Cervical Disc Replacement: Trends, Costs, and Complications

Trends in inpatient versus outpatient upper extremity fracture surgery from 2008 to 2021 and their implications for equitable access: a retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to describe trends in inpatient and outpatient upper extremity fracture surgery between 2008 and 2021, along with identifying patient factors (age, sex, race, socioeconomic status) associated with outpatient surgery.

METHODS

Retrospectively, 12,593 adult patients who underwent upper extremity fracture repair from 2008 to 2021 at one of five urban hospitals in the Northeastern USA were identified. Using Distressed Communities Index (DCI), patients were divided into five quintiles based on their level of socioeconomic distress. Multivariable logistic regression was performed on patients from 2008 to 2019 to identify independent factors associated with outpatient management.

RESULTS

From 2008 to 2019, outpatient procedures saw an average increase of 31%. The largest increases in the outpatient management were seen in humerus (132%) and forearm fractures (127%). Carpal and hand surgeries had the lowest percent increase of 8.1%. Clavicle and wrist fractures were independently associated with outpatient management. Older age, male sex, higher Elixhauser comorbidity index, DCI scores in the 4th or 5th quintile, and fractures of the scapula, humerus, elbow, and forearm were associated with inpatient management. During the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a decrease in outpatient procedures.

CONCLUSION

There is a shift toward outpatient surgical management of upper extremity fractures from 2008 to 2021. Application of our findings can serve as an institutional guide to allocate patients to appropriate surgical settings. Moreover, physicians and institutions should be aware of the potential socioeconomic disparities and implement plans to allow for equal access to care.

Clinical management of bone loss in cervical total disc arthroplasty: literature review and treatment recommendations

PURPOSE

Cervical total disc replacement (cTDR) has been established as an alternative treatment for degenerative cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy. While the rate of complications for cTDR is reasonably low, recent studies have focused on bone loss after cTDR. The purpose of this work is to develop a clinical management plan for cTDR patients with evidence of bone loss. To guide our recommendations, we undertook a review of the literature and aimed to determine: (1) how bone loss was identified/imaged, (2) whether pre- or intraoperative assessments of infection or histology were performed, and (3) what decision-making and revision strategies were employed.

METHODS

We performed a search of the literature according to PRISMA guidelines. Included studies reported the clinical performance of cTDR and identified instances of cervical bone loss.

RESULTS

Eleven case studies and 20 cohort studies were reviewed, representing 2073 patients with 821 reported cases of bone loss. Bone loss was typically identified on radiographs during routine follow-up or by computed tomography (CT) for patients presenting with symptoms. Assessments of infection as well as histological and/or explant assessment were sporadically reported. Across all reviewed studies, multiple mechanisms of bone loss were suspected, and severity and progression varied greatly. Many patients were reportedly asymptomatic, but others experienced symptoms like progressive pain and paresthesia.

CONCLUSION

Our findings demonstrate a critical gap in the literature regarding the optimal management of patients with bone loss following cTDR, and treatment recommendations based on our review are impractical given the limited amount and quality evidence available. However, based on the authors' extensive clinical experience, close follow-up of specific radiographic observations and serial radiographs to assess the progression/severity of bone loss and implant changes are recommended. CT findings can be used for clinical decision-making and further follow-up care. The pattern and rate of progression of bone loss, in concert with patient symptomatology, should determine whether non-operative or surgical intervention is indicated. Future studies involving implant retrieval, histopathological, and microbiological analysis for patients undergoing cTDR revision for bone loss are needed.

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus cervical disc arthroplasty: an epidemiological review of 433,660 surgical patients from 2011 to 2021

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) are commonly performed operations to address cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy. Trends in utilization and revision surgery rates warrant investigation.

PURPOSE

To explore the epidemiology, postoperative complications, and reoperation rates of ACDF and CDA.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

A total of 433,660 patients who underwent ACDF or CDA between 2011 and 2021 were included in this study.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The following data were observed for all cases: patient demographics, complications, and revisions.

METHODS

The PearlDiver database was queried to identify patients who underwent ACDF and CDA between 2011 and 2021. Epidemiological analyses were performed to examine trends in cervical procedure utilization by age group and year. After matching by age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), levels of operation, and reason for surgery, the early postoperative (2-week), short-term (2-year), and long-term (5-year) complications of both cervical procedures were examined.

