scholarly journals Safety and Efficiency of Biomimetic Nanohydroxyapatite/Polyamide 66 Composite in Rabbits and Primary Use in Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hui Xu ◽  
Yan Wang ◽  
Xiaojing Su ◽  
Xuelian Zhang ◽  
Xuesong Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Spondylosis ◽  
Sagittal Alignment ◽  
Hind Femur ◽  
Anterior Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Peek Cage ◽  
Polyamide 66 ◽  
Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Cage Subsidence ◽  
Cervical Spondylosis Myelopathy

This study was conducted to validate the safety and efficiency of biomimetic nanohydroxyapatite/polyamide 66 (n-HA/PA66) composite in animal model (rabbit) and report its application in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for 4, 12, and 24 weeks. N-HA/PA66 composite was implanted into one-side hind femur defects and the control defects were kept empty as blank controls. A combination of macroscopic and histomorphometric studies was performed up to 24 weeks postoperatively and compared with normal healing. 60 cervical spondylosis myelopathy and radiculopathy patients who were subjected to ACDF using n-HA/PA66 and PEEK cage were involved in this study with six-month minimum follow-up. Their radiographic (cage subsidence, fusion status, and segmental sagittal alignment (SSA)) and clinical (VAS and JOA scales) data before surgery and at each follow-up were recorded and compared. Nanohydroxyapatite/polyamide 66 composite is safe and effective in animal experiment and ACDF.

scholarly journals A Comparison of Contiguous Two-level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion using a Structural Allograft versus a Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Cage: The Results of a Three-Year Follow-up

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
ING HOW MOO ◽  
Carmen Jia Wen Kam ◽  
Maksim Wen Sheng Lai ◽  
William Yeo ◽  
Reuben Chee Cheong Soh
Keyword(s):  
Neck Pain ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Plate Fixation ◽  
Neck Disability Index ◽  
Anterior Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Peek Cage ◽  
Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Structural Allograft ◽  
Cage Subsidence

Abstract Background: Allografts and polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages are the two most commonly used material in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). However, their effectiveness in in two-level ACDF remains controversial. The primary aim of this retrospective study is to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of two-level ACDF with plate fixation using either a structural allograft or a PEEK cage. Methods: From 2010 to 2015, 88 consecutive patients underwent a two-level ACDF of which 53 used an allograft and 35 patients with a PEEK cage. All PEEK cages were filled with local autografts. All clinical outcomes were prospectively collected preoperatively, at six months and at two years after surgery. Clinical efficacy was evaluated using visual analogue scale for neck pain and limb pain, the Neck Pain and Disability Score, Neck Disability Index, Neurogenic Symptom Score, and the Japan Orthopedic Association score. Radiological outcomes were assessed preoperatively, immediately after surgery, and at the final follow-up. Results: A preoperative comparison revealed no difference between the two patient groups in terms of age, gender, body mass index, smoking status, preoperative symptoms, operated levels, and follow-up (mean= 42.8 months). No difference in improvements in the clinical outcome between the two groups was observed. Both groups showed significant improvement in mean disc height, segmental height, and segmental lordosis postoperatively. The fusion rates for PEEK cage was 100% at both levels while the fusion rates for allograft group was 98.1% at cephalad level and 94.2% at caudad level (p>0.05). Subsidence at the cephalad level occurred in 22.9% (8/35) segments in the PEEK group and 7.7% (4/52) segments in the allograft group (p=0.057). At the caudal level, a higher cage subsidence was noted in the PEEK group compared to the allograft group [37.1% (13/35) versus 15.4% (8/52)] (p=0.02). Overall, subsidence was noted in 30% (21/70) of the PEEK group and in 11% (12/104) of the allograft group (p<0.05). Conclusion: The use of PEEK cages resulted in a higher rate of subsidence in two-level ACDF as compared to allograft. Two-level ACDF using either allografts or PEEK cages resulted in similar clinical outcomes, radiological improvements in alignment and fusion rates.

scholarly journals A Comparison of Contiguous Two-level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion using a Structural Allograft versus a Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Cage: The Results of a Three-Year Follow-up

