Long-term results of anterior versus posterior operations for herniated cervical discs: analysis of 6,000 patients

Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy Compared with Anterior Cervical Discectomy with Fusion for Cervical Radiculopathy: Two-Year Results of the FACET Randomized Noninferiority Study

BACKGROUND

Posterior cervical foraminotomy (posterior surgery) is a valid alternative to anterior discectomy with fusion (anterior surgery) as a surgical treatment of cervical radiculopathy, but the quality of evidence has been limited. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcome of these treatments after 2 years of follow-up. We hypothesized that posterior surgery would be noninferior to anterior surgery.

METHODS

This multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial assessed patients with single-level cervical radiculopathy in 9 Dutch hospitals with a follow-up duration of 2 years. The primary outcomes measured reduction of cervical radicular pain and were the success ratio based on the Odom criteria, and arm pain and decrease in arm pain, evaluated with the visual analog scale, with a 10% noninferiority margin, which represents the maximum acceptable difference between the new treatment (posterior surgery) and the standard treatment (anterior surgery), beyond which the new treatment would be considered clinically unacceptable. The secondary outcomes were neck pain, Neck Disability Index, Work Ability Index, quality of life, complications (including reoperations), and treatment satisfaction. Generalized linear mixed effects modeling was used for analyses. The study was registered at the Overview of Medical Research in the Netherlands (OMON), formerly the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR5536).

RESULTS

From January 2016 to May 2020, 265 patients were randomized (132 to the posterior surgery group and 133 to the anterior surgery group). Among these, 25 did not have the allocated intervention; 11 of these 25 patients had symptom improvement, and the rest of the patients did not have the intervention due to various reasons. At the 2-year follow-up, of 243 patients, primary outcome data were available for 236 patients (97%). Predicted proportions of a successful outcome were 0.81 after posterior surgery and 0.74 after anterior surgery (difference in rate, -0.06 [1-sided 95% confidence interval (CI), -0.02]), indicating the noninferiority of posterior surgery. The between-group difference in arm pain was -2.7 (1-sided 95% CI, 7.4) and the between-group difference in the decrease in arm pain was 1.5 (1-sided 95% CI, 8.2), both confirming the noninferiority of posterior surgery. The secondary outcomes demonstrated small between-group differences. Serious surgery-related adverse events occurred in 9 patients (8%) who underwent posterior surgery, including 9 reoperations, and 11 patients (9%) who underwent anterior surgery, including 7 reoperations (difference in reoperation rate, -0.02 [2-sided 95% CI, -0.09 to 0.05]).

CONCLUSIONS

This trial demonstrated that, after a 2-year follow-up, posterior surgery was noninferior to anterior surgery with regard to the success rate and arm pain reduction in patients with cervical radiculopathy.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Noninferiority of Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy vs Anterior Cervical Discectomy With Fusion for Procedural Success and Reduction in Arm Pain Among Patients With Cervical Radiculopathy at 1 Year: The FACET Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

The choice between posterior cervical foraminotomy (posterior surgery) and anterior cervical discectomy with fusion (anterior surgery) for cervical foraminal radiculopathy remains controversial.

Objective

To investigate the noninferiority of posterior vs anterior surgery in patients with cervical foraminal radiculopathy with regard to clinical outcomes after 1 year.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This multicenter investigator-blinded noninferiority randomized clinical trial was conducted from January 2016 to May 2020 with a total follow-up of 2 years. Patients were included from 9 hospitals in the Netherlands. Of 389 adult patients with 1-sided single-level cervical foraminal radiculopathy screened for eligibility, 124 declined to participate or did not meet eligibility criteria. Patients with pure axial neck pain without radicular pain were not eligible. Of 265 patients randomized (132 to posterior and 133 to anterior), 15 were lost to follow-up and 228 were included in the 1-year analysis (110 in posterior and 118 in anterior).

Interventions

Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to posterior foraminotomy or anterior cervical discectomy with fusion.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Primary outcomes were proportion of success using Odom criteria and decrease in arm pain using a visual analogue scale from 0 to 100 with a noninferiority margin of 10% (assuming advantages with posterior surgery over anterior surgery that would justify a tolerable loss of efficacy of 10%). Secondary outcomes were neck pain, disability, quality of life, work status, treatment satisfaction, reoperations, and complications. Analyses were performed with 2-proportion z tests at 1-sided .05 significance levels with Bonferroni corrections.