RESULTS

In total, 404,195 ACDF and 29,465 CDA patients were included. ACDF utilization rose by 25.25% between 2011 and 2014 while CDA utilization rose by 654.24% between 2011-2019 followed by relative plateauing in both procedures. Mann-Kendall trend test confirmed a significant but small rise in ACDF and large rise in CDA procedures from 2011 to 2021 (p<.001). After matching, ACDF and CDA had an overall complication rate of 12.20% and 8.77%, respectively, with the most common complications being subsequent anterior revision (4.96% and 3.35%) and dysphagia (3.70% and 2.98%). The ACDF cohort, especially multilevel ACDF patients, generally had more complications and higher revision rates than the CDA cohort (p<.05).

CONCLUSIONS

While ACDF utilization has plateaued since 2014, CDA rates have risen by a staggering 654.24% over the past decade. ACDF and CDA complication and revision rates were relatively low in comparison to previously published values, with significantly lower rates in CDA. Although a lack of radiographic data in this study limits its power to recommend either procedure for individual patients with cervical radiculopathy or myelopathy, CDA may be associated with minor improvement in the complication and revision profile.

Cervical Disk Arthroplasty: Updated Considerations of an Evolving Technology

For years, anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion has been considered the benchmark for patients with cervical radiculopathy/myelopathy. However, concerns regarding adjacent segment pathology have promoted the popularity of cervical disk arthroplasty (CDA) with its motion-preserving properties. To replicate the natural cervical disk's six degrees of freedom and compressibility in cervical spine implants, designers need to carefully consider the level of constraint for stability and material selection. Recent CDA designs have incorporated strategies to facilitate unrestricted or semirestricted motion, deploying various articulating components and materials with distinct wear and compressibility properties. To optimize outcomes, patient selection considering additional degeneration of the cervical spine is critical. Clinical long-term studies have been reported in industry-funded FDA investigational device exemption and nonindustry-funded data for one-level and two-level CDA. There are limited data available on three-level and four-level CDA. Adverse events such as heterotopic ossification, osteolysis, migration, subsidence, and failure have been described, where analysis from explanted devices yields insight into in vivo wear and impingement performance. CDA has shown short-term cost advantages, such as decreased procedural expenses. Nonetheless, long-term analysis is necessary to assess possible economic tradeoffs. Advancements in designs may lead to improved implant longevity while evidence-based decision making will guide and responsibly manage the rapid advancement in CDA technology.

Effect of Preoperative Motor Weakness on Postoperative Clinical Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Cervical Disk Replacement

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective review.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effect of preoperative motor weakness on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing cervical disk replacement (CDR).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Studies examining the effect of preoperative motor weakness on postoperative clinical outcomes in CDR are limited.

METHODS

Patient cohorts were based on documented upper-extremity motor weakness on physical exam versus no motor weakness. Demographics, perioperative characteristics, and preoperative patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were compared using univariate inferential statistics. PROMs consisted of Visual Analog Pain Scale-Neck (VAS-N), Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function (PROMIS-PF), VAS-Arm (VAS-A), 12-Item Short Form (SF-12) Physical Component Score (PCS), Oswestry Neck Disability Index (NDI), and SF-12 Mental Component Score (MCS). Postoperative PROMs were collected at the 6-week, 12-week, 6-month, and final follow-up up to 1-yeartime points, and intercohort minimum clinically important difference (MCID) achievement was compared through multivariable linear logistic regression adjusting for significant differences in preoperative characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 118 patients formed cohorts based on documented upper-extremity weakness (n=73) versus no weakness (n=45). The average time to postoperative follow-up was 9.7±7.0 mo. The differences in insurance type between the 2 cohorts were significant (P<0.042). Perioperative diagnosis of foraminal stenosis was significantly more common in the motor weakness cohort (P<0.013). There were no differences in reported PROMs between cohorts. Patients with motor weakness reported significant MCID achievement for PROMIS-PF at 6-/12-weeks (P<0.012, P<0.041 respectively), SF-12 PCS at 6-months (P<0.042), VAS-N at final follow-up (P<0.021), and NDI at final follow-up (P<0.013).

CONCLUSIONS

CDR patients with preoperative muscle weakness achieved MCID across several PROMs compared with patients without muscle weakness. Patients with motor weakness reported greater improvement in mental health, pain, and disability as early as 6 weeks and up to 1 year after CDR. This information serves to inform physicians that motor weakness may not indicate a negative overall outcome.