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
ING HOW MOO ◽  
Carmen Jia Wen Kam ◽  
Maksim Wen Sheng Lai ◽  
William Yeo ◽  
Reuben Chee Cheong Soh
Keyword(s):  
Neck Pain ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Plate Fixation ◽  
Neck Disability Index ◽  
Anterior Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Peek Cage ◽  
Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Structural Allograft ◽  
Cage Subsidence

Abstract Background: The effectiveness of graft type in two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with plate fixation remains controversial. The primary aim of this retrospective study is to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of two-level anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) with plate fixation using either a structural allograft or a polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage. Methods: From 2010 to 2015, 88 consecutive patients underwent a two-level ACDF of which 53 used an allograft and 35 patients with a PEEK cage. All clinical outcomes were prospectively collected preoperatively, at six months and at two years after surgery. Clinical efficacy was evaluated using visual analogue scale for neck pain and limb pain, the Neck Pain and Disability Score, Neck Disability Index, Neurogenic Symptom Score, and the Japan Orthopedic Association score. Radiological outcomes were assessed preoperatively, immediately after surgery, and at the final follow-up. Results: A preoperative comparison revealed no difference between the two patient groups in terms of age, gender, body mass index, smoking status, preoperative symptoms, operated levels, and follow-up (mean= 42.8 months). No difference in improvements in the clinical outcome between the two groups was observed. Both groups showed significant improvement in mean disc height, segmental height, and segmental lordosis postoperatively. The fusion rates for PEEK cage was 100% at both levels while the fusion rates for allograft group was 98.1% at cephalad level and 94.2% at caudad level (p>0.05). Subsidence at the cephalad level occurred in 22.9% (8/35) segments in the PEEK group and 7.7% (4/52) segments in the allograft group (p=0.057). At the caudal level, a higher cage subsidence was noted in the PEEK group compared to the allograft group [37.1% (13/35) versus 15.4% (8/52)] (p=0.02). Overall, subsidence was noted in 30% (21/70) of the PEEK group and in 11% (12/104) of the allograft group (p<0.05). Conclusion: The use of PEEK cages resulted in a higher rate of subsidence in two-level ACDF as compared to allograft. Two-level ACDF using either allografts or PEEK cages resulted in similar clinical outcomes, radiological improvements in alignment and fusion rates.

scholarly journals A Comparison of Contiguous Two-level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion using a Structural Allograft versus a Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Cage: The Results of a Three-Year Follow-up

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
ING HOW MOO ◽  
Carmen Jia Wen Kam ◽  
Maksim Wen Sheng Lai ◽  
William Yeo ◽  
Reuben Chee Cheong Soh
Keyword(s):  
Neck Pain ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Plate Fixation ◽  
Neck Disability Index ◽  
Anterior Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Peek Cage ◽  
Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Structural Allograft ◽  
Cage Subsidence

Abstract Background: Allografts and polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages are the two most commonly used material in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). However, their effectiveness in in two-level ACDF remains controversial. The primary aim of this retrospective study is to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of two-level ACDF with plate fixation using either a structural allograft or a PEEK cage. Methods: From 2010 to 2015, 88 consecutive patients underwent a two-level ACDF of which 53 used an allograft and 35 patients with a PEEK cage. All PEEK cages were filled with local autografts. All clinical outcomes were prospectively collected preoperatively, at six months and at two years after surgery. Clinical efficacy was evaluated using visual analogue scale for neck pain and limb pain, the Neck Pain and Disability Score, Neck Disability Index, Neurogenic Symptom Score, and the Japan Orthopedic Association score. Radiological outcomes were assessed preoperatively, immediately after surgery, and at the final follow-up. Results: A preoperative comparison revealed no difference between the two patient groups in terms of age, gender, body mass index, smoking status, preoperative symptoms, operated levels, and follow-up (mean= 42.8 months). No difference in improvements in the clinical outcome between the two groups was observed. Both groups showed significant improvement in mean disc height, segmental height, and segmental lordosis postoperatively. The fusion rates for PEEK cage was 100% at both levels while the fusion rates for allograft group was 98.1% at cephalad level and 94.2% at caudad level (p>0.05). Subsidence at the cephalad level occurred in 22.9% (8/35) segments in the PEEK group and 7.7% (4/52) segments in the allograft group (p=0.057). At the caudal level, a higher cage subsidence was noted in the PEEK group compared to the allograft group [37.1% (13/35) versus 15.4% (8/52)] (p=0.02). Overall, subsidence was noted in 30% (21/70) of the PEEK group and in 11% (12/104) of the allograft group (p<0.05). Conclusion: The use of PEEK cages resulted in a higher rate of subsidence in two-level ACDF as compared to allograft. Two-level ACDF using either allografts or PEEK cages resulted in similar clinical outcomes, radiological improvements in alignment and fusion rates.

