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

Minimally invasive posterior cervical foraminotomy versus anterior cervical fusion and arthroplasty: Systematic review and updated meta-analysis

Introduction

This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis that investigates the efficacy of different surgical methods for treating cervical disc herniation or cervical foraminal stenosis.

Research question

The research aimed to compare the efficacy of Minimally Invasive Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy (MI-PCF) with anterior approaches, namely Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) and Cervical Disc Arthroplasty (CDA).

Material and methods

The study included a comprehensive review of eight articles that compared ACDF and MI-PCF, and four articles that compared CDA to MI-PCF.

Results

The results indicated no significant difference in surgical duration, hospital stay, complication rates, and reoperation rates between MI-PCF and ACDF. However, when comparing CDA with MI-PCF, it was found that CDA had a higher complication rate, while MI-PCF had a higher reoperation rate.

Discussion and conclusion

Despite these findings, the study recommends MI-PCF as the preferred surgical method for cervical radiculopathy, owing to the advancements in minimally invasive techniques. However, these findings are preliminary, and further research with longer follow-up periods and larger sample sizes is necessary to confirm these findings and to further explore the potential advantages and disadvantages of these surgical methods.

Comparing outcomes between anterior cervical disc replacement (ACDR) and minimally invasive posterior cervical foraminotomy (MI-PCF) in the treatment of cervical radiculopathy

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Anterior cervical disc replacement (ACDR) and minimally invasive posterior cervical foraminotomy (MI-PCF) have emerged as two increasingly popular alternatives to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for the management of cervical radiculopathy. Both techniques provide advantages of segmental motion preservation and lower rates of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) compared to ACDF.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to analyze the clinical and functional outcomes of patients undergoing ACDR or MI-PCF for the treatment of unilateral cervical radiculopathy.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Retrospective Cohort Review.

PATIENT SAMPLE

A total of 152 patients were included (86 ACDR and 66 MI-PCF).

OUTCOME MEASURES

(1) Patient demographics; (2) perioperative data; (3) rates of complications and revisions; (5) visual analogue scale (VAS) and Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort review was performed to identify all patients at a single institution between 2012-2020 who underwent 1- or 2- level ACDR or MI-PCF from C3-C7 with a minimum follow-up of 24 months. Patient demographics, perioperative data, postoperative complications, and revisions were analyzed. Patient reported outcome measures including VAS and NDI scores were compared.

RESULTS

The ACDR group had a significantly greater mean operative time (99.8 minutes vs 79.2 minutes, p<.001), but comparable estimated blood loss and length of stay following surgical intervention (p=.899). The overall complication rate was significantly greater in the ACDR group than the MI-PCF group (24.4% vs 6.2%; p=.003) but was largely driven by approach-related dysphagia in 20.9% of ACDR patients. The MI-PCF group had significantly greater revision rates (13.6% vs 1.2%; p=.002) with an average time to revision of 20.7 months in the MI-PCF group compared to 40.3 months in the ACDR group. The ACDR cohort had significantly greater improvements in NDI scores at the final follow-up (25.0 vs 21.3, p<.001).

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that ACDR offer clinically relevant advantages over MI-PCF in terms of long-term revision rates despite an increased approach-related risk of transient postoperative dysphagia. Additionally, patients in the ACDR cohort achieved greater mean improvements in NDI scores but these results may have limited clinical significance due to inability to reach minimally clinically important difference (MCID) thresholds.

Multi-Level Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy Associated With Increased Post-operative Infection Rates and Overall Re-Operation Relative to Anterior Cervical Discectomy With Fusion or Cervical Disc Arthroplasty

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE

Cervical radiculopathy meeting operative criteria has traditionally been managed using anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). However, cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) and posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF) are also reasonable options. This study aimed to assess differences in postoperative outcomes among patients undergoing multi-level ACDF, CDA, or PCF comparing medical/surgical complications and healthcare utilization parameters.

METHODS

Patients who underwent multi-level ACDF, CDA, or PCF between 2012 and 2019 were identified from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (ACS-NSQIP) database. Patients were stratified based on procedure type and propensity score matched to resolve baseline differences. ANOVA was performed to identify differences in medical complications, surgical complications, and healthcare utilization metrics.

