficient long-term results become available, it is important to know whether results of 1 of the 2 treatments are superior to the other in the first 1 to 2 years.

METHODS

We searched electronic databases for randomized controlled trials. We included randomized controlled trials that directly compared any type of cervical fusion with any type of cervical arthroplasty, with at least 1 year of follow-up. Study selection was performed independently by 3 review authors, and "risk of bias" assessment and data extraction were independently performed by 2 review authors. In case of missing data, we contacted the study authors or the study sponsor. We assessed the quality of evidence.

RESULTS

Nine studies (2400 participants) were included in this review; 5 of these studies had a low risk of bias. Results for the arthroplasty group were better than the fusion group for all primary comparisons, often statistically significant. For none of the primary outcomes was a clinically relevant difference in effect size shown. Quality of the evidence was low to moderate.

CONCLUSION

There is low to moderate quality evidence that results are consistently in favor of arthroplasty, often statistically significant. However, differences in effect size were invariably small and not clinically relevant for all primary outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1.

Factors affecting hospital length of stay following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion

Study design: Retrospective cohort study.

Background: Several studies focus on the long-term results of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgeries, but little information exists regarding how various patient-related, procedure-related, and payer-related variables may affect postoperative hospital length of stay (LOS).

Objective: To determine what factors, if any, contribute to increased hospital LOS in patients who have had an ACDF.

Methods: Retrospective cohort study of 108 consecutive patients who underwent elective ACDF at a Midwest academic medical center. Extensive preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data were abstracted and analyzed to identify prognostic factors for an increased LOS. Multivariate analysis was performed to analyze the effects of patient and hospital characteristics on hospital LOS.

Results: 103 patients met inclusion and exclusion criteria. The mean LOS for patients undergoing ACDF was 1.98 (±1.6) days. Only 29% of patients had one level fused. The mean blood loss during surgery was 87.4 ± 99.6 mL. One subject lost 700 mL of blood. Complications, though rare, included uncontrolled postoperative pain (13%), cardiac (6%), pulmonary (4%), and urinary (3%). Covariates included in the final model were age, sex, cardiac complication, urinary complication, and pulmonary complication. Factors that contributed to increased LOS and their associated adjusted mean days were: ≥50 years of age (2.5 ± 1.2 days), female gender (2.3 ± 1.2 days), and three particular types of complications. The complications that had the largest effect on increased LOS from least to most severe were cardiac (3.5 ± 1.3 days), urinary (4.7 ± 1.3 days), and pulmonary (5.3 ± 1.3 days).

Conclusions: The information presented in this study may be useful for patients, clinicians, and insurance companies, including precertification and case-management services. Our results can be instrumental in designing future prospective studies using more detailed analyses with more patients, more surgeons, and multiple institutions.