scholarly journals A Comparison of Contiguous Two-level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion using a Structural Allograft versus a Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Cage: The Results of a Three-Year Follow-up

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
ING HOW MOO ◽  
Carmen Jia Wen Kam ◽  
Maksim Wen Sheng Lai ◽  
William Yeo ◽  
Reuben Chee Cheong Soh
Keyword(s):  
Neck Pain ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Plate Fixation ◽  
Neck Disability Index ◽  
Anterior Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Peek Cage ◽  
Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Structural Allograft ◽  
Cage Subsidence

Abstract Background: Allografts and polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages are the two most commonly used material in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). However, their effectiveness in in two-level ACDF remains controversial. The primary aim of this retrospective study is to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of two-level ACDF with plate fixation using either a structural allograft or a PEEK cage. Methods: From 2010 to 2015, 88 consecutive patients underwent a two-level ACDF of which 53 used an allograft and 35 patients with a PEEK cage. All PEEK cages were filled with local autografts. All clinical outcomes were prospectively collected preoperatively, at six months and at two years after surgery. Clinical efficacy was evaluated using visual analogue scale for neck pain and limb pain, the Neck Pain and Disability Score, Neck Disability Index, Neurogenic Symptom Score, and the Japan Orthopedic Association score. Radiological outcomes were assessed preoperatively, immediately after surgery, and at the final follow-up. Results: A preoperative comparison revealed no difference between the two patient groups in terms of age, gender, body mass index, smoking status, preoperative symptoms, operated levels, and follow-up (mean= 42.8 months). No difference in improvements in the clinical outcome between the two groups was observed. Both groups showed significant improvement in mean disc height, segmental height, and segmental lordosis postoperatively. The fusion rates for PEEK cage was 100% at both levels while the fusion rates for allograft group was 98.1% at cephalad level and 94.2% at caudad level (p>0.05). Subsidence at the cephalad level occurred in 22.9% (8/35) segments in the PEEK group and 7.7% (4/52) segments in the allograft group (p=0.057). At the caudal level, a higher cage subsidence was noted in the PEEK group compared to the allograft group [37.1% (13/35) versus 15.4% (8/52)] (p=0.02). Overall, subsidence was noted in 30% (21/70) of the PEEK group and in 11% (12/104) of the allograft group (p<0.05). Conclusion: The use of PEEK cages resulted in a higher rate of subsidence in two-level ACDF as compared to allograft. Two-level ACDF using either allografts or PEEK cages resulted in similar clinical outcomes, radiological improvements in alignment and fusion rates.

scholarly journals PEEK Cages versus PMMA Spacers in Anterior Cervical Discectomy: Comparison of Fusion, Subsidence, Sagittal Alignment, and Clinical Outcome with a Minimum 1-Year Follow-Up

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan-Helge Klingler ◽  
Marie T. Krüger ◽  
Ronen Sircar ◽  
Evangelos Kogias ◽  
Christoph Scholz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Sagittal Alignment ◽  
Anterior Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Ct Scans ◽  
Peek Cage ◽  
Disc Disease ◽  
Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Bony Fusion ◽  
Sf 36