RESULTS

A total of 31 344 patients who underwent an eligible procedure were identified (ACDF: n = 28 089, CDA: n = 1748, PCF: n = 1507), and 684 patients remained in each group following propensity score matching. Patients undergoing multi-level PCF were found to experience longer lengths of hospital stay (PCF: 1.67 ± 1.61 days, ACDF: 1.50 ± 1.32 days, CDA: 1.27 ± 1.05 days, P < .001), higher rates of reoperation (PCF: 3.2%, ACDF: 1.0%, CDA: .4%, P = .020), superficial infection (PCF: 1.3%, ACDF: .3%, CDA: .1%, P = .008) and deep infection (PCF: 1.2%, ACDF: 0%, CDA: 0%, P < .001). There were no outcome differences between multi-level ACDF and CDA.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing multi-level PCF were at increased risk for longer hospital stay, re-operation, and infection relative to those undergoing ACDF and CDA. Future research should aim to uncover the precise mechanisms underlying these complications, as well as analyze long term outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Anterior transcorporeal approach combined with posterior translaminar approach in percutaneous endoscopic cervical discectomy for two-segment cervical disc herniation treatment: a technical report and early follow-up

OBJECTIVE

Full endoscopic techniques are being gradually introduced from single-segment cervical disc herniation surgery to two-segment cervical disc herniation surgery. However, there is no suitable full endoscopic treatment for mixed-type two-segment cervical disc herniation (MTCDH) in which one segment herniates in front of the spinal cord and the other segment herniates behind the spinal cord. Therefore, we introduce a new full endoscopic technique by combining an anterior transcorporeal approach and a posterior translaminar approach. In addition, we provide a brief description of its safety, efficacy, feasibility, and surgical points.

METHODS

Thirty patients with MTCDH were given full endoscopic surgical treatment by a combined transcorporeal and transforaminal approach and were followed up for at least 12 months.

RESULTS

Clinical assessment scales showed that the patient's symptoms and pain were significantly reduced postoperatively. Imaging results showed bony repair of the surgically induced bone defect and the cervical Cobb angle was increased. No serious complications occurred.

CONCLUSION

This technique enables minimally invasive surgery to relieve the compression of the spinal cord by MTCDH. It avoids the fusion of the vertebral body for internal fixation, preserves the vertebral motion segments, avoids medical destruction of the cervical disc to the greatest extent possible, and expands the scope of adaptation of full endoscopic technology in cervical surgery.

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

Background

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

Objective

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

Design

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

Setting

National Health Service trusts.

Participants

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

Interventions

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

Main outcome measures

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Trial registration

This trial is registered as ISRCTN10133661.

Funding

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

Single-level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Results in Lower Five-year Revisions than Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy in a Large National Cohort

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study using the 2010-2020 MSpine PearlDiver administrative data set.

OBJECTIVE

To compare perioperative adverse events and five-year revisions for single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) versus posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Cervical disk disease can often be treated surgically using single-level ACDF or PCF. Prior studies have suggested that posterior approaches provide similar short-term outcomes as ACDF; however, posterior procedures may have an increased risk of revision surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The database was queried for patients undergoing elective single-level ACDF or PCF (excluding cases performed for myelopathy, trauma, neoplasm, and/or infection). Outcomes, including specific complications, readmission, and reoperations, were assessed. Multivariable logistic regression was used to ascertain odds ratios (OR) of 90-day adverse events controlling for age, sex, and comorbidities. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed to determine five-year rates of cervical reoperation in the ACDF and PCF cohorts.

RESULTS

A total of 31,953 patients treated by ACDF (29,958, 93.76%) or PCF (1995, 6.24%) were identified. Multivariable analysis, controlling for age, sex, and comorbidities, demonstrated that PCF was associated with significantly greater odds of aggregated serious adverse events (OR 2.17, P <0.001), wound dehiscence (OR 5.89, P <0.001), surgical site infection (OR 3.66, P <0.001), and pulmonary embolism (OR 1.72, P =0.04). However, PCF was associated with significantly lower odds of readmission (OR 0.32, P <0.001), dysphagia (OR 0.44, P <0.001), and pneumonia (OR 0.50, P =0.004). At five years, PCF cases had a significantly higher cumulative revision rate compared with ACDF cases (19.0% vs. 14.8%, P <0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The current study is the largest to date to compare short-term adverse events and five-year revision rates between single-level ACDF and PCF for nonmyelopathy elective cases. Perioperative adverse events differed by procedure, and it was notable that the incidence of cumulative revisions was higher for PCF. These findings can be used in decision-making when there is clinical equipoise between ACDF and PCF.