Presentation and management of infection in total disc replacement: A review

Background

Total disc replacement (TDR) is widely used in the treatment of cervical and lumbar spine pathologies. Although TDR infection, particularly delayed infection, is uncommon, the results can be devastating, and consensus on clinical management remains elusive. In this review of the literature, we asked: (1) What are the reported rates of TDR infection; (2) What are the clinical characteristics of TDR infection; and (3) How has infection been managed for TDR patients?

Methods

We performed a search of the literature using PubMed and Embase to identify studies that reported TDR infection rates, the identification and management of TDR infection, or TDR failures with positive cultures. Twenty database studies (17 focusing on the cervical spine and 3 on the lumbar spine) and 10 case reports representing 15 patients were reviewed along with device Summary of Safety and Effectiveness Data reports.

Results

We found a lack of clarity regarding how infection was diagnosed, indicating a variation in clinical approach and highlighting the need for a standard definition of TDR infection. Furthermore, while reported infection rates were low, the absence of a clear definition prevented robust data analysis and may contribute to underreporting in the literature. We found that treatment strategy and success rely on several factors including patient symptoms and time to onset, microorganism type, and implant positioning/stability.

Conclusions

Although treatment strategies varied throughout the extant literature, common practices in eliminating infection and reconstructing the spine emerged. The results will inform future work on the creation of a more robust definition of TDR infection and as well as recommendations for management.

Cervical Disc Arthroplasty (CDA) versus Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) for Two-Level Cervical Disc Degenerative Disease: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) are both considered to be efficacious surgical procedures for treating cervical spondylosis in patients with or without compression myelopathy. This updated systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the outcomes of these procedures for the treatment of cervical degenerative disc disease (DDD) at two contiguous levels. Methods: The PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases were searched up to 1 May 2023. Studies comparing the outcomes between CDA and ACDF in patients with two-level cervical DDD were eligible for inclusion. Primary outcomes were surgical success rates and secondary surgery rates. Secondary outcomes were scores on the Neck Disability Index (NDI) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for neck and arm pain, as well as the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score for the severity of cervical compression myelopathy and complication rates. Results: In total, eight studies (two RCTs, four retrospective studies, and two prospective studies) with a total of 1155 patients (CDA: 598; ACDF: 557) were included. Pooled results revealed that CDA was associated with a significantly higher overall success rate (OR, 2.710, 95% CI: 1.949-3.770) and lower secondary surgery rate (OR, 0.254, 95% CI: 0.169-0.382) compared to ACDF. In addition, complication rates were significantly lower in the CDA group than in the ACDF group (OR, 0.548, 95% CI: 0.326 to 0.919). CDA was also associated with significantly greater improvements in neck pain VAS than ACDF. No significant differences were found in improvements in the arm VAS, NDI, and JOA scores between the two procedures. Conclusions: CDA may provide better postoperative outcomes for surgical success, secondary surgery, pain reduction, and postoperative complications than ACDF for treating patients with two-level cervical DDD.

Influence of Surgeon Specialty on 30-day Outcomes Following Single-Level Cervical Disc Arthroplasty: A Propensity-Matched Analysis

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective, propensity-matched analysis.

OBJECTIVES

Cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) is being increasingly utilized for cervical disc generation. Surgeon specialty has been shown to influence the risk for postoperative complications in spine surgery, but this has not yet been explored for CDA. Thus, the purpose of this study is to determine whether there is any difference in 30-day complications between patients undergoing single-level CDA by neurosurgeons vs by orthopaedic surgeons.

METHODS

A retrospective, 1:1 propensity score matched analysis was performed using the NSQIP database from 2015 to 2020. Patient demographics, operative characteristics, and postoperative complications were recorded. Independent multivariate logistic regression models were constructed using the propensity-matched dataset to assess surgical specialty influence on any complication, any site complication, any operative infection, and any medical complications.

RESULTS

3179 single-level CDAs (28.8% orthopaedic surgery patients, 71.2% neurosurgery patients) were identified that met the inclusion criteria. Well-matched cohorts of 916 patients each were generated. After controlling for all possible confounders, orthopedic surgery specialty was not associated with a higher odds for any complication (OR: .87, 95% CI: .35 - 2.20, P = .7696), any site complication (OR: .32, 95% CI: .08 - 1.32, P = .1359), any operative infection (OR: .31, 95% CI: .07 - 1.34), P = .1172), nor any medical complication (OR: 2.11, 95% CI: .62 - 7.20, P = .2311) vs neurosurgery.

