Anterior Cervical Corpectomy And Fusion Group Research Articles

Safety of anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) for the treatment of subaxial cervical spine injuries, a single center comparative matched analysis

IntroductionAnterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) and Anterior Cervical Corpectomy and Fusion (ACCF) are both common surgical procedures in the management of pathologies of the subaxial cervical spine. While recent reviews have demonstrated ACCF to provide better decompression results compared to ACDF, the procedure has been associated with increased surgical risks. Nonetheless, the use of ACCF in a traumatic context has been poorly described. The aim of this study was to assess the safety of ACCF as compared to the more commonly performed ACDF.MethodsAll patients undergoing ACCF or ACDF for subaxial cervical spine injuries spanning over 2 disc-spaces and 3 vertebral-levels, between 2006 and 2018, at the study center, were eligible for inclusion. Patients were matched based on age and preoperative ASIA score.ResultsAfter matching, 60 patients were included in the matched analysis, where 30 underwent ACDF and ACCF, respectively. Vertebral body injury was significantly more common in the ACCF group (p = 0.002), while traumatic disc rupture was more frequent in the ACDF group (p = 0.032). There were no statistically significant differences in the rates of surgical complications, including implant failure, wound infection, dysphagia, CSF leakage between the groups (p ≥ 0.05). The rates of revision surgeries (p > 0.999), mortality (p = 0.222), and long-term ASIA scores (p = 0.081) were also similar.ConclusionResults of both unmatched and matched analyses indicate that ACCF has comparable outcomes and no additional risks compared to ACDF. It is thus a safe approach and should be considered for patients with extensive anterior column injury.

Does the novel artificial cervical joint complex resolve the conflict between stability and mobility after anterior cervical surgery? a finite element study.

Our group has developed a novel artificial cervical joint complex (ACJC) as a motion preservation instrument for cervical corpectomy procedures. Through finite element analysis (FEA), this study aims to assess this prosthesis's mobility and stability in the context of physiological reconstruction of the cervical spine. A finite element (FE)model of the subaxial cervical spine (C3-C7) was established and validated. ACJC arthroplasty, anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF), and two-level cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) were performed at C4-C6. Range of motion (ROM), intervertebral disc pressure (IDP), facet joint stress (FJS), and maximum von Mises stress on the prosthesis and vertebrae during loading were compared. Compared to the intact model, the ROM in all three surgical groups demonstrated a decline, with the ACCF group exhibiting the most significant mobility loss, and the highest compensatory motion in adjacent segments. ACJC and artificial cervical disc prosthesis (ACDP) well-preserved cervical mobility. In the ACCF model, IDP and FJS in adjacent segments increased notably, whereas the index segments experienced the most significant FJS elevation in the CDA model. The ROM, IDP, and FJS in both index and adjacent segments of the ACJC model were intermediate between the other two. Stress distribution of ACCF instruments and ACJC prosthesis during the loading process was more dispersed, resulting in less impact on the adjacent vertebrae than in the CDA model. The biomechanical properties of the novel ACJC were comparable to the ACCF in constructing postoperative stability and equally preserved physiological mobility of the cervical spine as CDA without much impact on adjacent segments and facet joints. Thus, the novel ACJC effectively balanced postoperative stability with cervical motion preservation.

Anterior cervical X-shape-corpectomy and fusion vs. anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion for two-level cervical spondylosis

PurposeAnterior cervical X-shape-corpectomy and fusion (ACXF) is a novel cervical surgery, designed as partial alternative to the classic technique, anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF). The aim of this study was to evaluate the early-stage outcomes of ACXF in treating two-level cervical spondylosis (CS) through comparisons with ACCF.MethodsA retrospectively comparative study was conducted in two cohorts of patients who underwent single-vertebral ACXF or ACCF to treat two-level CS during September 2019 and October 2021. Clinical and radiological data of all the patients were collected from pre-operation to 1 year after the surgery, following by intra- and intergroup analyses and comparisons.ResultsFifty-seven patients were included, with 24 undergoing ACXF and 33 undergoing ACCF. ACXF group had significantly shorter drainage duration (2.13 ± 0.61 days vs. 3.48 ± 1.30 days, P < 0.001) and less drainage volume (30.21 ± 26.88 ml vs. 69.30 ± 37.65 ml, P < 0.001) than ACCF group. Both techniques significantly improved all the clinical parameters (P < 0.01) with comparable effects (P > 0.05). Each complication rate in ACXF group was lower than that in ACCF group without significant difference (P > 0.05). ACXF showed a significantly smaller transverse decompression range than ACCF (11.93 ± 1.27 mm vs. 16.29 ± 1.88 mm, P < 0.001). Postoperatively, ACXF yielded a comparable fusion rate (P > 0.05) and a significantly lower subsidence rate (P < 0.01) than ACCF technique at all time points.ConclusionsACXF is a potential surgical alternative for certain patients with two-level CS, as it provides both adequate decompression range and fewer adverse events than ACCF. The further modifications on ACXF worth exploration.