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

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

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

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

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

PATIENTS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

An Atypical Presentation of Early Periprosthetic Infection After Cervical Disc Arthroplasty: A Case Report

CASE

A 22-year-old woman with Klippel-Feil syndrome who underwent cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) presented 3 months postoperatively with worsening neck pain and radiculopathy. Work-up was negative for infection, but single-photon emission computed tomography revealed increased metabolic activity in the vertebral body below the implant. During revision, the implant was grossly loose and multiple cultures grew Cutibacterium acnes. She was treated with an antibiotic course and conversion to anterior fusion without recurrence.

CONCLUSION

This report highlights the rare presentation of an early periprosthetic infection after CDA caused by C. acnes.

Impact of Preoperative 12-item Short Form Mental Composite Scores on Clinical Outcomes in Cervical Disc Replacement

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

We aim to examine the effects of preoperative mental health status on demographic, perioperative characteristics, and postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing cervical disc replacement (CDR).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The effect of preoperative mental health status has not been widely studied in CDR.

METHODS

Patients undergoing primary CDR were retrospectively collected and stratified into 2 cohorts by 12-item Short Form Survey Mental Composite Score (SF-12 MCS) ≥48.9. Patients without preoperative SF-12 MCS scores or diagnosis of infection, malignancy, or trauma were excluded. Demographic information, perioperative characteristic, and patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) were collected. Patient reported outcome measurement information system physical function (PROMIS-PF)/SF-12 Physical Component Score (PCS)/SF-12 MCS/visual analog scale (VAS) neck/VAS leg/neck disability index (NDI) were collected preoperatively and 6 weeks/12 weeks/6 months/1 year postoperatively.

RESULTS

Eighty-seven patients were included, (47 having SF-12 MCS≥48.9). For PROMs, both cohorts had significant improvement from preoperative baseline, besides SF-12 PCS/MCS at 1 year for the depressed cohort and SF-12 MCS at all time points. The non-depressed cohort demonstrated significantly higher PROMIS-PF preoperatively and at 12 weeks, SF-12 PCS at 12 weeks, SF-12 MCS at all time points, decreased VAS neck at 12 weeks and NDI preoperatively and at 12 weeks, overall minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in most patients in all PROMs besides SF-12 MCS, and higher MCID for PROMIS-PF at 12 weeks. The depressed cohort demonstrated overall MCID in most patients with PROMIS-PF/SF-12 MCS/VAS neck/NDI, and a higher MCID for 6 weeks/12 weeks/6 months postoperatively and overall SF-12 PCS.

CONCLUSION

Whereas both cohorts demonstrated significantly improved PROMs from baseline, the non-depressed cohort demonstrated better physical function, mental health, decreased pain, and disability at various time points, whereas the depressed cohort demonstrated higher mental health MCID achievement at every time point except 1 year. These findings may be useful in managing expectations for patients undergoing cervical surgery.

Microscopic Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Versus Posterior Percutaneous Endoscopic Cervical Keyhole Foraminotomy for Single-level Unilateral Cervical Radiculopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to compare the safety of microscopic anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (MI-ACDF) and posterior percutaneous endoscopic keyhole foraminotomy (PPEKF) in patients diagnosed with single-level unilateral cervical radiculopathy.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

After conservative treatment, the symptoms will be relieved in about 90% of cervical radiculopathy patients. For the other one tenth of patients, surgical treatment is needed. The overall complication rate of MI-ACDF and PPEKF ranges from 0% to 25%, and the reoperation rate ranges from 0% to 20%.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Electronic retrieval of studies from PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library was performed to identify comparative or single-arm studies on MI-ACDF and PPEKF. A total of 24 studies were included in our meta-analysis by screening according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. After data extraction and quality assessment of the included studies, a meta-analysis was performed by using the R software. The pooled incidences of efficient rate, total complication rate, and reoperation rate were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 24 studies with 1345 patients (MI-ACDF: 644, PPEKF: 701) were identified. There was no significantly statistical difference in pooled patient effective rate (MI-ACDF: 94.3% vs. PPEKF: 93.3%, P =0.625), total complication rate (MI-ACDF: 7.1% vs. PPEKF: 4.7%, P =0.198), and reoperation rate (MI-ACDF: 1.8% vs. PPEKF: 1.1%, P =0.312). However, the common complications of the 2 procedures were different. The most common complications of MI-ACDF were dysphagia and vertebral body sinking, whereas the most common complication of PPEKF was nerve root palsy.