CONCLUSION

This is the first propensity-matched analysis to show that spine surgeon specialty does not influence the risk for any complication, any site complication, any operative infection, nor any medical complication following single-level CDA within the first 30 days after surgery.

Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Versus Cervical Disc Replacement for a Workers' Compensation Population in an Ambulatory Surgical Center

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective Cohort.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) achievement outcomes between anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and cervical disk replacement (CDR) in the Workers' Compensation (WC) population.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

No studies to our knowledge have compared PROMs and MCID attainment between ACDF and CDR among patients with WC insurance undergoing surgery in an outpatient ambulatory surgical center (ASC).

METHODS

WC insurance patients undergoing primary, single/double-level ACDF/CDR in an ASC were identified. Patients were divided into ACDF versus CDR. PROMs were collected at preoperative/6-week/12-week/6-month/1-year timepoints, including PROMIS-PF, SF-12 PCS/MCS, VAS neck/arm, and NDI.

RESULTS

Seventy-nine patients were included, 51 ACDF/28 CDR. While operative time (56.4 vs. 54.4 min), estimated blood loss (29.2 vs. 25.9 mL), POD0 pain (4.9 vs. 3.8), and POD0 narcotic consumption (21.2 vs. 14.5 oral morphine equivalents) were higher in ACDF patients, none reached statistical significance ( P >0.050, all). One-year arthrodesis rate was 100.0% among ACDF recipients with available imaging (n=36). ACDF cohort improved from preoperative for PROMIS-PF from 12 weeks to 1 year, SF-12 PCS at 6 months, all timepoints for VAS neck/arm, and 12 weeks/6 months for NDI ( P ≤0.044, all). CDR cohort improved from preoperative for PROMIS-PF at 6 months, VAS neck/arm from 12 weeks to 1 year, and NDI at 12 weeks/6 months ( P ≤0.049, all). CDR cohort reported significantly lower VAS neck at 12 weeks/1 year and VAS arm at 12 weeks ( P ≤0.039, all). MCID achievement rates did not differ.

CONCLUSION

While operative duration/estimated blood loss/acute postoperative pain/narcotic consumption were, on average, higher among ACDF recipients, these were not statistically significant, possibly due to the limited sample size. ACDF and CDR ASC patients generally demonstrated comparable arm pain/disability/physical function/mental health, though neck pain was significantly lower at multiple timepoints among CDR patients. Clinically meaningful PROM improvements were comparable. Larger, multicentered studies are required to confirm our results.

Should patient eligibility criteria for cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) be expanded? A retrospective cohort analysis of relatively contraindicated patients undergoing CDA

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) is a safe and effective alternative to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in the treatment of various degenerative pathologies with advantages of motion preservation and lower rates of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD). Absolute contraindications for CDA have been well outlined in order to prevent adverse outcomes in patients. However, in cases of patients with relative contraindications (kyphotic deformity, prior cervical surgery, etc.), there remains controversy. There is minimal literature evaluating long-term outcomes in this patient population.

PURPOSE

To compare long-term clinical and functional outcomes of CDA in typical patients versus those with relative contraindications.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort review.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Eighty-nine patients were included in the study: 55 (no contraindications) in Group 1 and 34 (relatively contraindicated) in Group 2 and 26 (preoperative segmental kyphosis) in Group 3.

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

Patients were placed in the relatively contraindicated cohort if they possessed at least one of the following: (1) segmental kyphosis of 5° to 10°, (2) significant loss of disc height (between 50% and 75% of initial measurements or 1.5-3mm), (3) bridging osteophytes, and (4) prior cervical spine surgery based on preoperative cervical radiographs. The other cohort included patients without any relative contraindication who underwent CDA over the same time frame. Additionally, a subgroup analysis was used to compare those without any contraindications to those with only preoperative segmental kyphosis. Patients were included in this study if they met the following criteria: over 18 years of age, minimum follow-up of 24 months, and availability of complete medical records. Patient demographics, levels operated on, and perioperative outcomes were assessed between the two groups. Revision and complication rates were recorded. Functional outcomes scores were compared using VAS and NDI scores at 6-months, 12-months and final follow-up.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up was 40.8 months in Group 1 and 38.3 months in Group 2 (p=.569). Complication rates were 21.8% in Group 1 and 26.4% in Group 2 (p=.615). Complication rates in a comparison between Groups 1 and 3 were statistically insignificant (p=.383). The most common complication was transient approach-related postoperative dysphagia (Group 1: 20% vs Group 2: 23.5%, p=.693). No significant differences were observed in the rates of transient dysphonia (Group 1: 0.0% vs Group 2: 2.9%, p=.201), adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) (Group 1: 1.8% vs Group 2: 0.0%, p=.429), infection (Group 1: 1.8% vs Group 2: 2.9%, p=.712), heterotopic ossification (Group 1: 49.1% vs Group 2: 50.0%, p=.934) or spontaneous fusion (Group 1: 1.8% vs Group 2: 2.9%, p=.728). No revision surgeries were observed in either cohort. All three groups demonstrated significant improvements in their VAS and NDI scores compared with preoperative measurements (p<.001), but no significant differences were found in the degree of improvement between groups at any point in time.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study found no significant differences in clinical and functional outcomes between patients undergoing 1- and 2-level CDA with relative contraindications versus typical patients. These findings suggest that patient eligibility criteria for CDA may warrant expansion. However, future prospective studies over a longer period of follow-up are necessary to corroborate our results.