Cervical alignment and clinical outcome of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion vs. anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion in local kyphotic cervical spondylotic myelopathy

BackgroundCervical local kyphosis (CLK) is a common degenerative disorder with a potentially debilitating and intractable condition. Currently, there is still debate on the optimal treatment of local kyphotic cervical spondylotic myelopathy (LKCSM) via different anterior approaches. ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to evaluate the surgical efficacy of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) vs. anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) for the treatment of LKCSM. In addition, the cervical sagittal alignment parameters and axial symptoms (AS) severity after CLK correction were analyzed. Materials and methodsFrom January 2016 and December 2020, 104 patients who suffered LKCSM were retrospectively reviewed. These patients underwent ACDF (n = 53) and ACCF (n = 51). Pre- and postoperatively, cervical sagittal alignment parameters were measured on the lateral X-rays, including local kyphotic angles (LKA), C2-7 Cobb angle, T1 slope, and C2-7 sagittal vertical axis (C2-7 SVA). The neurological recovery rate was calculated according to the Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score. The AS severity was evaluated using Neck Disability Index (NDI). ResultsSignificant differences (P < 0.05) were demonstrated between ACDF and ACCF groups regarding LKA, LKA correction, C2-7 Cobb angle, T1 slope, C2-7 SVA, NDI, NDI recovery and NDI ranking system. However, no significant differences (P > 0.05) existed in JOA score, recovery rate, and neurological recovery rate grade. In both groups, significant differences (P < 0.05) were demonstrated between pre- and postoperative LKA, T1 slope, C2-7 Cobb angle, C2-7 SVA, JOA score, and NDI. LKA correction showed the positive correlations with the recovery rate (r = 0.48, P < 0.001), and with the NDI recovery in ACDF group (r = 0.49, P < 0.001) and in ACCF group (r = 0.55, P < 0.001). ConclusionsLKCSM with ≤3 segments of spinal cord compression can be improved with either ACDF or ACCF, resulting in satisfactory neurological outcomes. CLK correction can significantly improve the neurological function and AS, and increase the T1 slope and C2-7 SVA. However, ACDF was more favorable than ACCF in the CLK correction.

Vertebral Body Sliding Osteotomy as a Surgical Strategy for the Treatment of Cervical Myelopathy: Outcomes at Minimum Five years Follow-up.

A retrospective cohort study. To evaluate the outcomes of vertebral body sliding osteotomy (VBSO) with a minimum follow-up of five years and compare the results with those of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF). VBSO reportedly results in fewer complications, better lordosis restoration, and faster bone union than corpectomy. Although previous studies demonstrate the outcomes of VBSO with follow-up of two years or longer, results in longer term surveillance remain unknown. This study included 128 patients who underwent VBSO (n=38), ACDF (n=62), or ACCF (n=28) as a treatment for cervical myelopathy and was followed up for five years or more. Fusion, subsidence, C0-2 lordosis, C2-7 lordosis, segmental lordosis, C2-7 sagittal vertical axis, surgical complications, and neck pain visual analog scale, Neck Disability Index, and Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scores were assessed. Comparisons between continuous variables in each group were made using independent sample t tests. For nominal variables, the Fisher exact test or the χ 2 test was used. Paired t test was used to analyze the changes in postoperative values compared with preoperative values. The reoperation rate (0.0%) after VBSO was significantly lower than that after ACCF (14.3%; P =0.028). VBSO had a higher fusion rate at six-month and one-year follow-up, but the fusion rate at five years (97.4%) was not significantly different from that of ACDF (85.5%; P =0.054) and ACCF (85.7%; P =0.077). Segmental lordosis at the five-year follow-up was significantly higher in the VBSO group (16.1°) than in the ACDF (11.9°; P =0.002) and ACCF (6.5°; P <0.001) groups. C2-7 lordosis at five-year follow-up was significantly higher in the VBSO group than in the ACCF group ( P =0.017). Neck pain visual analog scale, Neck Disability Index, and JOA scores and the JOA recovery rate did not show significant intergroup differences during the five-year study period. VBSO showed promising long-term results in terms of low revision rate, fast solid union, and effective segmental lordosis restoration when compared with other anterior reconstruction techniques.