CONCLUSIONS

Both MI-ACDF and PPEKF can provide a relatively safe and reliable treatment for single-level unilateral cervical radiculopathy. The 2 techniques are not significantly different in terms of effective rate, total complication rate, and reoperation rate.

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

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

The Correlation between Cervical Fusion Length and Functional Outcomes in Patients with Traumatic Spinal Cord Damage—A Registry-Based Cohort Study

This study aims to assess if there is an evident correlation between fusion length and rehabilitation success after trauma to the cervical spine that could potentially be used to predict functional outcomes. This monocentric study was conducted in the Spinal-Cord-Injury center of the Berufsgenossenschaftliches Klinikum Hamburg. Data sets of 199 patients from the Spinal-Cord-Injury center admitted between the beginning of 2003 and the end of 2018 were subjected to statistical analyses. The Spinal Cord Independence Measure II (SCIM II) difference between admission and discharge was chosen as the primary outcome variable of a multiple linear regression analysis, including several other variables. The length of fusion, SCIM at admission and the International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury (ISNCSCI) values at admission could be identified as significant predictors. The cervical fusion length could be identified as an independent predictor of the functional outcome within our model. This correlation most likely mediates for the range of motion as well as partly for injury severity. This is much harder to evaluate in a newly admitted rehabilitation patient than a single numerical value that represents its rehabilitative implications, such as fusion length. Together with an initial assessment of the SCIM and ISNCSCI, it provides a solid basis for outcome prediction.

Outcomes of cervical disc replacement in patients with neck pain greater than arm pain

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Although anterior cervical discectomy and fusion is believed to positively impact a patient's radicular symptoms as well as axial neck pain, the outcomes of cervical disc replacement (CDR) with regards to neck pain specifically have not been established.

PURPOSE

Primary: to assess clinical improvement following CDR in patients with neck pain greater than arm pain. Secondary: to compare the clinical outcomes between patients undergoing CDR for predominant neck pain (pNP), predominant arm pain (pAP), and equal neck and arm pain (ENAP).

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review of prospectively collected data.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Patients who had undergone one- or two-level CDR for the treatment of degenerative cervical pathology and had a minimum of 6-month follow-up were included and stratified into three cohorts based on their predominant location of pain: pNP, pAP, and ENAP.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Patient-reported outcomes: Neck Disability Index (NDI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) neck and arm, Short Form 12-Item Physical Health Score (SF12-PHS), Short Form 12-Item Mental Health Score (SF12-MHS), minimal clinically important difference (MCID).

METHODS

Changes in Patient-reported outcomes from preoperative values to early (<6 months) and late (≥6 months) postoperative timepoints were analyzed within each of the three groups. The percentage of patients achieving MCID was also evaluated.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-five patients (52 pNP, 30 pAP, 43 ENAP) were included. The pNP cohort demonstrated significant improvements in early and late NDI and VAS-Neck, early SF-12 MCS, and late SF-12 PCS. The pAP and ENAP cohorts demonstrated significant improvements in all PROMs, including NDI, VAS-Neck, VAS-Arm, SF-12 PCS, and SF-12 MCS, at both the early and late timepoints. No statistically significant differences were found in the MCID achievement rates for NDI, VAS-Neck, SF-12 PCS, and SF-12 MCS at the late timepoint amongst the three groups.

CONCLUSIONS

CDR leads to comparable improvement in neck pain and disability in patients presenting with neck pain greater than arm pain and meeting specific clinical and radiographic criteria.

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

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Comparison of Percutaneous Endoscopic Cervical Keyhole Foraminotomy versus Microscopic Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion for Single Level Unilateral Cervical Radiculopathy

Objective

To compare the clinical and radiological outcomes between microscopic anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and percutaneous endoscopic cervical keyhole foraminotomy (PECF) for single level unilateral cervical radiculopathy.

Methods

A total of 127 patients (59 in PECF VS 68 in ACDF) were enrolled in this study from April 2016 to May 2018 with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Clinical data including baseline data, Neck Disability Index (NDI), and Visual Analogue Scale for neck and arm (VAS-n, VAS-a) were collected and compared. Radiological evaluation such as disc height, ROM of cervical, Cobb’s angle of cervical and Cobb’s angle of operated segment was measured by two experienced radiologists in twice.

