1
|
Abdelmalek G, Coban D, Patel N, Changoor S, Sahai N, Sinha K, Hwang K, Emami A. Are Patients With Segmental Cervical Kyphosis Appropriate Candidates for Cervical Disc Arthroplasty (CDA)? A Clinical and Radiographic Analysis Compared to Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF). Global Spine J 2024:21925682241232616. [PMID: 38359817 DOI: 10.1177/21925682241232616] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/17/2024] Open
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES To compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) in patients with preoperative segmental kyphosis. METHODS Patients with segmental cervical kyphosis at the operative levels undergoing 1- or 2-level ACDF or CDA from 2017 to 2020 with 2 years of follow were identified. Patient demographics, perioperative data, complication rates, radiographic findings and reported outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS A total of 48 patients met inclusion criteria and were included in our study (ACDF: n = 24, CDA: n = 24). Patient demographic data between the 2 cohorts was similar expect for proportion of males (ACDF: 62.5% vs CDA: 33.3%, P = .043). There was no statistical significance in the change of segmental lordosis (ACDF: +8.09° vs CDA: +5.88°, P = .075) between the preoperative and final postoperative period. Additionally, the change in cervical lordosis was similar between groups (ACDF:+ 9.86° vs CDA: +7.60°, P = .226). VAS scores were similar between the 2 groups at every follow-up interval. NDI scores were significantly different at the 6-month, 12 month and the final follow-up. Mean improvements between preoperative and final postoperative periods were statistically superior in the CDA cohort compared to the ACDF cohort (ACDF: 22.8 vs CDA: 24.1, P = .0375). CONCLUSION CDA was superior to ACDF in regards to NDI scores following index procedure in patients with preoperative segmental cervical kyphosis. Those in the CDA cohort had similar complication rates, revision rates and radiographic outcomes as those who underwent ACDF.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- George Abdelmalek
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, St Joseph's University Medical Center, Paterson, NJ, USA
| | - Daniel Coban
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, St Joseph's University Medical Center, Paterson, NJ, USA
| | - Neil Patel
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, St Joseph's University Medical Center, Paterson, NJ, USA
| | - Stuart Changoor
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, St Joseph's University Medical Center, Paterson, NJ, USA
| | - Nikhil Sahai
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, St Joseph's University Medical Center, Paterson, NJ, USA
| | - Kumar Sinha
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, St Joseph's University Medical Center, Paterson, NJ, USA
| | - Ki Hwang
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, St Joseph's University Medical Center, Paterson, NJ, USA
| | - Arash Emami
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, St Joseph's University Medical Center, Paterson, NJ, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Ko CC, Feng BK, Kuo YH, Kuo CH, Tu TH, Chang CC, Cheng H, Huang WC, Wu JC. Incidence and Risk Factor of Implant Dislocation After Cervical Disk Arthroplasty: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis of 756 Patients. Neurosurgery 2023; 93:330-338. [PMID: 36805569 DOI: 10.1227/neu.0000000000002413] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/01/2022] [Accepted: 12/16/2022] [Indexed: 02/22/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Implant dislocation after cervical disk arthroplasty (CDA) is obviously a critical complication, but no information about the incidence and associated risk factor has been reported. OBJECTIVE To investigate the incidence and risk factor of implant dislocation after CDA by a retrospective cohort analysis. METHODS A retrospective review of a consecutive series of CDA performed between January 2009 and March 2021 at a single institution was conducted. Analyses of chart records and radiological data established the incidence and associated risk factor of implant dislocation after CDA. A Kaplan-Meier survival estimation of implant survival was performed. RESULTS A total of 756 consecutive patients were included in this analysis. Five patients (0.7%) had a migration and even dropout of the artificial disk. The overall cumulative survival rate of the implant reached approximately 99.3% of the 756 patients. Preoperative kyphosis was significantly related to implant dislocation ( P = .016), with an odds ratio of 15.013. CONCLUSION The incidence of implant dislocation after CDA is as low as 0.7% or 5/756 patients. Preoperative kyphosis significantly increases the risk of postoperative implant dislocation by a factor of 15. The migrating implants could be revealed on radiographs as early as 0.9 to 1.4 months postoperatively and were revised to anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion within half a year. No new event of implant dislocation occurred half a year postoperatively. The overall cumulative survival rate of the implant reached 99.3% of the 756 patients. In conclusion, CDA remains a safe and reliable procedure.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chin-Chu Ko
- Department of Neurosurgery, Neurological Institute, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan
- School of Medicine, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan
- Institute of Pharmacology, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Bo-Kai Feng
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Far Eastern Memorial Hospital, New Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Yi-Hsuan Kuo
- Department of Neurosurgery, Neurological Institute, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan
- School of Medicine, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan
- Institute of Biomedical Informatics, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Chao-Hung Kuo
- Department of Neurosurgery, Neurological Institute, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan
- School of Medicine, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, School of Biomedical Science and Engineering, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Tsung-Hsi Tu
- Department of Neurosurgery, Neurological Institute, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan
- School of Medicine, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Chih-Chang Chang
- Department of Neurosurgery, Neurological Institute, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan
- School of Medicine, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, School of Biomedical Science and Engineering, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Henrich Cheng
- Department of Neurosurgery, Neurological Institute, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan
- School of Medicine, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan
- Institute of Pharmacology, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Wen-Cheng Huang
- Department of Neurosurgery, Neurological Institute, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan
- School of Medicine, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Jau-Ching Wu
- Department of Neurosurgery, Neurological Institute, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan
- School of Medicine, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan
- Institute of Pharmacology, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan
| |
Collapse
|