Is Anterior Trans‐Intervertebral Space Decompression Important in Treating Cervical Spondylosis with Severe Intervertebral Space Narrowing? A Retrospective Cohort Study

To evaluate the clinical efficacy and practicality of anterior trans-intervertebral space decompression and fusion (ATIDF) by comparing radiological and clinical outcomes between ATIDF and traditional anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) in cervical spondylosis patients with severe disc space narrowing. Seventy-one cervical spondylosis patients with severe disc space narrowing underwent anterior cervical spine surgery were included in this retrospective study. Thirty-seven patients underwent ATIDF and 34 patients underwent ACCF. The neck disability index (NDI), Japan Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score and the Hirabayashi improvement rate were used to evaluate patient neurological status. Cervical sagittal alignment (C2-C7 Cobb angle), surgical segment sagittal alignment (Cobb angle of surgical segment) and disc space height were also compared between the two groups. There were 39 males and 32 females; mean age was 63.72 ± 6.36 years (range, 39-81 years). Mean follow-up was 22.4 months (range, 6-45 months). All patients achieved an adequate neurological improvement. There were no significant differences in NDI, JOA scores and Hirabayashi improvement rate between the two groups. The change of C2-7 Cobb angle and surgical segment Cobb angle were both greater in the ATIDF group. The average intervertebral height ratio of the patients in the ATIDF group increased significantly after surgery (0.38 ± 0.17 before surgery to 1.13 ± 0.32 after surgery, P < 0.01). The overall complication rate was lower in the ATIDF group than the ACCF group (35.14% and 44.12%). At 6 months follow-up, three patients in the ACCF group presented with subsidence of the titanium mesh cage. ATIDF is an effective technique for treating cervical spondylosis with severe disc space narrowing; it can achieve adequate decompression and improve sagittal alignment while avoiding and reducing the implant-related complications inherent to traditional ACCF.

Comparison of Complications between Anterior Cervical Diskectomy and Fusion versus Anterior Cervical Corpectomy and Fusion in Two- and Three-Level Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: A Meta-analysis.

In this study, we systematically analyze the differences in complications between anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion (ACDF) and anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) in two- and three-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). We performed a systematic search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane databases, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, CNKI, and Wan Fang Data for all relevant studies. All statistical analyses were performed using Review Manager version 5.3. A total of 11 articles with 849 study subjects were included, with 474 patients in the ACDF group and 375 patients in the ACCF group. The results of the meta-analysis showed that in C5 palsy (odds ratio [OR]: 0.41; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.16-1.06), pseudarthrosis (OR: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.23-5.07), dysphagia (OR: 1.06; 95% CI: 0.60-1.86), infection (OR: 0.41; 95% CI: 0.16-1.09), cerebrospinal fluid leakage (OR: 1.21; 95% CI: 0.39-3.73), graft dislodgment (OR: 0.28; 95% CI: 0.06-1.37), and hematoma (OR: 0.32; 95% CI: 0.06-1.83), there are no significant differences between the ACDF and ACCF groups, whereas total complication (OR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.31-0.80) showed that the ACDF group had a significantly lower morbidity than the ACCF group. Furthermore, the three-level subgroup of ACDF had significantly better results in C5 palsy (OR: 0.31; 95% CI: 0.11-0.88), infection (OR: 0.22; 95% CI: 0.05-0.94), graft dislodgment (OR: 0.07; 95% CI: 0.01-0.40), and total complication (OR: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.23-0.60) compared with the ACCF subgroup. In general, postoperative pseudarthrosis, dysphagia, cerebrospinal fluid leakage, hematoma, C5 palsy, infection, and graft dislodgment did not differ significantly between the two groups. Total complication was significantly less in the ACDF group compared to the ACCF group. In the three-level subgroup, the morbidity of C5 palsy, infection, and graft dislodgment was significantly lower in ACDF than in ACCF.

New anterior controllable antedisplacement and fusion surgery for cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament: a biomechanical study.