Results

There was no significant difference between the two groups in the baseline data, and hospital stay was significantly decreased in PECF group than ACDF group (P < 0.001). PECF group did not yield superior better outcomes in NDI, VAS-a and VAS-n than ACDF group except at 1-month follow-up. As for radiological outcomes, PECF group has significantly better cervical motion, cervical angle and segmental angle than ADCF group at 12- and 24-month follow-up visit (P < 0.05); however, ACDF had shown better disc height restoration and maintenance than PECF (P < 0.05). More complications including surface hematoma and swallowing difficulty were occurred in ADCF group.

Conclusion

Percutaneous endoscopic cervical keyhole foraminotomy could be the alternative method for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in selective cases. However, the indication should be fulfilled, more studies need to be conducted to further testify the efficacy of PECF.

Stand-Alone Cage Versus Anterior Plating for 1-Level and 2-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Randomized Controlled Trial

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to compare perioperative and radiographic outcomes between stand-alone and anterior plated 1 and 2-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

ACDF with interbody spacer and separate plate/screw construct (PLATE) may be associated with a higher incidence of postoperative dysphagia, increased operative time, and other complications. Therefore, some have opted to utilize an interbody cage with integrated screws and no plate (CAGE) with good results.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with 1-level to 2-level degenerative disease were prospectively enrolled and randomized into 1 of 2 treatment arms consisting of either PLATE or CAGE reconstruction. Patients were followed for a minimum of 1 year postoperatively. Primary endpoints included improvement on patient-reported outcome metrics, construct integrity, cervical alignment, successful arthrodesis, and subsequent revision surgeries.

RESULTS

Forty-six patients were included: 12 with 1-level PLATE, 12 with 1-level CAGE, 12 with 2-level PLATE, and 10 with 2-level CAGE. For 1-level ACDF, PLATE patients reported worse swallow function on Swallowing Quality of Life Questionnaire at 6 weeks (P=0.050) and 6 months (P=0.042). Pseudarthrosis requiring revision was observed in one PLATE patient. For 2-level ACDF CAGE patients reported worse disability on neck disability index (P=0.037) at 6 weeks, as well as worse neck disability index (P=0.017) and visual analog scale neck (P=0.010) at 6 months. However, PLATE patients reported worse swallow function on Swallowing Quality of Life Questionnaire at 6 weeks (P=0.038). There were no differences in the rates of fusion, loss of disc height correction, subsidence, or in sagittal parameters between cohorts for both 1-level and 2-level ACDF.

CONCLUSION

There was greater incidence of transient postoperative dysphagia in both single and 2-level PLATE cohorts. However, early postoperative outcomes were worse for 2-level CAGE in certain patient-reported metrics. This suggests that although anterior instrumentation may be associated with a higher likelihood of dysphagia, it may also lead to higher short-term stability and improved patient-reported outcomes for 2-level fusion.

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

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

Feasibility of Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy for Adjacent Segmental Disease after Anterior Cervical Fusion

Objective

The aim of this study is to evaluate the feasibility of posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF) for adjacent segmental disease (ASD) after anterior cervical fusion (ACF). As ACF is accepted as the standard treatment for cervical spondylosis, many studies have been conducted to evaluate the efficacy of various surgical techniques to overcome symptomatic ASD after the previous surgery. Herein, PCF was performed for the treatment of symptomatic ASD and the feasibility of the surgery was evaluated.

Methods

Forty nine patients who underwent PCF due to symptomatic ASD from August 2008 to November 2017 were identified. For demographic and perioperative data, the sex, age, types of previous surgery, ASD levels, operation times, and bleeding amount were recorded. The clinical outcome was assessed using the visual analogue scale for the neck and arm, the modified Odom’s criteria as well as neck disability index. Radiologic evaluations were performed by measuring disc softness, disc height, the cervical 2–7 sagittal vertical axis, cervical cobb angle, and facet violation.

Results

Thirty-seven patients were enrolled in this study. The patients were divided into two groups based on the location of the pathology; paracentral (group P) or foramina (group F). Both groups showed significant clinical improvement (p<0.05). The proportion of calcified disc and facet violations was significantly larger in group F (p<0.05). The minimal disc height decrease with mild improvement on sagittal alignment and cervical lordosis was radiologically measured without statistical significance in both groups (p>0.05).

