Biomechanical comparison of anterior cervical spine instrumentation techniques with and without supplemental posterior fusion after different corpectomy and discectomy combinations: Laboratory investigation.

OBJECT The objective of this study was to compare the stiffness and range of motion (ROM) of 4 cervical spine constructs and the intact condition. The 4 constructs consisted of 3-level anterior cervical discectomy with anterior plating, 1-level discectomy and 1-level corpectomy with anterior plating, 2-level corpectomy with anterior plating, and 2-level corpectomy with anterior plating and posterior fixation. METHODS Eight human cadaveric fresh-frozen cervical spines from C2-T2 were used. Three-dimensional motion analysis with an optical tracking device was used to determine motion following various reconstruction methods. The specimens were tested in the following conditions: 1) intact; 2) segmental construct with discectomies at C4-5, C5-6, and C6-7, with polyetheretherketone (PEEK) interbody cage and anterior plate; 3) segmental construct with discectomy at C6-7 and corpectomy of C-5, with PEEK interbody graft at the discectomy level and a titanium cage at the corpectomy level; 4) corpectomy at C-5 and C-6, with titanium cage and an anterior cervical plate; and 5) corpectomy at C-5 and C-6, with titanium cage and an anterior cervical plate, and posterior lateral mass screw-rod system from C-4 to C-7. All specimens underwent a pure moment application of 2 Nm with regards to flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. RESULTS In all tested motions the statistical comparison was significant between the intact condition and the 2-level corpectomy with anterior plating and posterior fixation construct. All other statistical comparisons between the instrumented constructs were not statistically significant except between the 3-level discectomy with anterior plating and the 2-level corpectomy with anterior plating in axial rotation. There were no statistically significant differences between the 1-level discectomy and 1-level corpectomy with anterior plating and the 2-level corpectomy with anterior plating in any tested motion. There was also no statistical significance between the 3-level discectomy with anterior plating and the 2-level corpectomy with anterior plating and posterior fixation. CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrates that segmental plate fixation (3-level discectomy) affords the same stiffness and ROM as circumferential fusion in 2-level cervical spine corpectomy in the immediate postoperative setting. This obviates the need for staged circumferential procedures for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Given that the posterior segmental instrumentation confers significant stability to a multilevel cervical corpectomy, the surgeon should strongly consider the placement of segmental posterior instrumentation to significantly improve the overall stability of the fusion construct after a 2-level cervical corpectomy.

[1]  H. Wilke,et al.  Erratum to: The stabilizing potential of anterior, posterior and combined techniques for the reconstruction of a 2-level cervical corpectomy model: biomechanical study and first results of ATPS prototyping , 2010, European Spine Journal.

[2]  Zhenhua Liao,et al.  In vitro evaluation of stiffness and load sharing in a two-level corpectomy: comparison of static and dynamic cervical plates. , 2010, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[3]  Jia Lian-shun,et al.  Reconstructive Techniques Study After Anterior Decompression of Multilevel Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy , 2009, Journal of spinal disorders & techniques.

[4]  R. Winter,et al.  A Concomitant Posterior Approach Improves Fusion Rates but not Overall Reoperation Rates in Multilevel Cervical Fusion for Spondylosis , 2009, Journal of spinal disorders & techniques.

[5]  J. Torner,et al.  Biomechanical rigidity of cadaveric cervical spine with posterior versus combined posterior and anterior instrumentation. , 2009, Journal of neurosurgery. Spine.

[6]  C. Ames,et al.  Long-term Biomechanical Stability and Clinical Improvement After Extended Multilevel Corpectomy and Circumferential Reconstruction of the Cervical Spine Using Titanium Mesh Cages , 2008, Journal of spinal disorders & techniques.

[7]  W. Hitzl,et al.  4- and 5-level anterior fusions of the cervical spine: review of literature and clinical results , 2007, European Spine Journal.

[8]  R. Lehman,et al.  Stabilizing Potential of Anterior, Posterior, and Circumferential Fixation for Multilevel Cervical Arthrodesis: An In Vitro Human Cadaveric Study of the Operative and Adjacent Segment Kinematics , 2007, Spine.

[9]  C. Ames,et al.  Successful treatment of cervical myelopathy with minimal morbidity by circumferential decompression and fusion , 2007, European Spine Journal.

[10]  P. K. Kim,et al.  Indications for circumferential surgery for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. , 2006, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[11]  D. Cho,et al.  Efficacy and safety of the use of titanium mesh cages and anterior cervical plates for interbody fusion after anterior cervical corpectomy. , 2006, Surgical neurology.

[12]  D. Cho,et al.  Treatment of multilevel cervical fusion with cages. , 2004, Surgical neurology.

[13]  S. Howng,et al.  Three-level and four-level anterior cervical discectomies and titanium cage-augmented fusion with and without plate fixation. , 2004, Journal of neurosurgery. Spine.

[14]  Eric P. Lorenz,et al.  Enhancement of Stability Following Anterior Cervical Corpectomy: A Biomechanical Study , 2004, Spine.

[15]  Eric P. Lorenz,et al.  Biomechanical Comparison of Cervical Spine Reconstructive Techniques After a Multilevel Corpectomy of the Cervical Spine , 2003, Spine.

[16]  N. Crawford,et al.  Biomechanical analysis of multilevel cervical corpectomy and plate constructs. , 2003, Journal of neurosurgery.

[17]  Thomas M. Reilly,et al.  Early Reconstruction Failures After Multilevel Cervical Corpectomy , 2003, Spine.