2007SpineRequires access

Biomechanical Comparison of Instrumented and Uninstrumented Multilevel Cervical Discectomy Versus Corpectomy

Robert M. Galler, Şeref Doğan, Mary S. Fifield, Hakan Bozkuş, Robert H. Chamberlain, Volker K.H. Sonntag, Neil R. Crawford

Open publisher page 20 citations

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN: In vitro flexibility test comparing biomechanics of cervical corpectomy versus discectomy with and without instrumentation. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether the additional effort required to perform multilevel discectomies instead of corpectomies is worthwhile biomechanically. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Both cervical corpectomy and discectomy have been shown to be effective clinically. No previous biomechanical comparison exists. METHODS: Fourteen human cadaveric cervical spines were studied: 1) intact, 2) after discectomy and wedge grafting at C4-C5, C5-C6, and C6-C7 (Group 1) or corpectomy and strut grafting of C5 and C6 (Group 2), 3) after attaching a locking metal plate from C4-C7, and 4) after adding posterior locking lateral mass screw/rod instrumentation across C4-C7. Non-constraining, nondestructive torques induced flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation (maximum, 1.5 Nm) while angular motion was measured stereophotogrammetrically. RESULTS: Discectomy and grafting did not alter the range of motion (ROM) significantly from normal during any loading mode (P > 0.11). Corpectomy and grafting allowed a significantly greater range of motion than normal during flexion, lateral bending, and axial rotation (P < 0.05). Addition of an anterior plate reduced ROM to significantly less than normal during all loading modes in both groups (P < 0.005). Addition of posterior instrumentation further reduced ROM significantly in both groups (P < 0.01). There was no significant difference in ROM between corpectomy and discectomy groups in any loading mode whether uninstrumented (P > 0.18), anteriorly plated (P > 0.33), or anteriorly and posteriorly instrumented (P > 0.30). CONCLUSIONS: Less difference in stability was observed than was predicted between specimens receiving multilevel discectomy versus multilevel corpectomy, regardless of whether specimens were left unplated, plated anteriorly, or fixated with combined anterior/posterior instrumentation.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

STUDY DESIGN: In vitro flexibility test comparing biomechanics of cervical corpectomy versus discectomy with and without instrumentation. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether the additional effort required to perform multilevel discectomies instead of corpectomies is worthwhile biomechanically. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Both cervical corpectomy and discectomy have been shown to be effective clinically. No previous biomechanical comparison exists. METHODS: Fourteen human cadaveric cervical spines were studied: 1) intact, 2) after discectomy and wedge grafting at C4-C5, C5-C6, and C6-C7 (Group 1) or corpectomy and strut grafting of C5 and C6 (Group 2), 3) after attaching a locking metal plate from C4-C7, and 4) after adding posterior locking lateral mass screw/rod instrumentation across C4-C7. Non-constraining, nondestructive torques induced flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation (maximum, 1.5 Nm) while angular motion was measured stereophotogrammetrically. RESULTS: Discectomy and grafting did not alter the range of motion (ROM) significantly from normal during any loading mode (P > 0.11). Corpectomy and grafting allowed a significantly greater range of motion than normal during flexion, lateral bending, and axial rotation (P < 0.05). Addition of an anterior plate reduced ROM to significantly less than normal during all loading modes in both groups (P < 0.005). Addition of posterior instrumentation further reduced ROM significantly in both groups (P < 0.01). There was no significant difference in ROM between corpectomy and discectomy groups in any loading mode whether uninstrumented (P > 0.18), anteriorly plated (P > 0.33), or anteriorly and posteriorly instrumented (P > 0.30). CONCLUSIONS: Less difference in stability was observed than was predicted between specimens receiving multilevel discectomy versus multilevel corpectomy, regardless of whether specimens were left unplated, plated anteriorly, or fixated with combined anterior/posterior instrumentation.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 20 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: In vitro flexibility test comparing biomechanics of cervical corpectomy versus discectomy with and without instrumentation. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether the additional effort required to perform multilevel discectomies instead of corpectomies is worthwhile biomechanically. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Both cervical corpectomy and discectomy have been shown to be effective clinically. No previous biomechanical comparison exists. METHODS: Fourteen human cadaveric cervical spines were studied: 1) intact, 2) after discectomy and wedge grafting at C4-C5, C5-C6, and C6-C7 (Group 1) or corpectomy and strut grafting of C5 and C6 (Group 2), 3) after attaching a locking metal plate from C4-C7, and 4) after adding posterior locking lateral mass screw/rod instrumentation across C4-C7. Non-constraining, nondestructive torques induced flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation (maximum, 1.5 Nm) while angular motion was measured stereophotogrammetrically. RESULTS: Discectomy and grafting did not alter the range of motion (ROM) significantly from normal during any loading mode (P > 0.11). Corpectomy and grafting allowed a significantly greater range of motion than normal during flexion, lateral bending, and axial rotation (P < 0.05). Addition of an anterior plate reduced ROM to significantly less than normal during all loading modes in both groups (P < 0.005). Addition of posterior instrumentation further reduced ROM significantly in both groups (P < 0.01). There was no significant difference in ROM between corpectomy and discectomy groups in any loading mode whether uninstrumented (P > 0.18), anteriorly plated (P > 0.33), or anteriorly and posteriorly instrumented (P > 0.30). CONCLUSIONS: Less difference in stability was observed than was predicted between specimens receiving multilevel discectomy versus multilevel corpectomy, regardless of whether specimens were left unplated, plated anteriorly, or fixated with combined anterior/posterior instrumentation.

Key concepts: Corpectomy, Discectomy, Medicine, Cadaveric spasm, Biomechanics, Range of motion, Surgery, Orthodontics

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Biomechanical Comparison of Instrumented and Uninstrumented Multilevel Cervical Discectomy Versus Corpectomy — Research Paper | ScholarLens