Current Evidence for Hybrid Constructs: Simultaneous ACDF/Arthroplasty and Arthroplasty Adjacent to Previous ACDF

It is not surprising that the utilization of hybrid constructs, combining cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical disc arthroplasty, has steadily increased over the last decade. Known limitations exist with multi-level anterior cervical disc arthroplasty and cervical disc arthroplasty procedures. Hybrid surgery offers the possibility to address patient-specific pathology in a more tailored manner by restoring functional mobility and promoting fusion where appropriate. This review discusses the current evidence, both biomechanical and clinical, of hybrid surgery for 2-level and 3-level cervical disease.

Combining Laminoplasty With Artificial Disc Replacement for the Treatment of Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy With Congenital Cervical Stenosis

BACKGROUND

Cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) is a very common and devastating spinal disease. Congenital cervical stenosis (CCS) is the most common cause. We aimed to elucidate the security, effectivity, and feasibility of surgery combining laminoplasty with artificial disc replacement (ADR) to treat CSM patients with radiculopathy, especially for preserving the range of motion (ROM) of the cervical spine.

METHOD

Between August 2008 and April 2019, 39 patients with multiple CSM caused by CCS were enrolled in the present study. All patients received laminoplasty first and then ADR. We used a retrospective collection of data for evaluating the functional and radiologic outcomes, especially regarding preservation of ROM.

RESULTS

Each patient underwent at least a 2-year postoperative follow-up. The Japanese Orthopedic Association score showed great improvements at 6 months. The ADR index-level ROM was preserved during follow-up. The subaxial Cobb angle could also be retained in the whole cervical spine, and the spinal canal diameter could be expanded by more than 52.6%. There were no severe complications or side effects, and no patients needed secondary surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

We aimed to treat multiple levels of CSM with adequate decompression without too many intervertebral disc replacements. We were able to expand the spinal canal directly for these patients with CCS and needed only 1- or 2-level ADR to treat them with associated radiculopathy. This combined surgical strategy was secure, effective, and was able to preserve the ROM of the cervical spine.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4

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.

Vertebral Body Sliding Osteotomy as a Surgical Strategy for the Treatment of Cervical Myelopathy: Complications and Pitfalls

OBJECTIVE

This retrospective cohort study has been aimed at evaluating the incidence of complications after vertebral body sliding osteotomy (VBSO) and analyzing some cases. Furthermore, the complications of VBSO were compared with those of anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF).

METHODS

This study included 154 patients who underwent VBSO (n = 109) or ACCF (n = 45) for cervical myelopathy and were followed up for > 2 years. Surgical complications, clinical and radiological outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

The most common surgical complications after VBSO were dysphagia (n = 8, 7.3%) and significant subsidence (n = 6, 5.5%). There were 5 cases of C5 palsy (4.6%), followed by dysphonia (n = 4, 3.7%), implant failure (n = 3, 2.8%), pseudoarthrosis (n = 3, 2.8%), dural tears (n = 2, 1.8%), and reoperation (n = 2, 1.8%). C5 palsy and dysphagia did not require additional treatment and spontaneously resolved. The rates of reoperation (VBSO, 1.8%; ACCF, 11.1%; p = 0.02) and subsidence (VBSO, 5.5%; ACCF, 40%; p < 0.01) were significantly lower in VBSO than in ACCF. VBSO restored more C2-7 lordosis (VBSO, 13.9° ± 7.5°; ACCF, 10.1° ± 8.0°; p = 0.02) and segmental lordosis (VBSO, 15.7° ± 7.1°; ACCF, 6.6° ± 10.2°; p < 0.01) than ACCF. The clinical outcomes did not significantly differ between both groups.