Results

Among 265 included patients, the mean (SD) age was 51.2 (8.3) years; 133 patients (50%) were female and 132 (50%) were male. Patients were randomly assigned to posterior (132) or anterior (133) surgery. The proportion of success was 0.88 (86 of 98) in the posterior surgery group and 0.76 (81 of 106) in the anterior surgery group (difference, -0.11 percentage points; 1-sided 95% CI, -0.01) and the between-group difference in arm pain was -2.8 (1-sided 95% CI, -9.4) at 1-year follow-up, indicating noninferiority of posterior surgery. Decrease in arm pain had a between-group difference of 3.4 (1-sided 95% CI, 11.8), crossing the noninferiority margin with 1.8 points. All secondary outcomes had 2-sided 95% CIs clustered around 0 with small between-group differences.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this randomized clinical trial, posterior surgery was noninferior to anterior surgery for patients with cervical radiculopathy regarding success rate and arm pain at 1 year. Decrease in arm pain and secondary outcomes had small between-group differences. These results may be used to enhance shared decision-making.

Trial Registration

Netherlands Trial Register Identifier: NTR5536.

Risk Factors for Adjacent Segment Problems after Posterior Instrumentation of the Cervical Spine

Adjacent segment problems after cervical spine instrumentation are widely reported. They can range from asymptomatic adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) noted on radiographs to symptomatic adjacent segment disease and even instability. While ASD following anterior instrumentation is well studied, there is a paucity of literature on ASD following posterior instrumentation. We intended to identify the risk factors associated with ASD following posterior instrumentation, focusing on pre-operative and surgical parameters. Eighty-seven patients who underwent posterior instrumentation of the cervical spine were recruited. Clinical and radiological examination was performed preoperatively and up to 24 months postoperatively. The collected data included patient demographics, indication for surgery, sagittal parameters (cervical lordosis, C2–7 sagittal-vertical axis), technique of surgery, number of levels instrumented and fused, number of levels decompressed, and the level at which the instrumentation ended. Based on postoperative evaluation, ASD was found in 29.9% of the patients, of which, one patient was symptomatic and required reoperation. Even though, according to our univariate analysis, reduced pre-operative cervical lordosis and the indication of degenerative spondylosis seemed to significantly influence the occurrence of ASD, multivariate regression analysis did not identify any independent risk factors. We also noted that, even though patients may develop ASD after the instrumented fusion of the cervical spine, this may not necessarily develop into symptomatic adjacent segment disease requiring revision surgery.

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.

The life and legacy of William Beecher Scoville

Dr. William Beecher Scoville (1906-1984) is a giant figure in the history of neurosurgery, well known by the public for his operation on Patient H.M. He developed dozens of neurosurgical instruments and techniques, with many tools named after him that are still widely used today. He founded numerous neurosurgical societies around the world. He led the movement in psychosurgery, developing the technique of selective orbital undercutting and performing hundreds of lobotomies throughout his career. However, his many contributions to the advancement of neurosurgery have not been well described in the medical literature. To bridge the knowledge gap, this article seeks to detail the life and career of William Beecher Scoville and bring to attention the enduring impact of his work.

Clinical and Radiological Comparison of Hybrid Surgery and Fusion Application with Peek Cage in Patients Undergoing Three-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we aimed to compare patients with degenerative cervical disc herniation (CDH) who had undergone three-level anterior cervical discectomy (ACD) and fusion with a peek cage supported by synthetic bone graft in all levels to the cases with CDH with hybrid surgery (HS) regarding their radiological findings and surgical results.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The patients who had undergone three-level ACD were evaluated retrospectively. The cases who were followed up for 2 years and longer were evaluated regarding gender, age, radiological findings, and patient satisfaction. A radiological assessment was made by calculating the Cobb angle on lateral cervical radiographs. Clinical assessment was performed by the Neck Disability Index (NDI).

