THE KINEMATICS OF ANTERIOR CERVICAL DISCECTOMY AND FUSION VERSUS ARTIFICIAL CERVICAL DISC: A PILOT STUDY

OBJECTIVE Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for the management of cervical spondylosis may contribute to further degenerative changes at adjacent levels secondary to abnormal spinal motion. Insertion of a Bryan Cervical Disc (AD) (Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Memphis, TN) may prevent this accelerated degeneration. This retrospective study compares the in vivo x-ray cervical spine kinematics in patients with ACDF and AD. METHODS Ten patients with single-level AD were matched to 10 patients with single-level ACDF based on age and sex. Lateral neutral, flexion and extension cervical x-rays were obtained preoperatively and at regular intervals up to 24 months postoperatively. Kinematic parameters, including range of motion, anteroposterior translation, and disc height, were assessed for all cervical functional spinal units using quantitative motion analysis software. Changes in these parameters were compared between matched patients from both groups using paired Student's t tests. RESULTS The range of motion at the operated level was greater in the AD group compared with the ACDF group at early (6.9 versus 0.89 degrees, P < 0.01) and late (8.4 versus 0.53 degrees, P < 0.01) follow-up evaluations. Translation was greater at the operated level in patients with AD at late follow-up (6.8 versus 0.8%, P < 0.03) evaluation. No significant between-group kinematic differences were seen at adjacent levels. CONCLUSION Patients with AD and those with ACDF demonstrated similar in vivo adjacent level kinematics within the first 24 months after anterior cervical decompression.

[1]  B. Cunningham,et al.  Cervical Disc Replacement—Porous Coated Motion Prosthesis: A Comparative Biomechanical Analysis Showing the Key Role of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament , 2003, Spine.

[2]  F. Geisler,et al.  Reoperation in Patients After Anterior Cervical Plate Stabilization in Degenerative Disease , 1998, Spine.

[3]  W. Sears,et al.  Complications with cervical arthroplasty. , 2006, Journal of neurosurgery. Spine.

[4]  K. Nakanishi,et al.  Strain on intervertebral discs after anterior cervical decompression and fusion. , 1999, Spine.

[5]  S. Emery,et al.  Anterior Cervical Decompression and Arthrodesis for the Treatment of Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy. Two to Seventeen-Year Follow-up* , 1998, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[6]  Jan Goffin,et al.  The Bryan Cervical Disc: wear properties and early clinical results. , 2004, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[7]  G. Pickett,et al.  Kinematic Analysis of the Cervical Spine Following Implantation of an Artificial Cervical Disc , 2005, Spine.

[8]  A. Hilibrand,et al.  Radiculopathy and myelopathy at segments adjacent to the site of a previous anterior cervical arthrodesis. , 1999, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[9]  Y. Takakura,et al.  Sagittal Alignment of Cervical Flexion and Extension: Lateral Radiographic Analysis , 2002, Spine.

[10]  Tae-Hong Lim,et al.  Biomechanical Study on the Effect of Cervical Spine Fusion on Adjacent-Level Intradiscal Pressure and Segmental Motion , 2002, Spine.

[11]  V. Traynelis,et al.  The Prestige cervical disc replacement. , 2004, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[12]  G. Pickett,et al.  Early clinical and biomechanical results following cervical arthroplasty. , 2004, Neurosurgical focus.

[13]  W. Sears,et al.  Effects of a cervical disc prosthesis on segmental and cervical spine alignment. , 2004, Neurosurgical focus.

[14]  Jan Goffin,et al.  Intermediate Follow-up After Treatment of Degenerative Disc Disease With the Bryan Cervical Disc Prosthesis: Single-Level and Bi-Level , 2003, Spine.

[15]  H. Baba,et al.  Late radiographic findings after anterior cervical fusion for spondylotic myeloradiculopathy. , 1993, Spine.

[16]  C. Reitman,et al.  Changes in Segmental Intervertebral Motion Adjacent to Cervical Arthrodesis: A Prospective Study , 2004, Spine.

[17]  P. McAfee,et al.  Clinical experience with the new artificial cervical PCM (Cervitech) disc. , 2004, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[18]  Ilana Langdon,et al.  Influence of an artificial cervical joint compared with fusion on adjacent-level motion in the treatment of degenerative cervical disc disease. , 2002, Journal of neurosurgery.

[19]  J. Robertson,et al.  Assessment of adjacent-segment disease in patients treated with cervical fusion or arthroplasty: a prospective 2-year study. , 2005, Journal of neurosurgery. Spine.

[20]  K. Yonenobu,et al.  Causes of Neurologic Deterioration Following Surgical Treatment of Cervical Myelopathy , 1986, Spine.

[21]  S. Sepic,et al.  Roentgenographic findings following anterior cervical fusion , 2004, Skeletal Radiology.

[22]  P. Anderson,et al.  A comparison of simulator-tested and -retrieved cervical disc prostheses. Invited submission from the Joint Section Meeting on Disorders of the Spine and Peripheral Nerves, March 2004. , 2004, Journal of neurosurgery. Spine.

[23]  Ricardo Vieira Botelho,et al.  Preliminary clinical experience with the Bryan cervical disc prosthesis. , 2003, Neurosurgery.