Arthroplasty versus fusion in single-level cervical degenerative disc disease

BACKGROUND

There is ongoing debate about whether fusion or arthroplasty is superior in the treatment of single level cervical degenerative disc disease. Mainly because the intended advantage of arthroplasty over fusion, that is, the prevention of symptoms due to adjacent segment degeneration in the long term, is not confirmed yet. Until sufficient long-term results become available, it is important to know whether results of one of the two treatments are superior to the other in the first one to two years.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of arthroplasty versus fusion for radiculopathy or myelopathy, or both due to single level cervical degenerative disc disease.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases for randomised controlled trials (RCTs): CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 2), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and EBMR. Additionally, we searched the System for Information on Grey Literature (SIGLE), subheading Biological and Medical Sciences, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) database on medical devices, and Clinicaltrials.gov to identify trials in progress. We also screened the reference list of all selected papers. Date of search: 25 May 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs that directly compared any type of cervical fusion with any type of arthroplasty, with at least one year of follow-up. Primary outcomes were arm pain, neck pain, neck-related functional status, patient satisfaction, neurological outcome, and global health status. Secondary outcomes were the presence of (radiological) fusion, revision surgery at the treated level, secondary surgery on adjacent levels, segmental mobility of treated and adjacent levels, and work status.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Study selection was performed independently by three review authors, and 'Risk of bias' assessment and data extraction were performed by two review authors. In case of missing data or insufficient information for a judgement about risk of bias, we tried to contact the study authors or the study sponsor. The data were entered into RevMan by one review author and subsequently checked by a second review author. We assessed the quality of evidence using GRADE. We analysed heterogeneity and performed sensitivity analyses for the pooled analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine studies (2400 participants), five of which had a low risk of bias. Eight of these studies were industry sponsored. The most important results showed low-quality evidence for a small but significant difference in alleviation of arm pain at one to two years in favour of arthroplasty (mean difference (MD) -1.54; 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.86 to -0.22; 100-point scale). A small study effect could not be ruled out for this outcome in the sensitivity analyses. This means that smaller studies (or small published subsets of larger studies) showed larger differences for this outcome, which may indicate publication bias. Also, moderate-quality evidence showed a small difference in neck-related functional status at one to two years in favour of arthroplasty (MD -2.79; 95% CI -4.73 to -0.85; 100-point scale) and a small difference in neurological outcome in favour of arthroplasty (risk ratio (RR) 1.05; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.09). These two outcomes were robust to sensitivity analyses. For none of the primary outcomes, was a clinically relevant difference shown. Additionally, there was high-quality evidence for a large, statistically significant difference in segmental mobility at one to two years (measured as degrees segmental range of motion) at the treated level (MD 6.90; 95% CI 5.45 to 8.35). There was low-quality evidence that there was no statistically significant difference in secondary surgery at the adjacent levels at one to two years (RR 0.60; 95% CI 0.35 to 1.02). The latter was not robust to sensitivity analyses.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was a tendency for clinical results to be in favour of arthroplasty; often these were statistically significant. However, differences in effect size were invariably small and not clinically relevant for all primary outcomes. Significance was often gained or lost in the varying sensitivity analyses, probably owing to the relatively small number of studies, in combination with the small differences that were found. Given the fact that all of the included studies were not blinded, this could be due to patient or carer expectations. However, at this time both treatments can be seen as valid options with respect to results at a maximum of one to two years. Given the current absence of truly long-term results, use of these mobile disc prostheses should still be limited to clinical trials. There was high-quality evidence that the goal of preservation of segmental mobility in arthroplasty was met. A statistically significant effect on the incidence of secondary symptoms at adjacent levels, the primary goal of arthroplasty over fusion, was not found at one to two years. If there was a protective effect, this should become clearer over time. A future update, when studies with 'truly long-term' results (five years or more) become available, should focus on this issue.

National trends in anterior cervical fusion procedures

STUDY DESIGN

Population-based database analysis.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze trends in patient- and healthcare-system-related characteristics, utilization and outcomes associated with anterior cervical spine fusions.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Anterior cervical decompression and spine fusion (ACDF) is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures of the spine. However, few data analyzing trends in patient- and healthcare-system-related characteristics, utilization and outcomes exist.

METHODS

Data from 1990 to 2004 collected in the National Hospital Discharge Survey were accessed. ACDF procedures were identified. Five-year periods of interest (POI) were created for temporal analysis and changes in the prevalence and utilization of this procedure as well as in patient- and healthcare-system-related variables were examined. The changes in the occurrence of procedure-related complications were evaluated.

RESULTS

An estimated total of 771,932 discharges after ACDF were identified. Temporally, an almost 8-fold increase in total prevalence was accompanied by a similar increase in utilization (23/100.000 civilians/POI to 157/100.000/civilians/POI). The highest increase in utilization was observed in those > or =65 years (28-fold). Average age increased from 47.2 years to 50.5 years over time. Length of hospital stay decreased from 5.17 days to 2.38 days. Overall procedure-related complication rates decreased from 4.6% to 3.03%. The prevalence of hypertension, diabetes mellitus, hypercholesterolemia, obesity, pulmonary, and coronary artery increased over time among patients undergoing ACDF.