RESULTS

In the first group, 13 patients had undergone ACD and fusion with peek cage and bone graft, and in the hybrid group, there were 11 patients in whom fusion with peek cage and bone graft were made in two levels, and cervical disc arthroplasty was performed throughout the distance in-between. In the hybrid group, the 1-month and 24-month changes in cervical range of motion in hyperflexion were statistically significant (p < 0.05). In both groups, significant improvements of NDI were determined postoperatively (p < 0.05). When the groups were compared, the 1-month and 24-month improvements were statistically significantly increased in the hybrid surgery group compared to the group that underwent fusion surgery with a cage (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

HS is a reliable and effective treatment method in the three-level cervical disk disease for preserving and improving cervical ROM, particularly in the flexion position.

Subjective and Objective Quality-of-Life Assessment of Outcome Measures in Cervical Spine Surgery for Degenerative Changes

Cervical spine diskectomy is a commonly used procedure in degenerative disease of cervical spine surgery. However, it is difficult to assess the quality of life after this widely applied and variously modified procedure. This literature review presents cervical diskectomy results, according to various scales and measures in multidirectional surgical strategies. Using relevant databases, we tried to find the best treatment options for degenerative disk disease and the best method of quality-of-life assessment, searching for modalities that may influence the outcome.

Posterior Cervical Keyhole Laminoforaminotomy: A Cadaveric Comparative Study to Evaluate Limits of Bony Resection

BACKGROUND

The posterior cervical keyhole (KH) laminoforaminotomy has been described to involve the lateral portion of cervical laminae of the upper vertebra alone (small KH) or of both upper and lower vertebrae (large KH).

OBJECTIVE

To microscopically compare the two keyhole techniques in terms of their ability to expose the corresponding cervical roots.

METHODS

Ten cadaveric specimens were operated bilaterally from C3-4 to C6-7 level to expose a total of 80 nerve roots. The large KH was applied to the left side, the small KH to the right side. The maximal length of exposed nerve roots was measured under microscope. The virtual optimal KH surface area was determined using digital software. Each root was inspected for exposure of its root and axilla.

RESULTS

The maximal exposed nerve root length on the large KH side was significantly larger than on the small KH side at C3-4, C5-6, and C6-7 levels (P = .031, P = .002, P = .003). No significance was reported for C4-5 (P = .06). We could expose right axillae in (3/40) and left axillae in (33/40; P < .001). Optimal keyhole surface areas were 37.9, 38.2, 38.7, and 46.2 mm2 in craniocaudal order.

CONCLUSION

Large KH defects involving both upper and lower laminae and facets can expose the roots to greater extent than small KH defects at C3-4, C5-6, and C6-7 levels. Large KH defects may allow better exposure of nerve roots axillae than small KH defects.

Anterior Techniques in Managing Cervical Disc Disease

Surgical treatment may be indicated for select patients with cervical disc disease, whether it is cervical disc herniation or spondylosis due to degenerative changes, acute cervical injury due to trauma, or other underlying cervical pathology. Currently, there are various surgical techniques, including anterior, posterior, or combined approaches, in addition to new interventions being utilized in practice. Ideally, the surgical approach should be selected in consideration of each patient’s clinical presentation, imaging findings, and overall medical comorbidities on an individual basis. But the unique advantages and disadvantages of each surgical technique often complicate the therapy choice in managing cervical disc diseases. Although anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is the most widely accepted procedure performed for both single and multi-level cervical disc diseases, there are multiple modifications to this technique. Surgeons have access to different types of plates, screws, and cages and can adopt newer advances in the field such as stand-alone and minimally invasive techniques when indicated. In short, no consensus exists in terms of a single approach that is preferred for all patients. This article aims to review the standard of care for management of cervical disc disease with a focus on the surgical techniques and, in particular, the anterior approach, exploring the various surgical options within this technique.