CONCLUSION

VBSO has advantages over ACCF in terms of low rate of surgical complications related to reoperation and significant subsidence. However, dural tears may still occur despite the lessened need for ossified posterior longitudinal ligament lesion manipulation in VBSO; hence, caution is warranted.

No Significant Differences in Postoperative Complications Between Outpatient and Inpatient Single-level or Multiple-level Cervical Disk Replacement for Cervical Radiculopathy

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort analysis.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the safety profile of outpatient versus inpatient single-level and multiple-level cervical disk replacement (CDR) by analyzing one- and two-year surgical outcomes and 90-day medical complications using a large patient database.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

CDR is becoming a more desirable option for patients undergoing cervical spine procedures. Unlike anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion, CDR is motion-preserving and has been shown to reduce rates of adjacent segment disease. Current literature investigating outpatient versus inpatient CDR has shown a similar safety profile among the two cohorts. However, most of these studies have relatively small sample sizes with short-term follow-up.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was done using the PearlDiver patient database between 2010 and 2019. Patients who underwent single-level and multiple-level CDR with a follow-up of at least two years were identified. Patients within each procedure cohort were subdivided into an outpatient and an inpatient group. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed.

RESULTS

In total, 2294 patients underwent single-level CDR of which 506 patients underwent outpatient CDR and 1788 underwent inpatient CDR. In total, 236 patients underwent multiple-level CDR of which 49 patients underwent outpatient CDR and 187 underwent inpatient CDR. In the single-level CDR cohort, patients undergoing outpatient CDR were found to have lesser odds of a decompressive laminectomy at one year following the initial procedure (odds ratio=0.471; 95% confidence interval: 0.205-0.945; P =0.05). No significant differences in one- and two-year surgical complications, or 90-day postoperative complications, were found on multivariate analysis of outpatient versus inpatient multiple-level CDR.

CONCLUSION

Our study found that performing single-level and multiple-level CDR on an outpatient basis has a similar safety profile to patients who underwent these procedures in an inpatient setting.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Revision Anterior Cervical Disc Arthroplasty: A National Analysis of the Associated Indications, Procedures, and Postoperative Outcomes

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the associated indications, procedures, and postoperative outcomes after revision ACDA.

METHODS

We utilized a national database to identify adult(≥18 years) patients who underwent either a primary ACDA or removal of ACDA over a 10-year period(2008-2017). An in-depth assessment of the reasons for revision surgery and the subsequent procedures performed after the removal of ACDA was done by using both Current Procedural Terminology(CPT) and International Statistical Classification of Diseases (ICD-9,10) coding.

RESULTS

From 2008 to 2017, a total of 3,350 elective, primary ACDA cases were performed. During this time, 69 patients had a revision surgery requiring the removal of ACDA. The most common reasons for revision surgery included cervical spondylosis(59.4%) and mechanical complications(27.5%). After removal of ACDA, common procedures performed included anterior cervical fusion with or without decompression(69.6%), combined anterior/posterior fusion/decompression (11.6%), and replacement of ACDA (7.2%). The indications for surgery did not vary significantly among the different procedures performed (p = 0.318). Patients requiring revision surgery for mechanical complications or those who underwent a combined surgical approach were at significantly higher risk for subsequent short-term complications (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Over a 10-year period, the rate of revision surgery for ACDA was low (2.1%). Nearly 90% of revision cases were due to either cervical spondylosis or mechanical complications. These indications for surgery did not vary significantly among the different procedures performed. These findings will be important during the shared-decision making process for patients undergoing primary or revision ACDA.

Manual therapy interventions in the management of adults with prior cervical spine surgery for degenerative conditions: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

Cervical spine surgeries for degenerative conditions are rapidly increasing. Cervical post-surgery syndrome consisting of chronic pain, adjacent segment disease, recurrent disc herniation, facet joint pain, and/or epidural scarring is common. Repeat surgery is regularly recommended, though patients are often unable to undergo or decline further surgery. Manual therapy is included in clinical practice guidelines for neck pain and related disorders, however clinical guidance for utilization of manual therapy in adults with prior cervical spine surgery is lacking. This study aimed to synthesize available literature and characterize outcomes and adverse events for manual therapy interventions in adults with prior cervical spine surgery due to degenerative conditions.

