A Comparative Study Between the Functional and Radiological Outcomes of ACDF Using Locking Stand Alone Cage And Anterior Cervical Plate With Titanium Disc Cage in Degenerative Cervical Spine Disease

H. Chandrashekar, Mohan N S, A. S, Syed Farhan Bukhari, Nithin S M
{"title":"A Comparative Study Between the Functional and Radiological Outcomes of ACDF Using Locking Stand Alone Cage And Anterior Cervical Plate With Titanium Disc Cage in Degenerative Cervical Spine Disease","authors":"H. Chandrashekar, Mohan N S, A. S, Syed Farhan Bukhari, Nithin S M","doi":"10.13107/jkoa.2022.v10i01.046","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Cervical spondylotic radiculopathy and myelopathy are common problems for which anterior cervical discectomy and fusion is a gold standard procedure. There are various implant options available, two of which are commonly used in practice. Anterior cervical cage with plate and locking standalone cage. Our study aims to compare these two methods to know the functional and radiological outcomes after Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion procedure. Materials and Methods: We performed a prospective comparative study of 60 patients with single or two level degenerative cervical spine disease with failed conservative management. They were divided randomly into 2 groups of 30 patients each one group treated using locking standalone cage and the other with anterior cervical plate with cage using Smith Robinson approach. The clinical outcome was measured using visual analogue scores, Robinson’s criteria and Neck disability index and the radiological outcome was assessed using cobb’s angle, segmental height and segment angle with a follow up period of 2 years. Results: At 2 years follow up, good functional outcomes were obtained in both implant groups in terms of Robinson criteria, neck disability index and visual analogue scale. And good radiological outcomes were obtained in both implant groups with 93.3% fusion rates in both groups. Significant dysphagia was seen in the cage with plate group(26.6%) and significant cage subsidence was noted in the standalone cage group(20%). Conclusion: The functional and radiological outcomes are superior at 2 years follow up in both implant groups. Hence standalone cage and cage with plate technique both are equally safe and effective treatment options in 1 or 2 level degenerative cervical spine disease. Keywords: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, Neck Disability Index, Visual Analogue scale, Locking standalone cage, Anterior cervical plate, cage subsidence, Robinson criteria","PeriodicalId":167557,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Karnataka Orthopaedic Association","volume":"53 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Karnataka Orthopaedic Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13107/jkoa.2022.v10i01.046","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Cervical spondylotic radiculopathy and myelopathy are common problems for which anterior cervical discectomy and fusion is a gold standard procedure. There are various implant options available, two of which are commonly used in practice. Anterior cervical cage with plate and locking standalone cage. Our study aims to compare these two methods to know the functional and radiological outcomes after Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion procedure. Materials and Methods: We performed a prospective comparative study of 60 patients with single or two level degenerative cervical spine disease with failed conservative management. They were divided randomly into 2 groups of 30 patients each one group treated using locking standalone cage and the other with anterior cervical plate with cage using Smith Robinson approach. The clinical outcome was measured using visual analogue scores, Robinson’s criteria and Neck disability index and the radiological outcome was assessed using cobb’s angle, segmental height and segment angle with a follow up period of 2 years. Results: At 2 years follow up, good functional outcomes were obtained in both implant groups in terms of Robinson criteria, neck disability index and visual analogue scale. And good radiological outcomes were obtained in both implant groups with 93.3% fusion rates in both groups. Significant dysphagia was seen in the cage with plate group(26.6%) and significant cage subsidence was noted in the standalone cage group(20%). Conclusion: The functional and radiological outcomes are superior at 2 years follow up in both implant groups. Hence standalone cage and cage with plate technique both are equally safe and effective treatment options in 1 or 2 level degenerative cervical spine disease. Keywords: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, Neck Disability Index, Visual Analogue scale, Locking standalone cage, Anterior cervical plate, cage subsidence, Robinson criteria
椎弓根椎弓根固定器与前颈椎板带钛椎间盘固定器治疗退行性颈椎病的功能和影像学比较研究
背景:神经根型颈椎病和脊髓病是常见的问题,颈前路椎间盘切除术和融合是一个金标准程序。有多种可选择的植入物,其中两种在实践中常用。颈椎前路固定器,带钢板和锁定的独立式固定器。我们的研究旨在比较这两种方法,以了解颈椎前路椎间盘切除术和融合手术后的功能和影像学结果。材料和方法:我们对60例保守治疗失败的单级或双级颈椎退行性疾病患者进行了前瞻性比较研究。将患者随机分为2组,每组30例,每组采用Smith Robinson入路,一组采用颈椎前路钢板加颈椎前路固定器。临床结果采用视觉模拟评分、罗宾逊标准和颈部残疾指数进行测量,影像学结果采用cobb角、节段高度和节段角度进行评估,随访2年。结果:随访2年,两组患者在罗宾逊标准、颈部残疾指数和视觉模拟评分方面均获得良好的功能结局。两组均获得了良好的影像学结果,融合率均为93.3%。有板笼组出现明显的吞咽困难(26.6%),独立笼组出现明显的笼下陷(20%)。结论:两组术后随访2年,功能和影像学结果均优于对照组。因此,在治疗1级或2级退行性颈椎疾病时,独立cage和cage with plate技术都是同样安全有效的选择。关键词:颈前路椎间盘切除术及融合术,颈部残疾指数,视觉模拟量表,锁定独立椎笼,颈椎前路钢板,椎笼沉降,罗宾逊标准
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信