[Operative treatment of the degenerative cervical spine]

BACKGROUND

Degenerative alterations of the cervical spine often entail disc herniations and stenoses of the spinal canal and/or neural foramen. Mediolateral or lateral compression of nerve roots causes cervical radiculopathy, which is an indication for surgery in cases of significant motor deficits or refractory pain. Median canal encroachment may result in compression of the spinal cord and cervical myelopathy. Its natural history is typically characterized by episodic deterioration, so that surgical decompression is indicated in cases of clear myelopathic signs.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present article is to outline the operative options for patients with cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy. Furthermore, we describe the operative complications and the outcome in these patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

For this manuscript a systematic PubMed search was carried out, the papers were systematically analyzed for the best evidence and this was combined with the authors' experience.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Depending on the cervical pathology, the most prevalent surgical options for radiculopathy include anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), cervical arthroplasty or posterior cervical foraminotomy. Cervical myelopathy may be decompressed by ACDF, corpectomy or posterior approaches like laminectomy plus instrumented fusion or laminoplasty. The outcome depends on the cervical pathology and the type of operation. Overall, in long-term follow-up studies the results of all surgical techniques on the cervical spine are generally considered to be very good, although specific patient characteristics are more suited for a particular approach.

Management of cervical monoradiculopathy due to prolapsed intervertebral disc, an institutional experience

Background:

Cervical radiculopathy is the common clinical entity, often caused by “wear and tear” changes that occur in the spine. In the younger population, cervical radiculopathy is a result of a disc herniation or an acute injury causing foraminal impingement of an exiting nerve, whereas in the older individuals, it is due to foraminal narrowing from osteophyte formation, decreased disc height, and degenerative changes of the uncovertebral joints anteriorly and of the facet joints posteriorly. In most (75%–90%), cervical radiculopathy responds well to conservative treatment, whereas the remaining patients, who fail to achieve acceptable recovery with conservative modalities, alone need surgical decompression of the nerve root. Surgical interventions can be categorized into anterior and posterior approaches to the spine. Our study is focused on the surgical outcome of anterior discectomy with fusion versus posterior cervical discectomy with foraminotomy for cervical monoradiculopathy.

Materials and Methods:

Ours is a retrospective study including patients of one level unilateral posterolateral cervical disc prolapse with radiculopathy operated in Department of Neurosurgery, Bangalore Medical College and Research Institute between 2012 and June 2016. The hospital records, imagings, operation notes, and follow-up records were reviewed and analyzed. One hundred and fourteen patients of cervical monoradiculopathy were investigated and operated, 76 operated by anterior cervical discectomy with fusion (ACDF), and 38 operated by posterior cervical laminoforaminotomy (PCL).

Results:

The average operation time in 76 patients of ACDF group was 178 min and in 38 patients of PCL group was 72 min. Sixty-nine (91%) patients of ACDF and 38 (100%) patients of PCL had symptomatic relief but statistically (P > 0.5) was not significant. Three patients in ACDF group had hoarseness of voice due to recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy and there were no fresh permanent neurological deficits in any patients of PCL group over a follow-up period of 36 months. The average postoperative hospital stay was 5 days in ACDF group and 3 days in PCL group. The average intraoperative blood loss was <50 ml in ACDF group and 650 ml in PCL group. The need of analgesic for pain arising from bone graft site in ACDF group was comparable with operative site pain in PCL group.

Conclusions:

PCL is a simple approach, yields gratifying results, and is a promising alternative in selected cases of cervical monoradiculopathy due to disc prolapse.

Study protocol for a randomised controlled multicentre study: the Foraminotomy ACDF Cost-Effectiveness Trial (FACET) in patients with cervical radiculopathy

INTRODUCTION

Cervical radiculopathy due to discogenic or spondylotic stenosis of the neuroforamen can be surgically treated by an anterior discectomy with fusion (ACDF) or a posterior foraminotomy (FOR). Most surgeons prefer ACDF, although there are indications that FOR is as effective as ACDF, has a lower complication rate and is less expensive. A head-to-head comparison of the 2 surgical techniques in a randomised controlled trial has not yet been performed. The study objectives of the Foraminotomy ACDF Cost-Effectiveness Trial (FACET) study are to compare clinical outcomes, complication rates and cost-effectiveness of FOR to ACDF.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The FACET study is a prospective randomised controlled trial conducted in 7 medical centres in the Netherlands. The follow-up period is 2 years. The main inclusion criterion is a radiculopathy of the C4, C5, C6 or C7 nerve root, due to a single-level isolated cervical foraminal stenosis caused by a soft disc and/or osteophytic component, requiring operative decompression. A sample size of 308 patients is required to test the hypothesis of clinical non-inferiority of FOR versus ACDF. Primary outcomes are: 'operative success', the measured decrease in radiculopathy assessed by the visual analogue scale and 'patient success', assessed by the modified Odom's criteria. Secondary outcomes are: Work Ability Index (single-item WAI), quality of life (EuroQol 5 Dimensions 5 level Survey, EQ-5D-5L), Neck Disability Index (NDI) and complications. An economic evaluation will assess cost-effectiveness. In addition, a budget impact analysis will be performed.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was obtained from the Institutional Ethics Committee of the University Medical Center Groningen. Results of this study will be disseminated through national and international papers. The participants and relevant patient support groups will be informed about the results of the study.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NTR5536, pre-results.