CONCLUSION

Despite limitations inherent to secondary analysis of large databases, we identified a number of significant changes in the utilization, demographics, and outcomes associated with ACDF, which can be used to assess the effect of changes in medical care, direct health care resources, and future research. The effect of the increased prevalence of comorbidities on medical practice remains to be evaluated. Further studies are necessary to evaluate causal relationships.

Indications for anterior cervical decompression for the treatment of cervical degenerative radiculopathy

OBJECT

The objective of this systematic review was to use evidence-based medicine to identify the indications and utility of anterior cervical nerve root decompression.

METHODS

The National Library of Medicine and Cochrane Database were queried using MeSH headings and key words relevant to surgical management of cervical radiculopathy. Abstracts were reviewed after which studies meeting inclusion criteria were selected. The guidelines group assembled an evidentiary table summarizing the quality of evidence (Classes I-III). Disagreements regarding the level of evidence were resolved through an expert consensus conference. The group formulated recommendations that contained the degree of strength based on the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines network. Validation was done through peer review by the Joint Guidelines Committee of the American Association of Neurological Surgeons/Congress of Neurological Surgeons.

RESULTS

Anterior nerve root decompression via anterior cervical discectomy (ACD) with or without fusion for radiculopathy is associated with rapid relief (3-4 months) of arm/neck pain, weakness, and/or sensory loss compared with physical therapy (PT) or cervical collar immobilization. Anterior cervical discectomy and ACD with fusion (ACDF) are associated with longer term (12 months) improvement in certain motor functions compared to PT. Other rapid gains observed after anterior decompression (diminished pain, improved sensation, and improved strength in certain muscle groups) are also maintained over the course of 12 months. However, comparable clinical improvements with PT or cervical immobilization therapy are also present in these clinical modalities (Class I). Conflicting evidence exists as to the efficacy of anterior cervical foraminotomy with reported success rates of 52-99% but recurrent symptoms as high as 30% (Class III).

CONCLUSIONS

Anterior cervical discectomy, ACDF, and anterior cervical foraminotomy may improve cervical radicular symptoms. With regard to ACD and ACDF compared to PT or cervical immobilization, more rapid relief (within 3-4 months) may be seen with ACD or ACDF with maintenance of gains over the course of 12 months (Class I). Anterior cervical foraminotomy is associated with improvement in clinical function but the quality of data are weaker (Class III), and there is a wide range of efficacy (52-99%).

Comparison of short-term SF-36 results between total joint arthroplasty and cervical spine decompression and fusion or arthroplasty

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort comparison of results of meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE

To compare improvement in SF-36 after cervical spine surgery to total hip and joint arthroplasty.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Health-related quality of life outcome instruments allow comparison of different diseases and change with various treatments. Total hip and knee arthroplasty are accepted procedures with excellent outcomes. It is unknown if treatment of cervical spine disease approaches those results.

METHODS

A meta-analysis of SF-36 outcomes of total hip and knee arthroplasty was performed and compared to results after cervical discectomy and arthroplasty or fusion. Pooled means and SD were calculated and compared among treatment groups using analysis of variance.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies reporting results in patients having total hip and knee arthroplasty and 2 randomized controlled studies of cervical disc arthroplasty were identified. The baseline physical function was worse in the joint arthroplasty patients and the mental health scores were worse in the cervical spine patients. The mean improvements in PCS for disc, fusion, total hip, and total knee arthroplasty were 14.2, 12.5, 12.2, and 9.6, respectively. The improvement in the physical component score (SF-36) was significantly greater in the cervical arthroplasty compared to the other 3 groups. Cervical fusion improvement was similar to total hip arthroplasty and both were greater than total knee arthroplasty. MCS domain improvement was significantly better in the cervical spine groups.

CONCLUSION

The SF-36 results were surprising and showed equal or greater short-term improvement in cervical spine patient's pain and function than that observed after joint arthroplasty, although all groups had substantial improvement. Greater MCS improvement was likely caused by a ceiling effect as joint arthroplasty on average had normal scores at baseline.