Conclusion

PCF showed satisfactory clinical and radiologic outcomes for both paracentral and foraminal pathologies of ASD after ACF. Complications related to anterior revision were also avoided. PCF can be considered a feasible and safe surgical option for ASD after ACF.

Posterior Endoscopic Cervical Decompression: Review and Technical Note

Endoscopic spine surgery for the treatment of degenerative spinal diseases from lumbar to cervical spine has accelerated over the past 2 decades. Posterior endoscopic cervical discectomy (PECD) has been described as a safe, effective, and minimally invasive procedure for cervical radiculopathy or even part of the myelopathy. This procedure also has been validated with comparable outcomes to open and microscopic surgery. Radiculopathy due to foraminal disc herniation or foraminal stenosis should be the optimum indications of this procedure. Intraoperative 3-dimensional navigation can help surgeons to get quick and great quality guidance for endoscopic surgeons. In this review, we will focus on the technical details and evidence-based results of PECD which is a promising procedure for cervical radiculopathy with the advantages of a minimally invasive method.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Comparing the postoperative results of single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, cervical disc prosthesis and minimal invasive posterior cervical disc surgery

Objective: Comparison of preoperative and postoperative clinical characteristics of patients who underwent single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, cervical discectomy and prosthesis or minimal invasive posterior cervical discectomy.Methods: The preoperative and the postoperative characteristics (0-, 3-, 12- and 24-month results) of patients who had undergone anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (24 patients, 40%), cervical discectomy and prosthesis (21 patients, 35%) or minimal invasive posterior cervical discectomy (15 patients, 25%), for single-level disc hernia of the C3 to C7 region at the İstanbul Yeni Yüzyıl University Gaziosmanpaşa Hospital between February 2015 and December 2017 were evaluated postoperatively using visual pain scales, neck disability index (NDI) values and Odom's criteria.Results: Postoperative visual analog scale and NDI scores were significantly decreased immediately after surgery in all groups (p < .001). Similarly, these two values at the second year were significantly decreased compared to post-op values (p < .001). When pre-op, post-op, third month, first year and second year scores were compared between the groups, a significant difference was found between the groups (p < .001). It was observed that the minimal invasive posterior cervical discectomy surgery was significantly better than the other two surgeries in all follow-up assessments (p < .001 for all follow-up).Conclusion: The early postoperative values of the visual pain scale and neck disability indicator were found to demonstrate immediate benefits of the surgeries, in addition to the further decrease at the 2-year follow-up in this study.

Comparison of 10-year Outcomes of Bryan Cervical Disc Arthroplasty for Myelopathy and Radiculopathy

Objective

To evaluate the long‐term efficacy of Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty in the treatment of myelopathy patients compared with radiculopathy patients.

Methods

This study is a prospective study. Sixty‐six patients (38 patients in myelopathy group and 28 patients in radiculopathy group) who were treated with Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty between 2004 and 2007 and followed for 10 years were included in this study. The Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, neck disability index (NDI), and Odom's criteria were used to evaluate the clinical outcomes. X‐ray, computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were used to evaluate the radiographic outcomes including the global range of motion (ROM), segmental ROM, and segment alignment before the surgery and at last follow‐up. The incidence of segmental kyphosis, segmental mobility lost, and the grade of paravertebral ossification (PO) were also evaluated at last follow‐up.

Results

The JOA score and NDI improved in both groups. Thirty‐three of 38 patients in myelopathy group and all patients in radiculopathy group reported good or excellent outcomes according to Odom's criteria. The segmental ROM was (9.5° ± 4.4°) before surgery and maintained at (9.0° ± 5.5°) at last follow‐up in myelopathy group. The segmental ROM was (9.5° ± 4.6°) and (9.0° ± 5.3°) before surgery and at last follow‐up in radiculopathy group, respectively. The Bryan prosthesis remained mobile at last follow‐up for 30 patients (78.9%) in the myelopathy group and 22 patients (78.6%) in the radiculopathy group. Of the patients in the myelopathy group, 21.1% developed segmental kyphosis, as did 21.4% of patients in the radiculopathy group. The incidence of PO and high‐grade PO was 92.1 and 28.9% in the myelopathy group, and was 92.9 and 32.1% in the radiculopathy group. There was no significant difference between both groups.

Conclusions

Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty was an effective and safe technique in treating patients with myelopathy. The clinical and radiographic outcomes in the myelopathy group were similar to those in the radiculopathy group at the 10‐year follow‐up.