Cervical disc hernia operations through posterior laminoforaminotomy

OBJECTIVE

The most common used technique for posterolateral cervical disc herniations is anterior approach. However, posterior cervical laminotoforaminomy can provide excellent results in appropriately selected patients with foraminal stenosis in either soft disc prolapse or cervical spondylosis. The purpose of this study was to present the clinical outcomes following posterior laminoforaminotomy in patients with radiculopathy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated 35 patients diagnosed with posterolateral cervical disc herniation and cervical spondylosis with foraminal stenosis causing radiculopathy operated by the posterior cervical keyhole laminoforaminotomy between the years 2010 and 2015.

RESULTS

The file records and the radiographic images of the 35 patients were assessed retrospectively. The mean age was 46.4 years (range: 34-66 years). Of the patients, 19 were males and 16 were females. In all of the patients, the neurologic deficit observed was radiculopathy. The posterolaterally localized disc herniations and the osteophytic structures were on the left side in 18 cases and on the right in 17 cases. In 10 of the patients, the disc level was at C5-6, in 18 at C6-7, in 2 at C3-4, in 2 at C4-5, in 1 at C7-T1, in 1 patient at both C5-6 and C6-7, and in 1 at both C4-5 and C5-6. In 14 of these 35 patients, both osteophytic structures and protruded disc herniation were present. Intervertebral foramen stenosis was present in all of the patients with osteophytes. Postoperatively, in 31 patients the complaints were relieved completely and four patients had complaints of neck pain and paresthesia radiating to the arm (the success of operation was 88.5%). On control examinations, there was no finding of instability or cervical kyphosis.

CONCLUSION

Posterior cervical laminoforaminotomy is an alternative appropriate choice in both cervical soft disc herniations and cervical stenosis.

Long-Term Results of Various Operations for Lumbar Disc Herniation: Analysis of over 39,000 Patients

OBJECTIVE

To determine the long-term follow-up of the various operations for lumbar disc herniation in a large patient population.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Patients who had operations for lumbar disc herniation (microdiscectomy, endoscopic microdiscectomy and the 'classical operation', i.e. laminectomy/laminotomy with discectomy) were collected from the world literature. Patients who had follow-ups for at least 2 years were analyzed relative to the outcome. The outcome was graded by the patients themselves, and the operative groups were compared to one another.

RESULTS

39,048 patients collected from the world literature had had lumbar disc operations for disc herniations. The mean follow-up period was 6.1 years, and 30,809 (78.9%) patients reported good/excellent results. Microdiscectomy was performed on 3,400 (8.7%) patients. The mean follow-up was 4.1 years with 2,866 (84.3%) good/excellent results, while 1,101 (3.6%) patients had endoscopic microdiscectomy. There, the mean follow-up was 2.9 years with 845 (79.5%) good/excellent results. The classical operation was performed on 34,547 (88.5%) patients with a mean follow-up period of 6.3 years, and 27,050 (78.3%) patients had good/excellent results. These results mirror those with discectomy and the placement of prosthetic discs.

CONCLUSIONS

The analysis of 39,048 patients with various operations for lumbar disc herniation revealed the same pattern of long-term results. Patients who had microdiscectomy, endoscopic microdiscectomy or the classical operation (laminectomy/laminotomy with discectomy) all had approximately 79% good/excellent results. None of the operative procedures gave a different outcome. l.