The traditional anterior approach for multilevel severe cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL) is demanding and risky. Recently, a novel surgical procedure-anterior controllable antedisplacement and fusion (ACAF)-was introduced by the authors to deal with these problems and achieve better clinical outcomes. However, to the authors' knowledge, the immediate and long-term biomechanical stability obtained after this procedure has never been evaluated. Therefore, the authors compared the postoperative biomechanical stability of ACAF with those of more traditional approaches: anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF). To determine and assess pre- and postsurgical range of motion (ROM) (2 Nm torque) in flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation in the cervical spine, the authors collected cervical areas (C1-T1) from 18 cadaveric spines. The cyclic fatigue loading test was set up with a 3-Nm cycled load (2 Hz, 3000 cycles). All samples used in this study were randomly divided into three groups according to surgical procedures: ACDF, ACAF, and ACCF. The spines were tested under the following conditions: 1) intact state flexibility test; 2) postoperative model (ACDF, ACAF, ACCF) flexibility test; 3) cyclic loading (n = 3000); and 4) fatigue model flexibility test. After operations were performed on the cadaveric spines, the segmental and total postoperative ROM values in all directions showed significant reductions for all groups. Then, the ROMs tended to increase during the fatigue test. No significant crossover effect was detected between evaluation time and operation method. Therefore, segmental and total ROM change trends were parallel among the three groups. However, the postoperative and fatigue ROMs in the ACCF group tended to be larger in all directions. No significant differences between these ROMs were detected in the ACDF and ACAF groups. This in vitro biomechanical study demonstrated that the biomechanical stability levels for ACAF and ACDF were similar and were both significantly greater than that of ACCF. The clinical superiority of ACAF combined with our current results showed that this procedure is likely to be an acceptable alternative method for multilevel cervical OPLL treatment.

A biomechanical analysis of four anterior cervical techniques to treating multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a finite element study

BackgroundThe decision to treat multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy (MCSM) remains controversial. The purpose of this study is to compare the biomechanical characteristics of the intervertebral discs at the adjacent segments and internal fixation, and to provide scientific experimental evidence for surgical treatment of MCSM.MethodsAn intact C2-C7 cervical spine model was developed and validated. Four additional models were developed from the fusion model, including multilevel anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (mACDF), anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF), hybrid decompression and fusion (HDF), and mACDF with cage alone (mACDF-CA). Biomechanical characteristics on the plate and the disc of adjacent levels (C2/3, C6/7) were comparatively analyzed.ResultsOf the four models, stress on the upper (C2/3) adjacent intervertebral disc was the lowest in the mACDF-CA group and highest in the ACCF group. Stress on the intervertebral discs at adjacent segments was higher for the upper C2/3 than the lower C6/7 intervertebral disc. In all models, the mACDF-CA group had the lowest stress on the intervertebral disc, while the ACCF group had the highest stress. In the three surgical models with titanium plate fixation (mACDF, ACCF, and HDF), the ACCF group had the highest stress at the titanium plate-screw interface, while the mACDF group had the lowest stress.ConclusionAmong the four anterior cervical reconstructive techniques for MCSM, mACDF-CA makes little effect on the adjacent disc stress, which might reduce the incidence of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) after fusion. However, the accompanying risk of the increased incidence of cage subsidence should never be neglected.

Comparison of 30-Day Outcomes in Patients with Cervical Spine Metastasis Undergoing Corpectomy Versus Posterior Cervical Laminectomy and Fusion: A 2006–2016 ACS-NSQIP Database Study

Patients with metastatic disease to the cervical spine have historically had poor outcomes, with an average survival of 15 months. Every effort should be made to avoid complications of surgical intervention for stabilization and decompression. We identified patients who had undergone anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) or posterior cervical laminectomy and fusion (PCLF) for metastatic disease of the cervical spine using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database from 2006 to 2016. Patients meeting the inclusion criteria were subsequently propensity matched 1:1. We compared the overall complications, intensive care unit level complications, mortality, and return to the operating room between the 2 groups. After identifying the patients who met the inclusion criteria and propensity matching, a cohort of 240 patients was included, with 120 (50%) in the ACCF group and 120 (50%) in the PCLF group. The patients in the ACCF group were more likely to have experienced any complication (odds ratio, 2.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-4.1; P= 0.026) but not severe complications or a return to the operating room (P= 0.406 and P= 0.450, respectively). In the present study, we found that anterior surgical approaches (ACCF) for metastatic cervical spine disease resulted in a significantly greater rate of overall complications (2.1 times more) compared with PCLF in the first 30 days. Although more studies are required to further elucidate this relationship, the general belief that the anterior approach is better tolerated by patients might not apply to patients with metastatic tumors.

