Radiographic assessment of anterior titanium mesh cages.

K R Eck, L G Lenke, K H Bridwell, L A Gilula, C J Lashgari, K D Riew
{"title":"Radiographic assessment of anterior titanium mesh cages.","authors":"K R Eck,&nbsp;L G Lenke,&nbsp;K H Bridwell,&nbsp;L A Gilula,&nbsp;C J Lashgari,&nbsp;K D Riew","doi":"10.1097/00002517-200012000-00006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Carbon fiber and titanium cage implantation for anterior column support during spinal fusions is an alternative to the use of more traditional structural allografts and autografts. The authors report instrumentation and cage failure for patients who underwent spinal fusion with structural titanium mesh cages implanted into the anterior column a minimum of 2 years after surgery. They wanted to determine whether plain radiographic techniques can be used to critically assess disk space and corpectomy fusions after implantation of these radioopaque cages. Fifty patients having undergone spinal fusions using structural titanium mesh cages in the anterior column had 99 anterior levels fused with at least 1 (maximum of 2) titanium mesh cage, resulting in a total of 131 cages used. The cages were examined for evidence of settling, migration, or failure. The anterior and posterior instrumentation was assessed for evidence of failure, and the spine was examined for evidence of successful fusion. Radiographic cage settling (>2 mm) into the vertebral body end plates was observed, but cage migration or failure were not. An average lordotic correction of 10 degrees was observed, with loss of correction into kyphosis from immediately after operation to final follow-up averaging 2 degrees. As an average of all reviewers, using a strict radiographic fusion assessment, definite or probable anterior fusion was graded at 81% of the levels, probably not or no at 5% of the levels, and could not be assessed at 14% of the levels. Definite or probable posterior fusion as an average of all reviewers was graded at 44% of the posterior fusion levels, questionable at 4%, no at 5%, and could not be assessed at 47%. The use of anterior-only, posterior-only, or anterior and posterior instrumentation with structural titanium mesh cages in the anterior spine along with proper autogenous bone grafting techniques provided anterior column support with a low rate of radiographic complications. Acceptable anterior spinal fusion rates, as assessed by a consensus agreement of reviewers, were observed primarily by evaluation of the fusion mass around the cages (extracage fusion), because intracage fusion was difficult to assess.</p>","PeriodicalId":77226,"journal":{"name":"Journal of spinal disorders","volume":"13 6","pages":"501-9; discussion 510"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1097/00002517-200012000-00006","citationCount":"87","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of spinal disorders","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/00002517-200012000-00006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 87

Abstract

Carbon fiber and titanium cage implantation for anterior column support during spinal fusions is an alternative to the use of more traditional structural allografts and autografts. The authors report instrumentation and cage failure for patients who underwent spinal fusion with structural titanium mesh cages implanted into the anterior column a minimum of 2 years after surgery. They wanted to determine whether plain radiographic techniques can be used to critically assess disk space and corpectomy fusions after implantation of these radioopaque cages. Fifty patients having undergone spinal fusions using structural titanium mesh cages in the anterior column had 99 anterior levels fused with at least 1 (maximum of 2) titanium mesh cage, resulting in a total of 131 cages used. The cages were examined for evidence of settling, migration, or failure. The anterior and posterior instrumentation was assessed for evidence of failure, and the spine was examined for evidence of successful fusion. Radiographic cage settling (>2 mm) into the vertebral body end plates was observed, but cage migration or failure were not. An average lordotic correction of 10 degrees was observed, with loss of correction into kyphosis from immediately after operation to final follow-up averaging 2 degrees. As an average of all reviewers, using a strict radiographic fusion assessment, definite or probable anterior fusion was graded at 81% of the levels, probably not or no at 5% of the levels, and could not be assessed at 14% of the levels. Definite or probable posterior fusion as an average of all reviewers was graded at 44% of the posterior fusion levels, questionable at 4%, no at 5%, and could not be assessed at 47%. The use of anterior-only, posterior-only, or anterior and posterior instrumentation with structural titanium mesh cages in the anterior spine along with proper autogenous bone grafting techniques provided anterior column support with a low rate of radiographic complications. Acceptable anterior spinal fusion rates, as assessed by a consensus agreement of reviewers, were observed primarily by evaluation of the fusion mass around the cages (extracage fusion), because intracage fusion was difficult to assess.

前路钛网笼的影像学评价。
在脊柱融合过程中,碳纤维和钛笼植入用于前柱支撑,是使用更传统的同种异体和自体移植物的替代方法。作者报道了术后至少2年将结构钛网笼植入前柱进行脊柱融合术的患者的内固定和笼失败。他们想确定放射平片技术是否可用于在植入这些不透射线的保持器后严格评估椎间盘间隙和椎体切除术融合。50例在前柱使用结构钛网笼进行脊柱融合的患者有99个前节段与至少1个(最多2个)钛网笼融合,总共使用了131个笼。检查了这些笼子是否有定居、迁移或损坏的证据。评估前路和后路内固定是否失败,检查脊柱是否融合成功。x线摄影观察到笼沉降(> 2mm)进入椎体终板,但未见笼迁移或失效。观察到平均前凸矫正10度,从手术后立即到最后随访平均2度的后凸矫正损失。作为所有评论者的平均值,使用严格的放射学融合评估,81%的水平确定或可能的前路融合被分级,5%的水平可能没有或没有,14%的水平无法评估。确定或可能的后路融合在所有评估者中平均评分为44%,有疑问的为4%,没有的为5%,无法评估的为47%。在脊柱前路使用单纯的前路、单纯的后路或前后路内固定,并结合适当的自体植骨技术,提供了低放射并发症率的前柱支撑。可接受的前路脊柱融合率,正如评估人员一致同意的那样,主要是通过评估笼周围的融合块(取出融合)来观察的,因为很难评估内融合。
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信