Purpose. To compare radiographic and clinical outcomes after anterior cervical discectomy in patients with cervical degenerative disc disease using PEEK cages or PMMA spacers with a minimum 1-year follow-up.Methods. Anterior cervical discectomy was performed in 107 patients in one or two levels using empty PEEK cages (51 levels), Sulcem PMMA spacers (49 levels) or Palacos PMMA spacers (41 levels) between January, 2005 and February, 2009. Bony fusion, subsidence, and sagittal alignment were retrospectively assessed in CT scans and radiographs at follow-up. Clinical outcome was measured using the VAS, NDI, and SF-36.Results. Bony fusion was assessed in 65% (PEEK cage), 57% (Sulcem), and 46% (Palacos) after a mean follow-up of 2.5 years. Mean subsidence was 2.3–2.6 mm without significant differences between the groups. The most pronounced loss of lordosis was found in PEEK cages (−4.1°). VAS was 3.1 (PEEK cage), 3.6 (Sulcem), and 2.7 (Palacos) without significant differences. Functional outcome in the PEEK cage and Palacos group was superior to the Sulcem group.Conclusions. The substitute groups showed differing fusion rates. Clinical outcome, however, appears to be generally not correlated with fusion status or subsidence. We could not specify a superior disc substitute for anterior cervical discectomy. This trial is registered withDRKS00003591.

scholarly journals A Comparison of Contiguous Two-level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion using a Structural Allograft versus a Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Cage: The Results of a Three-Year Follow-up

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
ING HOW MOO ◽  
Carmen Jia Wen Kam ◽  
Maksim Wen Sheng Lai ◽  
William Yeo ◽  
Reuben Chee Cheong Soh
Keyword(s):  
Neck Pain ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Plate Fixation ◽  
Neck Disability Index ◽  
Anterior Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Peek Cage ◽  
Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Structural Allograft ◽  
Cage Subsidence

Abstract Background: Allografts and polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages are the two most commonly used material in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). However, their effectiveness in in two-level ACDF remains controversial. The primary aim of this retrospective study is to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of two-level ACDF with plate fixation using either a structural allograft or a PEEK cage. Methods: From 2010 to 2015, 88 consecutive patients underwent a two-level ACDF of which 53 used an allograft and 35 patients with a PEEK cage. All PEEK cages were filled with local autografts. All clinical outcomes were prospectively collected preoperatively, at six months and at two years after surgery. Clinical efficacy was evaluated using visual analogue scale for neck pain and limb pain, the Neck Pain and Disability Score, Neck Disability Index, Neurogenic Symptom Score, and the Japan Orthopedic Association score. Radiological outcomes were assessed preoperatively, immediately after surgery, and at the final follow-up. Results: A preoperative comparison revealed no difference between the two patient groups in terms of age, gender, body mass index, smoking status, preoperative symptoms, operated levels, and follow-up (mean= 42.8 months). No difference in improvements in the clinical outcome between the two groups was observed. Both groups showed significant improvement in mean disc height, segmental height, and segmental lordosis postoperatively. The fusion rates for PEEK cage was 100% at both levels while the fusion rates for allograft group was 98.1% at cephalad level and 94.2% at caudad level (p>0.05). Subsidence at the cephalad level occurred in 22.9% (8/35) segments in the PEEK group and 7.7% (4/52) segments in the allograft group (p=0.057). At the caudal level, a higher cage subsidence was noted in the PEEK group compared to the allograft group [37.1% (13/35) versus 15.4% (8/52)] (p=0.02). Overall, subsidence was noted in 30% (21/70) of the PEEK group and in 11% (12/104) of the allograft group (p<0.05). Conclusion: The use of PEEK cages resulted in a higher rate of subsidence in two-level ACDF as compared to allograft. Two-level ACDF using either allografts or PEEK cages resulted in similar clinical outcomes, radiological improvements in alignment and fusion rates.

scholarly journals Partial uncinatectomy combined with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the treatment of one-level cervical radiculopathy: analysis of clinical efficacy and sagittal alignment