Meta-analysis of calcium chemotherapeutic effect of anterior cervical subtotal vertebroplasty and posterior laminoplasty

To systematically assess the efficacy of anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) versus posterior laminoplasty (LAMP) for cervical ossification of posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL). PubMed and EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CBM, CNKI, Wanfang and VIP were collected from 7 databases of ACCF, LAMP from 1970 to May 2018. According to the criteria, the articles were included and independently screened by two authors. The quality of the articles was assessed by using the MINORS scale (methodological index for non randomized studies). After extracting the data from the article, the JOA score, cervical curvature, operation time, bleeding volume, excellent and good rate, recovery rate, adverse events and secondary surgery were analyzed by using Review Manager 5.3 software. Finally, a total of 22 articles with 1 678 patients were included in this Meta-analysis, with 810 patients in ACCF group and 868 patients in LAMP group. Meta analysis results showed that the ACCF group had higher postoperative JOA scores[MD=0.63, 95%CI(0.05, 1.20), P= 0.03], higher excellent rate [OR=1.85, 95%CI (1.14, 3.02), P=0.01] and higher recovery rate [OR=11.90, 95%CI (5.75, 18.05), P=0.000 1]. But the LAMP group has a shorter operative time [MD=52.19, 95%CI (29.36, 75.03), P<0.000 01], less complications [OR=1.56, 95%CI (1.03, 2.35), P=0.04] and less reoperations [OR=3.73, 95%CI (1.62, 8.57), P=0.002]. There was no significant different in postoperative lordosis [MD=3.15, 95%CI(-0.14, 6.43), P=0.06] and blood loss[SMD= 0.26, 95%CI(-0.05, 0.57), P=0.10] between two groups. The recovery of functionof ACCF group was better, but operation time, complications and reoperations of LAMP group were all better than ACCF group. There was no difference in postoperative lordosis and intraoperative blood loss between two groups. However, there are some limitations in this study. Therefore, higher quality and larger sample size clinical studies are needed to further verify.

Adjacent two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus one-level corpectomy and fusion in cervical spondylotic myelopathy: Analysis of perioperative parameters and sagittal balance

ObjectivesThe optimal surgical strategy for cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) remains controversial; thus, the current study was designed to compare the outcomes of two different anterior approach surgeries for two-level CSM, namely, adjacent two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and one-level anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF). Patients and methodsA total of 53 patients who underwent adjacent two-level ACDF and 68 patients who underwent one-level ACCF in the Spinal Surgery Department from January 2010 to October 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. Independent sample t tests and chi-square tests were used to compare perioperative parameters (hospital stays, bleeding amounts and operation times), clinical parameters (Neck Disability Index scores and Visual Analog Scale scores for neck and arm pain), and radiologic parameters (difference in segmental height, T1 slope, C2-7 sagittal vertical axis, C2-7 lordosis, segmental angle, and fusion rate). ResultsThe length of hospital stay (p < 0.01), bleeding amount (p < 0.01), operation time (p < 0.001) and difference in segmental height (p < 0.001) were significantly greater in the ACCF group than in the ACDF group, whereas C2-7 lordosis (p < 0.05) and the segmental angle (p < 0.001) were significantly lower in the ACCF group than in the ACDF group. Other parameters were not significantly different between the two groups. ConclusionBoth ACDF and ACCF provided satisfactory clinical outcomes and fusion rates for CSM. However, adjacent two-level ACDF was associated with shorter hospital stays, less blood loss, shorter operative times, fewer differences in segmental height and greater improvement in segmental lordotic curvature. On most occasions, when either surgical method could be selected, adjacent two-level ACDF as a surgical treatment for CSM may be a worthwhile alternative method to one-level ACCF.

Cervical Range of Motion after Anterior Corpectomy and Fusion versus Laminoplasty for Multilevel Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: A Three-Dimensional Comparison Based on the Coda Motion System

To compare the change in cervical range of motion (CROM) after the 2 most widely used techniques for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM): anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) and laminoplasty. Patients with multilevel CSM treated in our hospital between 2014 and 2018 were divided into an ACCF group and a laminoplasty (LAMP) group according to the treatment received. Their demographic data, preoperative and postoperative Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scores, and CROM, measured using the Coda Motion system, were analyzed and compared. A total of 53 patients were enrolled, including 29 patients in the ACCF group and 24 patients in the LAMP group. Age, sex, duration of follow-up, and preoperative and postoperative JOA scores were comparable in the 2 groups. Compared with preoperative measurements, ACCF group lost an average of 9.8%, 28.5%, 8.9%, 9.9%, 10.6%, and 7.8% of their CROM in flexion, extension, left and right lateral flexion, and left and right rotation, respectively, at the latest follow-up. For the LAMP group, these average losses were 3.5%, 16.4%, 3.2%, 6.3%, 7.0%, and 5.7%, respectively. Thus, the ACCF group exhibited greater average CROM loss than the LAMP group in all directions at the latest follow-up. Both ACCF and laminoplasty cause significant CROM loss in patients with multilevel CSM. The laminoplasty technique preserved more CROM than ACCF in all 6 directions after at least 1 year of follow-up. These results can be used when counseling patients undergoing surgery.