Cost-utility analysis of routine neurosurgical spinal surgery

OBJECT

Cost-utility analysis is currently the preferred method with which to compare the cost-effectiveness of various interventions. The authors conducted a study to establish the cost-utility results of routine neurosurgery-based spinal interventions by examining patient-derived values.

METHODS

Two hundred seventy patients undergoing surgery for cervical or lumbar radicular pain filled in the 15-dimensional health-related quality of life (HRQOL) questionnaire before and 3 months after surgery. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated using the utility data and the expected remaining life years of the patients. The mean HRQOL score (scale, 0-1) increased after cervical surgery (169 patients, mean age 52 years, 40% women) from 0.81 +/- 0.11 preoperatively, to 0.85 +/- 0.11 at 3 months, and after lumbar surgery (101 patients, mean age 54 years, 59% women) from 0.79 +/- 0.10 preoperatively, to 0.85 +/- 0.12 at 3 months (p < 0.001). Of the 15 dimensions of health, improvement in the following was documented in both groups: sleeping, usual activities, discomfort and symptoms, depression, distress, vitality, and sexual activity (p < 0.05). The cost per QALY gained was Euro 2774 and 1738 for cervical and lumbar operations, respectively. In cases in which surgery was delayed the cost per QALY was doubled.

CONCLUSIONS

Spinal surgery led to a statistically significant and clinically important improvement in HRQOL. The cost per QALY gained was reasonable, less than half of that observed, for example, for hip replacement surgery or angioplasty treatment of coronary artery disease; however, a prolonged delay in surgical intervention led to an approximate doubling of the cost per QALY gained by the treatment.

Predictive factors for arm pain, neck pain, neck specific disability and health after anterior cervical decompression and fusion

BACKGROUND

Predictive factors for a low arm and neck pain, and good health after anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) with a cervical carbon fibre intervertebral fusion cage (CIFC) are still lacking.

METHOD

A prospective consecutive study to investigate which preoperative factors that could predict a good outcome with regard to arm pain, neck pain, Neck Disability Index (NDI) and general health three years after ACDF with CIFC was conducted. Thirty-four patients were included before surgery. Measurements took place the day before, six months, one year and three years after ACDF.

FINDINGS

In multivariate analysis, to be a non-smoker before surgery was the most important factor for a low postoperative arm pain, a low pain frequency was the most important factor for low postoperative neck pain, normal rating on Distress and Risk Assessment Method (DRAM) was the most important factor for high function on NDI and a low initial pain intensity was the most important factor for good postoperative health. For all outcome variables a normal rating on DRAM was an important factor for a good outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-smoking, a low pain level and normal rating on DRAM were the best preoperative predictors of a good outcome in ACDF. Inclusion criteria for surgery should be based on a bio psychosocial model and DRAM seems to be useful for including the traditional inclusion criteria.

A prospective randomized comparison of rectangular titanium cage fusion and iliac crest autograft fusion in patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy

Object

The authors compare clinical outcome and fusion rates after iliac crest autograft (ICAG)– and rectangular titanium cage (RTC)–augmented fusion in patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy (ACD).

Methods

One hundred consecutive patients with 127 levels of cervical disc disease refractory to conservative treatment were randomized into one of the two treatment groups (ICAG/RTC fusion). The visual analog scale was used by the patient to rate overall pain and head, neck, arm, and donor site pain separately. Myelopathy was documented according to Japanese Orthopaedic Association and Nurick grading systems. Outcome was analyzed using Odom criteria, the 36-Item Short Form (SF-36), and Patient Satisfaction Index scales. Fusion rates were assessed on standard and flexion–extension radiographs. Follow-up data of at least 12 months' duration were available for 95 patients.