METHODS

Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses extension for scoping reviews was followed. PubMed, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, physiotherapy evidence database, and Index to Chiropractic Literature were searched from inception through October 2021. English-language literature comprised of randomized clinical trials (RCT), case-control, cohort, and case report designs were included. Adults undergoing manual therapy, with or without combination of other interventions, with prior cervical spine surgery due to degenerative conditions were included.

RESULTS

Twelve articles were identified, including 10 case reports, 1 low-quality RCT, and 1 acceptable-quality RCT. Eight case reports described 9 patients with history of fusion surgery. Two case reports described 2 patients with history of discectomy. One case report described one patient with separate operations of a discectomy at one level and a fusion at another level. One case report described 2 patients with history of cervical disc replacement surgery. The two RCTs included 63 and 86 participants, respectively. Use of manual joint mobilization/manipulation, table/instrument assisted mobilization/manipulation, and multimodal interventions were described in eligible studies. Favorable clinical outcomes were reported in 10 studies. Six case reports/series involving 8 patients described use of unclassified forms of manual therapy. Eight studies described the use of multimodal interventions along with manual therapy. One study described high patient satisfaction. Two studies, accounting for 3 patients, reported serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a lack of literature informing evidence related to clinical outcomes, patient satisfaction, and adverse events associated with manual therapy for patients with prior cervical spine surgery due to degenerative conditions. High-quality studies of higher-level hierarchical study design are needed to understand the clinical utility and safety profile of manual therapy for this population.

Posterior intraprosthetic dislocation of cervical arthroplasty: illustrative case

BACKGROUND

Cervical disc herniation is a common condition usually treated with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) or, more recently, with cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA). Both treatments offer similar clinical results. However, CDA has been found to offer fewer medium- to long-term complications as well as potential reduction of long-term adjacent disc degeneration.

OBSERVATIONS

A 40-year-old man was treated with cervical discectomy and arthroplasty due to a C6-C7 disc herniation with left C7 radiculopathy. After the treatment, his postoperative follow-up appointments were uneventful for 9 months. However, after 9 months, he reported cervical pain and a right C7 radiculopathy after neck extension. Imaging confirmed a posterior intraprosthetic dislocation, the first case reported to date. The patient was received emergency surgery under neuromonitoring, and the prosthesis was replaced by an ACDF and anterior plate. The insert presented a rupture of the anterior horn. The patient presented no preoperative or postoperative neurological deficit, and his follow-up review revealed no issues.

LESSONS

Posterior intraprosthetic dislocation is an extremely rare complication. It may occur with Mobi-C cervical arthroplasty in the case of rupture and oxidation of the polyethylene insert. Spine surgeons should be aware of this potential major complication.

Comparison of the Safety of Outpatient Cervical Disc Replacement With Inpatient Cervical Disc Replacement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES

Outpatient cervical disc replacement (CDR) has been performed with an increasing trend in recent years. However, the safety profile surrounding outpatient CDR remains insufficient. The present study systematically reviewed the current studies about outpatient CDR and performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the current evidence on the safety of outpatient CDR as a comparison with the inpatient CDR.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases comprehensively up to April 2020. Patient demographic data, overall complication, readmission, returning to the operation room, operating time were analyzed with the Stata 14 software and R 3.4.4 software.

RESULTS

Nine retrospective studies were included. Patients underwent outpatient CDR were significantly younger (mean difference [MD] = -1.97; 95% CI -3.80 to -0.15; P = .034) and had lower prevalence of hypertension (OR = 0.68; 95% CI 0.53-0.87; P = .002) compared with inpatient CDR. The pooled prevalence of overall complication was 0.51% (95% CI 0.10% to 1.13%) for outpatient CDR. Outpatient CDR had a 59% reduction in risk of developing complications (OR = 0.41; 95% CI 0.18-0.95; P = .037). Outpatient CDR showed significantly shorter operating time (MD = -18.37; 95% CI -25.96 to -10.77; P < .001). The readmission and reoperation rate were similar between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a lack of prospective studies on the safety of outpatient CDR. However, current evidence shows outpatient CDR can be safely performed under careful patient selection. High-quality, large prospective studies are needed to demonstrate the generalizability of this study.