Comparison of Three Anterior Techniques in the Surgical Treatment of Three-Level Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy with Intramedullary T2-Weighted Increased Signal Intensity

To compare the clinical and radiologic outcomes of 3 anterior surgical techniques for the treatment of 3-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) and the evolution of intramedullary T2-weighted increased signal intensity (ISI). A total of 98 consecutive patients (61 males, 37 females) with 3-level CSM who underwent anterior cervical surgery between January 2006 and January 2016 were retrospectively enrolled. Based on different anterior reconstructive techniques, the patients were divided into 3 groups: anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF), and hybrid decompression and fusion (HDF) groups. The Japanese Orthopaedic Association score and its recovery rate were used to evaluate the clinical outcomes. The cervical alignment and range of motion were used to assess radiologic outcomes. In addition, the signal change ratio and length of ISI were used to measure the ISI. No statistical differences in preoperative factors were found among the 3 groups (P > 0.05). Although the HDF group had intermediate surgery time and blood loss compared with other groups (P < 0.05), it achieved greater postoperative Japanese Orthopaedic Association score and recovery rate than other groups (P < 0.05). The postoperative C2-C7 lordotic angle and postoperative range of motion in the HDF group were similar to that in the ACDF group (P > 0.05), both greater than that in the ACCF group (P < 0.05). The incidence of complications in the HDF group was close to the ACDF group (P > 0.05), and both groups were lower than that in the ACCF group (P < 0.05). In addition, the postoperative signal change ratio in the HDF group was lower than in other groups (P < 0.05). The postoperative length of ISI in the HDF group was similar to the ACCF group (P > 0.05), which was both shorter than that in the ACDF group (P < 0.05). For patients with 3-level CSM with ISI on T2-weighted MRI, HDF can be considered as the optimal technique that achieves better clinical and radiologic outcomes than the ACDF or ACCF procedure. HDF also has a better postoperative regression of ISI compared with the ACDF or ACCF procedure, which may potentially be an important indicator for improving surgical outcomes.

Anterior Controllable Antedisplacement Fusion for Multilevel Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy with Spinal Stenosis: Comparison with Anterior Cervical Corpectomy and Fusion

To introduce anterior controllable antedisplacement fusion (ACAF), a new surgical technique, to treat multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy with spinal stenosis and compare ACAF with anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF). Patients with multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy with spinal stenosis who underwent ACAF (36 cases) and ACCF (45 cases) from January 2016 to June 2017 were enrolled in this study. Japanese Orthopaedic Association score was analyzed before the operation and at each scheduled follow-up during the follow-up period after surgery to evaluate neurologic function. Clinical and radiologic outcomes and perioperative complications were analyzed. At the final follow-up, mean Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores of the 2 groups were significantly improved compared with preoperatively (P < 0.01 and P < 0.01). However, mean Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores between the 2 groups were not statistically significant (13.7 ± 1.9 vs. 13.5 ± 1.8, P= 0.66). Operative duration was longer and blood loss was greater in the ACAF group compared with the ACCF group. Overall occurrence of complications in the ACAF group wassignificantly lower compared with the ACCF group (P< 0.05). ACAF has similar clinical and radiologic outcomes and fewer complications compared with ACCF in treatment of multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy with spinal stenosis. ACAF can be used as an alternative treatment for cervical stenosis.

Anterior controllable antedisplacement fusion as a choice for 28 patients of cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament with dura ossification: the risk of cerebrospinal fluid leakage compared with anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion.

