1997SpineRequires access

The Success of Anterior Cervical Arthrodesis Adjacent to a Previous Fusion

Alan S. Hilibrand, Jung U. Yoo, Gregory D. Carlson, Henry H. Bohlman

Open publisher page 205 citations

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective review of all patients surgically treated for adjacent segment disease of the cervical spine over a 20-year period. OBJECTIVES: To determine the clinical and radiographic success of discectomy with interbody grafting and corpectomy with strut grafting in the treatment of adjacent segment disease of the cervical spine. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Up to 25% of all patients undergoing anterior cervical fusion have new disease due to degeneration of an adjacent segment within 10 years. The success of surgical treatment in these patients with adjacent segment disease has not been reported. METHODS: Thirty-eight patients were surgically treated for adjacent segment disease by discectomy with interbody grafting or corpectomy with strut grafting. Arthrodesis was evaluated by flexion-extension lateral radiographs and clinical outcomes were assessed using Robinson's criteria at least 2 years after surgery. Fusion rates were compared by Fisher's exact test, and outcomes were compared by rank-sum analysis. RESULTS: The rate of arthrodesis was significantly lower in the 24 patients treated by discectomy with interbody grafting at one or more levels (63%) than in the 14 patients treated by corpectomy with strut grafting (100%; P = 0.01). Clinical outcomes were similar for the corpectomy and discectomy groups (P = 0.55). There was a trend toward better outcomes in patients who achieved a solid arthrodesis (P = 0.13). CONCLUSIONS: Achieving fusion is more difficult when anterior cervical arthrodesis is performed adjacent to a prior fusion. Strut grafting resulted in a significantly higher rate of arthrodesis than interbody grafting.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective review of all patients surgically treated for adjacent segment disease of the cervical spine over a 20-year period. OBJECTIVES: To determine the clinical and radiographic success of discectomy with interbody grafting and corpectomy with strut grafting in the treatment of adjacent segment disease of the cervical spine. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Up to 25% of all patients undergoing anterior cervical fusion have new disease due to degeneration of an adjacent segment within 10 years. The success of surgical treatment in these patients with adjacent segment disease has not been reported. METHODS: Thirty-eight patients were surgically treated for adjacent segment disease by discectomy with interbody grafting or corpectomy with strut grafting. Arthrodesis was evaluated by flexion-extension lateral radiographs and clinical outcomes were assessed using Robinson's criteria at least 2 years after surgery. Fusion rates were compared by Fisher's exact test, and outcomes were compared by rank-sum analysis. RESULTS: The rate of arthrodesis was significantly lower in the 24 patients treated by discectomy with interbody grafting at one or more levels (63%) than in the 14 patients treated by corpectomy with strut grafting (100%; P = 0.01). Clinical outcomes were similar for the corpectomy and discectomy groups (P = 0.55). There was a trend toward better outcomes in patients who achieved a solid arthrodesis (P = 0.13). CONCLUSIONS: Achieving fusion is more difficult when anterior cervical arthrodesis is performed adjacent to a prior fusion. Strut grafting resulted in a significantly higher rate of arthrodesis than interbody grafting.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 205 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective review of all patients surgically treated for adjacent segment disease of the cervical spine over a 20-year period. OBJECTIVES: To determine the clinical and radiographic success of discectomy with interbody grafting and corpectomy with strut grafting in the treatment of adjacent segment disease of the cervical spine. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Up to 25% of all patients undergoing anterior cervical fusion have new disease due to degeneration of an adjacent segment within 10 years. The success of surgical treatment in these patients with adjacent segment disease has not been reported. METHODS: Thirty-eight patients were surgically treated for adjacent segment disease by discectomy with interbody grafting or corpectomy with strut grafting. Arthrodesis was evaluated by flexion-extension lateral radiographs and clinical outcomes were assessed using Robinson's criteria at least 2 years after surgery. Fusion rates were compared by Fisher's exact test, and outcomes were compared by rank-sum analysis. RESULTS: The rate of arthrodesis was significantly lower in the 24 patients treated by discectomy with interbody grafting at one or more levels (63%) than in the 14 patients treated by corpectomy with strut grafting (100%; P = 0.01). Clinical outcomes were similar for the corpectomy and discectomy groups (P = 0.55). There was a trend toward better outcomes in patients who achieved a solid arthrodesis (P = 0.13). CONCLUSIONS: Achieving fusion is more difficult when anterior cervical arthrodesis is performed adjacent to a prior fusion. Strut grafting resulted in a significantly higher rate of arthrodesis than interbody grafting.

Key concepts: Corpectomy, Medicine, Arthrodesis, Surgery, Discectomy, Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, Spinal fusion, Diskectomy

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The Success of Anterior Cervical Arthrodesis Adjacent to a Previous Fusion — Research Paper | ScholarLens