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Haimiti Abudouaini ◽  
Tingkui Wu ◽  
Hao Liu ◽  
Beiyu Wang ◽  
Hua Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Efficacy ◽  
Sagittal Alignment ◽  
Cervical Radiculopathy ◽  
Fusion Rate ◽  
Uncinate Process ◽  
Anterior Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Cervical Sagittal Alignment ◽  
Uncovertebral Joint

Abstract Background Biomechanical studies have demonstrated that uncovertebral joint contributes to segment mobility and stability to a certain extent. Simultaneously, osteophytes arising from the uncinate process are a common cause of cervical spondylotic radiculopathy (CSR). For such patients, partial uncinatectomy (UT) may be required. However, the clinical efficacy and sagittal alignment of partial UT during anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) have not been fully elucidated. Methods A total of 87 patients who had undergone single level ACDF using a zero-profile device from July 2014 to December 2018 were included. Based on whether the foraminal part of the uncovertebral joint was resected or preserved, the patients were divided into the ACDF with UT group (n = 37) and the ACDF without UT group (n = 50). Perioperative data, radiographic parameters, clinical outcomes, and complications were compared between the two groups. Results The mean follow-up was 16.86 ± 5.63 and 18.36 ± 7.51 months in the ACDF with UT group and ACDF without UT group, respectively (p > 0.05). The average preoperative VAS arm score was 5.89 ± 1.00 in the ACDF with UT group and 5.18 ± 1.21 in the ACDF without UT group (p = 0.038). However, the average VAS arm score was 4.22 ± 0.64, 4.06 ± 1.13 and 1.68 ± 0.71, 1.60 ± 0.70 at 1 week post operation and at final follow up, respectively, (p > 0.05). We also found that the C2-7 SVA and St-SVA at the last follow-up and their change (last follow-up value − preoperative value) in the ACDF with UT group were significantly higher than ACDF without UT group (p < 0.05). No marked differences in the other cervical sagittal parameters, fusion rate or complications, including dysphagia, ASD, and subsidence, were observed. Conclusions Our result indicates that ACDF using a zero-p implant with or without partial UT both provide satisfactory clinical efficacy and acceptable safety. However, additional partial UT may has a negative effect on cervical sagittal alignment.

scholarly journals Long-Term Results of Multiple Anterior Cervical Discectomy with Cage Fusion Technique: Results of Multiple Centre Study

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (17) ◽  
pp. 2824-2828 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hamdi Mostafa ◽  
Mohsen Lotfi ◽  
M. Wahid
Keyword(s):  
Neck Pain ◽  
Anterior Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Long Term Results ◽  
Cervical Disc ◽  
Fusion Technique ◽  
Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Cage Subsidence ◽  
Long Term Follow Up

BACKGROUND: Cervical herniation is commonly treated by anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) if conservative management has failed in relief of the patient's symptoms. Disc fusion is needed after ACDF as anterior longitudinal ligament will be absent after doing the operation, especially if multiple levels are needed. The occurrence of complications as cage subsidence and adjacent segment failure related to the length of follow up as they are increasing in percentage is directly proportional to the length of follow up. AIM: Analysis of the results for patients who underwent 3 levels of ACDF with cage fusion for short term and long term follow up in multiple centres as the visual analogue score for neck pain & brachialgia. METHODS: This retrospective cohort series of 68 patients selected out of 136 patients suffering from 3 levels of degenerative cervical disc disease who were unresponsive to adequate conservative therapy. All cases were treated at one of the neurosurgery departments of 3 different hospitals (Naser institute for research and treatment hospital, Haram hospital for research and treatment and Misr university for science and technology) by the same surgical team in the period from February 2012 to February 2017. RESULTS: We found in this study;68 patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria, of the 29 patients underwent 3 levels of ACDF starting from C3-4 (42.65%) and 39 patients who underwent 3 levels of ACDF starting from C4-5 (57.35%). Clinical assessment for VAS pain score for both neck pain and radiculopathy were done before the surgery and immediately post-operative and during each time follow up visit and we found statistically significant immediate postoperative improvement. (P ˂ 0.05) CONCLUSION: Stand-alone three levels of an anterior cervical discectomy with cage fusion technique improved the clinical outcomes on long term follow up.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document