To compare the incidence rate of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leakage between anterior controllable antedisplacement fusion (ACAF) and anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) in the treatment of ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL) with dura ossification (DO). In the period from June 2015 to June 2017, ACAF and ACCF were performed on patients with OPLL with DO. Double-layer sign was observed on axial bone window of CT images. The operation duration, blood loss, and hospital stay were measured. Radiologic assessment included occupying rate, type and extent of OPLL, decompression width, postoperative area of the spinal canal, and anteroposterior diameter of the spinal cord. The JOA scoring system was used to evaluate the neurological status. Surgery-related complications such as CSF leakage and spinal cord or nerve injury were all recorded. There were 28 patients in ACAF group and 31 in ACCF group. On cross-sectional CT, decompression width and postoperative spinal canal area were both significantly larger in the ACAF group than that in the ACCF group (P < 0.01). The anteroposterior diameter of the spinal cord was significantly larger in the ACAF group (P < 0.05). Mean JOA score was better in the ACAF group (P < 0.05). In the ACCF group, seven (22.6%) patients had CSF leakage. However, only one (3.6%) presented with CSF leakage in the ACAF group. The difference of incidence rate of CSF leakage was significant (P < 0.01). ACAF, which can significantly reduce CSF leakage and achieve good neurological recovery, is a good option to treat cervical OPLL with DO. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion versus posterior laminoplasty for the treatment of oppressive myelopathy owing to cervical ossification of posterior longitudinal ligament: a meta-analysis.

The purpose of this research is to compare the clinical efficacy, postoperative complication and surgical trauma between anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion versus posterior laminoplasty for the treatment of oppressive myelopathy owing to cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL). Systematic review and meta-analysis. An comprehensive search of literature was implemented in three electronic databases (Embase, Pubmed, and the Cochrane library). Randomized or non-randomized controlled studies published since January 1990 to July 2017 that compared anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) versus posterior laminoplasty (LAMP) for the treatment of cervical oppressive myelopathy owing to OPLL were acquired. Exclusion criteria were non-human studies, non-controlled studies, combined anterior and posterior operative approach, the other anterior or posterior approaches involving cervical discectomy and fusion and laminectomy with (or without) instrumented fusion, revision surgeries, and cervical myelopathy caused by cervical spondylotic myelopathy. The quality of the included articles was evaluated according to GRADE. The main outcome measures included: preoperative and postoperative Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score; neuro-functional recovery rate; complication rate; reoperation rate; preoperative and postoperative C2-C7 Cobb angle; operation time and intraoperative blood loss; and subgroup analysis was performed according to the mean preoperative canal occupying ratio (Subgroup A:the mean preoperative canal occupying ratio <60%, and Subgroup B:the mean preoperative canal occupying ratio ≥60%). A total of 10 studies containing 735 patients were included in this meta-analysis. And all of the selected studies were non-randomized controlled trials with relatively low quality as assessed by GRADE. The results revealed that there was no obvious statistical difference in preoperative JOA score between the ACCF and LAMP groups in both subgroups. Also, in subgroup A (the mean preoperative canal occupying ratio <60%), no obvious statistical difference was observed in the postoperative JOA score and neurofunctional recovery rate between the ACCF and LAMP groups. But, in subgroup B (the mean preoperative canal occupying ratio ≥60%), the ACCF group illustrated obviously higher postoperative JOA score and neurofunctional recovery rate than the LAMP group (P<0.01, WMD 1.89 [1.50, 2.28] and P<0.01, WMD 24.40 [20.10, 28.70], respectively). Moreover, the incidence of both complication and reoperation was markedly higher in the ACCF group compared with LAMP group (P<0.05, OR 1.76 [1.05, 2.97] and P<0.05, OR 4.63 [1.86, 11.52], respectively). In addition, the preoperative cervical C2-C7 Cobb angle was obviously larger in the LAMP group compared with ACCF group (P<0.05, WMD -5.77 [-9.70, -1.84]). But no statistically obvious difference was detected in the postoperative cervical C2-C7 Cobb angle between the two groups. Furthermore, the ACCF group showed significantly more operation time as well as blood loss compared with LAMP group (P<0.01, WMD 111.43 [40.32,182.54], and P<0.01, WMD 111.32 [61.22, 161.42], respectively). In summary, when the preoperative canal occupying ratio<60%, no palpable difference was tested in postoperative JOA score and neurofunctional recovery rate. But, when the preoperative canal occupying ratio ≥60% ACCF was associated with better postoperative JOA score and the recovery rate of neurological function compared with LAMP. Synchronously, ACCF in the cure for cervical myelopathy owing to OPLL led to more surgical trauma and more incidence of complication and reoperation. On the other hand, LAMP had gone a diminished postoperative C2-C7 Cobb angle, that might be a cause of relatively higher incidence of postoperative late neurofunctional deterioration. In brief, when the preoperative canal occupying ratio <60%, LAMP seems to be effective and safe. However, when the preoperative canal occupying ratio ≥60%, we prefer to choose ACCF while complications could be controlled by careful manipulation and advanced surgical techniques. No matter which option you choose, benefits and risks ought to be balanced.