More residual overall pain after 12 months was documented in patients who underwent ICAG fusion (3.3 ± 2.5 [ICAG] and 2.2 ± 2.4 [RTC]; p < 0.05). Although arm and head pain were minimal in both groups, neck pain proved to be the predominant symptom (2.7 ± 2.5 [ICAG] and 1.9 ± 2.1 [RTC]), which resolved in only 67 and 48% of RTC-and ICAG-treated patients, respectively (p < 0.05). Myelopathy improved comparably in both groups. Regardless of increased pain in ICAG-treated patients, PSI and SF-36 scores were not significantly different between groups (only four [8%] of 47 ICAG-treated patients and five [10%] of 48 RTC-treated patients were unsatisfied). Good to excellent functional recovery according to Odom criteria was observed in 75 and 79% of ICAG- and RTC-treated patients, respectively. Fusion rates were 81 and 74%, respectively (p = 0.51).

Conclusions

Fusion rates and clinical outcome at 12 months after ACD were comparable between patients who underwent ICAG and RTC fusion. The use of rectangular cages, however, avoids donor site morbidity and reduces overall pain and, thus, seems to be an advantageous treatment alternative.

Dynamic anterior cervical plates for multilevel anterior corpectomy and fusion with simultaneous posterior wiring and fusion: efficacy and outcomes

STUDY DESIGN

To prospectively evaluate major complications associated with the application of dynamic ABC plates (Aesculap, Tuttlingen, Germany) to multilevel Anterior Corpectomy/Fusion (ACF) followed by posterior fusion (C2-C7 PF).

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether dynamic ABC (Aesculap, Tuttlingen, Germany) plates would minimize major complications (plate/graft extrusion, pseudarthrosis) while maximizing neurological outcomes in 40 consecutive patients undergoing simultaneous multilevel ACF/PF with halo application.

SETTING

USA.

METHODS

Patients averaged 53 years of age and preoperatively exhibited severe myeloradiculopathy (Nurick Grade 3.9). MR/CT studies documented marked ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament/spondylostenosis. Surgery included two to four level ACF utilizing fibula strut allograft and ABC plates. Posterior spinous process wiring/fusions utilized braided titanium cables. The average operative time was 8.9 h. Fusion was confirmed on dynamic X-rays/CTs (3-12 months postoperatively). The average follow-up interval was 2.7 years. Outcomes (3 months-2 years postoperatively) were assessed utilizing Odom's Criteria, Nurick Grades, and SF-36 questionnaires.

RESULTS

Major complications included one pseudarthrosis requiring secondary PWF. Minor complications in six patients included two pulmonary emboli (PE), two tracheostomies, and five superficial wound infections. At 1 year postoperatively, marked improvement was observed in all patients utilizing Odom's criteria (38 excellent/good), Nurick Grades (mild radiculopathy 0.4), and the SF-36 (3 Health Scales; Role Physical (12.5-38.6), Bodily Pain (39.9-65.5), and Role Emotional (53.8-75.8)]. The 2-year postoperative data showed minimal additional improvement. The average time to fusion was 6.3 months.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing multilevel ACF/PF demonstrated marked neurological improvement (SF-36), and only one of 40 developed a delayed pseudarthrosis.

Cost-effectiveness of single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for cervical spondylosis

STUDY DESIGN

Cost-effectiveness analysis with retrospective cost analysis and literature review.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the relative cost-effectiveness of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with autograft, allograft, and allograft with plating for single-level anterior cervical spondylosis.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

There are several accepted methods of surgically treating single-level cervical spondylosis anteriorly. No study has clearly demonstrated the superiority of one method over the alternatives. The techniques may differ in their operative risks and resource use, perioperative complications, short-term outcome, and long-term outcome and complications. Formal cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) provides a structure for analyzing many variables and comparing different treatment outcomes. Sensitivity analysis is used to test the robustness of the model and to determine variables that have significant effects on the results. Future areas of research and refinements of the CEA model can be developed from these findings.

