Category: Cervical Spine Fusion Surgery

Radiological analysis of 37 segments in cervical spine implanted with a peek stand-alone device, with at least one year follow-up.

Radiological analysis of 37 segments in cervical spine implanted with a peek stand-alone device, with at least one year follow-up.

Br J Neurosurg. 2010 Dec;24(6):633-40

Authors: Dufour T, Huppert J, Louis C, Beaurain J, Stecken J, Aubourg L, Vila T

High incidence of subsidence in cervical stand-alone cages was reported in the literature.

PMID: 20632875 [PubMed – indexed for MEDLINE]

Read More »

Conventional versus digital radiographs for intraoperative cervical spine-level localization: a prospective time and cost analysis.

Conventional versus digital radiographs for intraoperative cervical spine-level localization: a prospective time and cost analysis.

Spine J. 2009 Dec;9(12):967-71

Authors: Steinmetz MP, Mroz TE, Krishnaney A, Modic M

In today’s health-care environment, operational efficiency is intrinsic to balancing the need for increased productivity driven by rising costs and potentially decreasing reimbursement. Other operational factors kept constant, decreasing the time for a procedure can be viewed as one marker for increased efficiency.

PMID: 19716345 [PubMed – indexed for MEDLINE]

Read More »

Outcomes of interbody fusion cages used in 1 and 2-levels anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: titanium cages versus polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages.

Outcomes of interbody fusion cages used in 1 and 2-levels anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: titanium cages versus polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages.

J Spinal Disord Tech. 2010 Jul;23(5):310-6

Authors: Niu CC, Liao JC, Chen WJ, Chen LH

A prospective study was performed in case with cervical spondylosis who underwent anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with titanium or polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages.

PMID: 20124907 [PubMed – indexed for MEDLINE]

Read More »

Cubital tunnel surgery in patients with cervical radiculopathy: double crush syndrome?

Cubital tunnel surgery in patients with cervical radiculopathy: double crush syndrome?

Neurosurg Rev. 2009 Oct;32(4):471-8

Authors: Galarza M, Gazzeri R, Gazzeri G, Zuccarello M, Taha J

To determine differences in clinical outcomes in patients harboring both cubital tunnel syndrome (CuTS) and cervical radiculopathy and the influence of the so-called double crush syndrome. Both procedures were performed in 24 patients, mean age 55 years; first group of 14 patients underwent CuTS surgery as a first procedure. Second group of 10 patients underwent anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) then ulnar nerve release (UNR). Two patients underwent bilateral nerve surgery and six multiple cervical discectomies. Surgeries consisted in 26 nerve releases with associated external neurolysis in five, and 34 ACDF procedures, with plating in six. Clinical complaints (mean time 12 months) were sensory in 20 arms, with associated motor weakness and hypothenar atrophy involvement in another six. Electromyography changes were mild (two arms), moderate (16 arms), and severe (eight arms). Mean time of follow-up was 3 years (range 18 months-14 years). Clinical improvement was evidenced in 14 patients. Sensory nerve symptoms improved in 13 limbs in both groups and motor improvement was evident in three patients with UNR as first surgery. A comparative cohort of 20 patients with UNR but without cervical radiculopathy was studied to disclose outcome differences. Of these, 13 patients had clinical improvement. No differences were found among groups. In patients with double crush syndrome, factors that seemed to influence a poor CuTS outcome were evolution of symptoms longer than a year, history of multiple neuropathies or radiculopathies, and ACDF performed before UNR.

PMID: 19685252 [PubMed – indexed for MEDLINE]

Read More »

Influence of number of operated levels and postoperative time on active range of motion following anterior cervical decompression and fusion procedures.

Influence of number of operated levels and postoperative time on active range of motion following anterior cervical decompression and fusion procedures.

Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011 Feb 15;36(4):263-8

Authors: Bell KM, Bechara BP, Hartman RA, Shively C, Frazier EC, Lee JY, Kang JD, Donaldson WF

A cohort study analyzing the cervical range of motion of subjects with anterior cervical decompression and fusion operation (ACDF).

PMID: 20622748 [PubMed – indexed for MEDLINE]

Read More »

Common pitfalls in interpretation of medical evidence: a case demonstration of misleading interpretation in the analysis of cervical spine fusions.

Common pitfalls in interpretation of medical evidence: a case demonstration of misleading interpretation in the analysis of cervical spine fusions.

Spine J. 2009 Nov;9(11):905-9

Authors: Resnick DK, Rajpal S, Steinmetz MP

Evidence-based clinical practice requires the incorporation of information available in the medical literature into clinical decision making. Reliance on randomized trials as criteria for making recommendations is usually impractical. Conclusions based on low-quality information or post hoc analysis of high-quality information must be interpreted with caution.

PMID: 19664970 [PubMed – indexed for MEDLINE]

Read More »

Complication rates of three common spine procedures and rates of thromboembolism following spine surgery based on 108,419 procedures: a report from the Scoliosis Research Society Morbidity and Mortality Committee.

Complication rates of three common spine procedures and rates of thromboembolism following spine surgery based on 108,419 procedures: a report from the Scoliosis Research Society Morbidity and Mortality Committee.

Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010 Nov 15;35(24):2140-9

Authors: Smith JS, Fu KM, Polly DW, Sansur CA, Berven SH, Broadstone PA, Choma TJ, Goytan MJ, Noordeen HH, Knapp DR, Hart RA, Donaldson WF, Perra JH, Boachie-Adjei O, Shaffrey CI

Retrospective review of a prospectively collected database.

PMID: 20581760 [PubMed – indexed for MEDLINE]

Read More »