Anterior discectomy could still be an alternative to corpectomy in highly migrated cervical disc herniation

Objective: For cases of cervical disc herniation, highly migrated cervical disc (HMCD) is clinically rare and usually treated with anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF). This study aims to analyze the feasibility of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for the patients with HMCD.Method: Clinical data of 32 patients with HMCD treated with ACDF or ACCF were retrospectively reviewed. Migration distances of the disc prolapses were measured. The mJOA score was used to evaluate surgical effect.Results: ACDF was successful in 27 patients while ACCF was used for the remaining 5 because of epidural disc prolapse adhesion or unreachable migrated fragments. Complete spinal cord decompression without residual disc fragments was observed in postoperative MRI of all cases. The mean migration distance of the disc prolapses in ACDF group was 7.3 mm, comparing to 11.4 mm in ACCF group. No disc prolapse in ACDF group exceeded the axial length of the vertebral bodies while three of five in ACCF group did. Preoperative mean mJOA scores in ACDF group and ACCF group were 8.20 ± 2.75 and 6.10 ± 2.15, respectively. Postoperative mean mJOA scores in those two groups were significantly improved to 14.70 ± 1.55 (p < .001) and 12.80 ± 1.72 (p < .001), with an improvement rate of 72.80 ± 4.76% and 62.90 ± 9.46%, respectively.Conclusion: ACDF is feasible for patients with HMCD except for cases of epidural disc prolapse adhesion or huge disc prolapse which migrates over the axial length of the vertebral body. Clinical symptoms can be significantly improved with few serious complications in those patients including ones underwent alternative ACCF due to a failed ACDF.

A study on the clinical outcomes of patients with revision surgery for adjacent segment disease after 10-year’s anterior cervical spine surgery

BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to investigate the clinical outcomes of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) or anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) as a revision surgery for adjacent segment disease (ASD) after primary surgery.MethodsThere were 35 patients who underwent anterior cervical spine surgery for symptomatic recurrent radicular or myelopathic symptoms from ASD. According to the ASD involved levels superior or inferior to the previous operated level, patients were divided into two groups: superior and inferior groups. The patients were also grouped into ACDF and ACCF groups by who received ACDF or ACCF as revision surgery for ASD. Clinical evaluations were performed preoperatively and repeated at 2 years after operation.ResultsIn this study, a total of 35 patients with a minimum of 2 years of follow-up data were available for analysis. There were 20 patients in the superior group and 15 patients in the inferior group according to the ASD developed at levels. Of these 35 patients, according to the treatment method, 12 patients were in the ACCF group and 23 patients were in the ACDF group. The Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA), Neck Disability Index (NDI), and visual analogue scale (VAS) on arm pain and neck pain scores demonstrated significant improvement compared to the preoperative scores in both groups (superior and inferior groups or ACDF and ACCF groups) (P < 0.05). However, there was no difference between the two groups (superior and inferior groups or ACDF and ACCF groups) (P > 0.05).ConclusionsAccording to our study, both superior and inferior adjacent-level groups together with ACDF and ACCF groups maintained favorable clinical results on patients who underwent one-level ACDF for symptomatic new radicular or myelopathic symptoms.

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion may be more effective than anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion for the treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

BackgroundThis meta-analysis explored the efficacy and safety of anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) comparing to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in treating cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) patients.MethodsSeveral electronic databases were searched combined with manually searching. Thirteen randomized controlled studies were enrolled with 1,062 CSM patients, including 468 patients and 594 patients in the in the ACCF and ACDF group, respectively. The meta-analysis was then performed using the STATA 12.0 software. Crude standard mean difference (SMD) or odds ratio (OR) with their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated.ResultsOur meta-analysis results revealed that CSM patients in ACDF group showed less blood loss than those in ACCF group (SMD = 1.21, 95% CI = 1.03 ~ 1.39, P < 0.001). The operation time of CSM patients in the ACDF group was also obviously shorter than those in ACCF group (SMD = 0.40, 95% CI = 0.23 ~ 0.57, P < 0.001). Furthermore, CSM patients in ACDF group had shorter hospital time than those in ACCF group (SMD = 0.45, 95% CI = 0.21 ~ 0.69, P < 0.001).ConclusionOur findings provide empirical evidence that ACDF may be more effective than ACCF for CSM treatment.