Comparison of Cervical Sagittal Parameters among Patients with Neck Pain and Patients with Cervical Spondylotic Radiculopathy and Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy

Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of Cervical Disc Arthroplasty in Patients with Modic Change

OBJECTIVE

Modic change (MC) is defined as abnormalities observed in the intervertebral disc subchondral and adjacent vertebral endplate subchondral bone changes. Most studies on MC were reported in the lumbar spine and associated with lower back pain. However, MC has been rarely reported in the cervical spine, let alone in those who underwent cervical disc replacement (CDR). This study aimed to focus on MC in the cervical spine and reveal clinical and radiological parameters, especially heterotopic ossification (HO), for patients who underwent CDR. Furthermore, we illustrated the association between MC and HO.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent CDA from January 2008 to December 2019. The Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA), Neck Disability Index (NDI), and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores were used to evaluate the clinical outcomes. Radiological evaluations were used to conclude the cervical alignment (CL) and range of motion (ROM) of C2-7, functional spinal unit angle (FSUA), shell angle (SA), FSU height, and HO. Univariate and multivariate logistic regressions were performed to identify the risk factors for HO. The Kaplan-Meier (K-M) method was used to analyze potential risk factors, and multivariate Cox regression was used to identify independent risk factors.

RESULTS

A total of 139 patients were evaluated, with a mean follow-up time of 46.53 ± 26.60 months. Forty-nine patients were assigned to the MC group and 90 to the non-MC group. The incidence of MC was 35.3%, with type 2 being the most common. Clinical outcomes (JOA, NDI, VAS) showed no significant difference between the two groups. The differences in C2-7 ROM between the two groups were not significant, while the differences in SA ROM and FSUA ROM were significantly higher in the non-MC than in the MC group (p < 0.05). Besides, FSU height in MC group was significantly lower than that in non-MC group. Parameters concerning CL, including C2-7, FSUA, SA, were not significantly different between the two groups. The incidence of HO and high-grade HO, respectively, in the MC group was 83.7% and 30.6%, while that in the non-MC group was 53.3% and 2.2%, and such differences were significant (p < 0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analyses and Cox regression showed that MC and involved level were significantly associated with HO occurrence (p < 0.05). No implant migration and secondary surgery were observed.

CONCLUSION

MC mainly affected the incidence of HO. Preoperative MC was significantly associated with HO formation after CDR and should be identified as a potential risk factor for HO. Rigorous criteria for MC should be taken into consideration when selecting appropriate candidates for CDR.

Two Methods of Forward Head Posture Assessment: Radiography vs. Posture and Their Clinical Comparison

Background: Forward head posture (FHP) and altered cervical lordotic curvatures are common spine displacements often associated with neck pain and disability. Two primary categories for determining FHP exist: radiographic and postural measurements. Methods: This study investigated the correlation between the craniovertebral angle (CVA), the radiographically measured C2-C7 sagittal vertical axis (SVA), and cervical lordosis (absolute rotation angle: ARA C2-C7) in a sample of participants with chronic myofascial pain (CMP). In 120 participants, we performed both a postural measurement of the CVA and a lateral cervical radiograph, where the C2-C7 SVA and ARA C2-C7 were measured. A linear-regression R2 value to assess the correlation between the CVA, C2-C7 SVA, and ARA C2-C7 was sought. Results: A statistically significant weak linear fit was identified (Spearman's r = 0.549; R2 = 0.30, p < 0.001) between the CVA and C2-C7 SVA, having considerable variation between the two measures. A statistically significant linear fit (very weak) was identified for the lordosis ARA C2-C7 and the CVA: Spearman's r = 0.524; R2 = 0.275; p < 0.001. A value of 50° for the CVA corresponded to a value of 20 mm for the C2-C7 SVA on an X-ray. Conclusion: While the CVA and radiographic C2-C7 SVA are weakly correlated in an individual, they seem to represent different aspects of sagittal cervical balance. The CVA cannot replace radiographically measured cervical lordosis. We recommend that more emphasis be given to radiographic measures of sagittal cervical alignment than the CVA when considering patient interventions.

Sagittal sequence and clinical efficacy of cervical disc replacement and hybrid surgery in the treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a retrospective study

Background

Hybrid surgery (HS) combines anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with cervical disc replacement (CDR) is gradually being more frequently implemented, but there are few studies reporting the safety and effectiveness of hybrid surgery in three levels cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

Methods

The clinical and radiographic data of patients with three-segment cervical spondylosis, who underwent CDR, ACDF and HS in our hospital from February 2007 to February 2013 were analyzed. The Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) and Neck Disability Index (NDI) were used to evaluate the clinical efficacy post surgery. Cervical spine x-rays were conducted to assess ROM, CL, T1S and relevant outcomes.

Results

A total of 94 patients were included in the study: 26 in the CDR group, 13 in the HS1 group, 31 in the HS2 group, and 24 in the ACDF group. Most patients in the CDR group were younger. There was no difference in the follow-up duration, blood loss volume or surgery time (P > 0.05). Four groups reported improvements in JOA and NDI scores compared to baseline. There was no significant difference in the final JOA, final NDI or recovery rate among the 4 groups. The final ROM was smaller in the ACDF group than in the other 3 groups. There was no difference among the four groups in the final UROM, final LROM or their changes. There was no difference in the final T1S, final SVA or their change among the four groups. All groups showed similar changes in CL and T1S-CL.

Conclusions

There was no difference in the clinical outcomes of ACDF, CDR, or hybrid surgery. CDR can better preserve the mobility of the cervical spine. Neither CDR nor hybrid surgery was significantly advantageous over ACDF in restoring the sagittal sequence in patients with three-level CSM.