Comparison of Two-level Cervical Disc Replacement Versus Two-level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion in the Outpatient Setting

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of two-level cervical disc replacement (CDR) in the outpatient setting.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Despite growing interest in CDR, limited data exist evaluating the safety of two-level CDR in the outpatient setting.

METHODS

The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database was queried for all two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and CDR procedures between 2015 and 2018. Demographics, comorbidities, and 30-day postoperative complication rates of outpatient two-level CDR were compared to those of inpatient two-level CDR and outpatient two-level ACDF. Radiographic data are not available in the NSQIP.

RESULTS

A total of 403 outpatient CDRs were compared to 408 inpatient CDRs and 4134 outpatient ACDFs. Outpatient CDR patients were older and more likely to have pulmonary comorbidities compared to inpatient CDR (P < 0.03). Outpatient CDR patients were less likely to have an American Society of Anesthesiologists class ≥2 and have hypertension compared to outpatient ACDF patients (P < 0.0001). Outpatient CDR had a lower 30-day readmission rate (0.5% vs. 2.5%, P = 0.02) and lower 30-day reoperation rate (0% vs. 1%, P = 0.047) compared to inpatient CDR. Outpatient CDR had a lower readmission rate (0.5% vs. 2.1%, P = 0.03) compared to outpatient ACDF, but there was no difference in reoperation rates between the two procedures (0% vs. 0.8%, P = 0.07). Outpatient CDR had an overall complication rate of 0.2%, inpatient CDR had a complication rate of 0.9%, and outpatient ACDF had a complication rate of 1.3%. These differences were not significant.

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this is the largest multicenter study examining the safety of two-level outpatient CDR procedures. Outpatient two-level CDR was associated with similarly safe outcomes when compared to inpatient two-level CDR and outpatient two-level ACDF. This suggests that two-level CDR can be performed safely in the outpatient setting.Level of Evidence: 3.

Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: Pathophysiology and Current Treatment Strategies

Chronic compression or ischemia of the spinal cord in the cervical spine causes a clinical syndrome known as cervical myelopathy. Recently, a new term “degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM)” was introduced. DCM encompasses spondylosis, intervertebral disk herniation, facet arthrosis, ligamentous hypertrophy, calcification, and ossification. The pathophysiology of DCM includes structural and functional abnormalities of the spinal cord caused by static and dynamic factors. In nonoperative patients, cervical myelopathy has a poor prognosis. Surgical treatments, such as anterior or posterior decompression accompanying arthrodesis, arthroplasty, or laminoplasty, should be considered for patients with chronic progressive cervical myelopathy. Surgical decompression can prevent the progression of myelopathy and improve the neurologic status, functional outcomes, and quality of life, irrespective of differences in medical systems and sociocultural determinants of health. The anterior surgical approach to the cervical spine has the advantage of removing or floating the intervertebral disk, osteophytes, and ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament that compress the spinal cord directly. The posterior surgical approach to the cervical spine is mainly used for multisegment spinal cord compression in patients with cervical lordosis. In this review article, we addressed the pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, differential diagnosis, and treatment options for DCM.

Comparison of the safety of outpatient cervical disc replacement with inpatient cervical disc replacement: A protocol for a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Cervical disc replacement (CDR) has been widely used as an effective treatment for cervical degenerative disc diseases in recent years. However, the cost of this procedure is very high and may bring a great economic burden to patients and the health care system. It is reported that outpatient procedures can reduce nearly 30% of the costs associated with hospitalization compared with inpatient procedures. However, the safety profile surrounding outpatient CDR remains poorly resolved. This study aims to evaluate the current evidence on the safety of outpatient CDR METHODS:: Four English databases were searched. The inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed according to the PICOS principle. The titles and abstracts of the records will be screened by 2 authors independently. Records that meet the eligibility criteria will be screened for a second time by reading the full text. An extraction form will be established for data extraction. Risk of bias assessment will be performed by 2 authors independently using Cochrane risk of bias tool or Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Data synthesis will be conducted using Stata software. Heterogeneity among studies will be assessed using I test. The funnel plot, Egger regression test, and Begg rank correlation test will be used to examine the publication bias.

RESULTS

The results of this meta-analysis will be published in a peer-review journal.

CONCLUSION

This will be the first meta-analysis that compares the safety of outpatient CDR with inpatient CDR. Our study will help surgeons fully understand the complications and safety profile surrounding outpatient CDR. OSF REGISTRATION NUMBER:: doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/3597Z.