METHODS

A retrospective review of hospital charges was performed for 78 patients who underwent single-level ACDF with allograft alone or ACDF with allograft and plating (ACDFP). The charges were converted to estimated costs for fiscal year 2000 using the ratio of costs to charges method. A CEA model was developed consisting of a decision-analysis model for the first year postsurgery and a Markov model for the next 4 years after surgery. Probabilities and outcome utilities were estimated from the literature. Outcome was measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental CEA was performed. Several variables were tested in one-way sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

Compared with ACDF with autograft, ACDF with allograft offered an improvement in quality of life at a cost of 496 dollars per QALY. ACDFP provided additional gains in quality of life compared with ACDF with allograft at a cost of 32,560 dollars per QALY in the base case analysis. In sensitivity analysis, these estimates varied between 417 dollars and 741 dollars per QALY and between 19,090 dollars per QALY and domination of ACDFP by ACDF with allograft, respectively. The results were most sensitive to assumptions regarding differences in the length of the postoperative recovery period.

CONCLUSIONS

ACDF with allograft offers a benefit relative to ACDF with autograft at a cost of 496 dollars per QALY. ACDFP has a benefit relative to ACDF with allograft at an approximate cost of 32,560 dollars per QALY. CEA provides a method for comparing the benefits and risks of these three procedures. Further research needs to be performed regarding these procedures, particularly examining the postoperative recovery period.

Circumferential cervical surgery for ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament: a multianalytic outcome study

STUDY DESIGN

Three outcome measures, Nurick grades, Odom's criteria, and the Short Form (SF-36) were analyzed following circumferential cervical surgery in 47 patients.

OBJECTIVES

To analyze three outcome measures following circumferential surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Few studies use multiple outcome criteria to assess circumferential surgery.

METHODS

Patients averaged 54 years of age and exhibited severe myelopathy (Nurick grade 3.6). Corpectomies of 2.6 vertebrae (on average) were followed by posterior fusions (C2-T1) with halo stabilization. Initial fixed-plates (n = 28) and subsequent dynamic ABC plates (Aesculap, Tuttlingen, Germany) (n = 19) were applied, Fusion was confirmed on dynamic radiographs and two-dimensional CT studies 3, 6, and up to 12 months after surgery. Nurick grades and Odom's criteria were evaluated 1 and 2 years after surgery. Results of SF-36 questionnaires, obtained before surgery, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years after surgery, were calculated.

RESULTS

Neurodiagnostic studies confirmed fusion on average 5.0 months after surgery. One and 2 years after surgery, mean Nurick grades were 0.8 (+2.8 points) and 0.4 (+3.2 points), respectively. One year (2 years) postoperative Odom's criteria revealed excellent 26 (30), good 14 (11), fair 6 (5), and poor 1 (1) patient outcomes. Comparing preoperative with 1-year postoperative SF-36 questionnaires revealed moderate improvement on 5 health scales: Social Function (+19.9), Bodily Pain (+19.6), Role-Physical (+18.8), Physical Function (+12.5), and Role-Emotional (+11.1). Minimal additional improvement occurred over the second year: Role-Physical (+21.6), Social Function (+16.4), Bodily Pain (+13.4), Physical Function (+12.8), and Role Emotional (+9.5).

CONCLUSION

Based on three outcome measures, the greatest improvement occurs 1 year following circumferential surgery.

Impact of neck and arm pain on overall health status

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective, multicenter, cross-sectional analysis of data from the National Spine Network database.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the relative impact of radicular and axial symptoms associated with disease of the cervical spine on general health as measured by the SF-36 Health Survey, and to compare the impact of these symptoms among patients of varying age and symptom duration.

BACKGROUND

Degenerative disorders of the cervical spine can cause debilitating symptoms of neck and arm pain. Physicians generally treat radiculopathy more aggressively than axial neck pain alone, although it has never been shown that the presence of radiculopathy leads to a greater impairment of physical and mental function.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

SF-36 Health Survey data were collected from all consenting patients seen within the National Spine Network. Patients with symptoms referable to the cervical spine (as per their physician) were included (n = 1,809). SF-36 scores for all eight scales (bodily pain (BP), vitality (VT), general health (GH), mental health (MH), physical function (PF), role physical (RP), role emotional (RE), and social function (SF), and two summary scales (Physical Component Summary [PCS] and Mental Component Summary [MCS]) were calculated. Age/gender normative scores were subtracted from the scale scores to produce a negative "impact" score, which reflected how far below normal health status these patients were. Patients were grouped according to location of symptoms (axial only, radicular only, or axial and radicular), age (younger than 40, 40 to 60, and older than 60 years), and symptom duration (acute: <6 wk; subacute: 6 wk-6 mo; and chronic: >6 mo). SF-36 scores were compared between all groups using analysis of variance and multiple comparisons with Bonferroni adjustment.

RESULTS

Patients who presented with both axial and radicular symptoms had the lowest SF-36 scores relative to age and gender norms. These scores were significantly lower than those for patients with only axial or only radicular symptoms across all eight subscales (P < 0.05- P < 0.0001). Scores for patients with only axial pain were significantly lower than for patients with only radicular pain for VT (P < 0.04) and GH (P < 0.004). Patients younger than 40 and those between ages 40 to 60 years were significantly more impacted by their symptoms than patients older than 60 years for all eight scales (P < 0.01). PCS scores were similar for acute, subacute, and chronic groups, whereas MCS scores were significantly worse for patients with chronic pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined neck and arm pain were much more disabling than either symptom alone. Younger patients (younger than 40 or 40-60) were more affected by these symptoms than patients older than 60 years. In addition, as symptom duration increased, a negative impact on mental health was observed, although chronic symptoms did not affect physical health. This study suggests that patients with a significant component of axial pain in conjunction with cervical radiculopathy should be considered the most affected of all patients with cervical spondylosis. Given the evidence that the treatment methods at the disposal of physicians are effective, this study suggests that prompt treatment of these patients may help avoid the harmful effects of chronic symptoms on mental functioning, especially among younger patients who were found to be more impacted by the symptoms.

A prospective randomized comparison of coralline hydroxyapatite with autograft in cervical interbody fusion

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective randomized trial with independent clinical and radiographic outcome review of patients receiving either hydroxyapatite or tricortical iliac crest graft for cervical interbody fusion was conducted.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether coralline-derived hydroxyapatite is a suitable bone graft substitute in cervical interbody fusion.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Tricortical iliac crest bone is the "gold standard" graft material for cervical interbody fusion. Various bone substitutes have been used for this procedure to avoid potential donor site morbidity. ProOsteon 200 is a coralline-derived hydroxyapatite product, the use of which remains unclear for cervical interbody fusion.

METHODS

In this study, 29 patients undergoing anterior cervical fusion and plating were randomized to receive either ProOsteon 200 or iliac crest grafts. The SF-36 and Oswestry Disability Index were used to measure clinical outcome. Postoperative radiographs were analyzed for graft fragmentation, loss of height, angular alignment, and hardware failure to assess structural integrity of the graft material. Plain radiographs and computed tomography scans were used to evaluate fusion.

RESULTS

Both the ProOsteon 200 and iliac crest groups demonstrated significant improvement in clinical outcome scores. There was no significant difference in clinical outcome or fusion rates between the two groups. Graft fragmentation occurred in 89% of the hydroxyapatite grafts and 11% of the autografts (P = 0.001). Significant graft settling occurred in 50% of the hydroxyapatite grafts, as compared with 11% of the autografts (P = 0. 009). One patient in the ProOsteon 200 group required revision surgery for graft failure.

CONCLUSIONS

ProOsteon 200 does not possess adequate structural integrity to resist axial loading and maintain disc height or segmental lordosis during cervical interbody fusion.

Cervical radiculopathies: conservative approaches to management

It is now well recognized that the natural course of cervical radiculopathy is generally favorable. Comprehensive, aggressive, nonsurgical management often is successful with respect to functional outcomes, pain reduction, and patient satisfaction. Surgery is avoidable for most patients. The focus of this article is a review of the most recent and classic literature related to the nonsurgical management of cervical radiculopathies.