Cargando…

Comparative evaluation of bone–filled Polymethylmethacrylate implant, autograft fusion, and Polyetheretherketone cervical cage fusion for the treatment of single –level cervical disc disease.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study is to compare the clinical, functional, and radiological outcomes of using bone-filled Polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) implant as an inexpensive alternative to Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage and Autologous bone graft (ABG) fusion after anterior cervical discec...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Orief, Tamer, Ramadan, Ismael, Seddik, Zaki, Kamal, Marwan, Rahmany, Mohamed, Takayasu, Masakazu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications Pvt Ltd 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3201081/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22028758
_version_ 1782214813367140352
author Orief, Tamer
Ramadan, Ismael
Seddik, Zaki
Kamal, Marwan
Rahmany, Mohamed
Takayasu, Masakazu
author_facet Orief, Tamer
Ramadan, Ismael
Seddik, Zaki
Kamal, Marwan
Rahmany, Mohamed
Takayasu, Masakazu
author_sort Orief, Tamer
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The objective of this study is to compare the clinical, functional, and radiological outcomes of using bone-filled Polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) implant as an inexpensive alternative to Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage and Autologous bone graft (ABG) fusion after anterior cervical discectomy (ACD) for the treatment of single level cervical disc disease. METHODS: 60 patients were prospectively randomized according to the material used for fusion after ACD into: 1) PMMA implant; 2) ABG; and 3) PEEK implant. The clinical outcomes were evaluated using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), whereas the functional outcomes were evaluated using Odom's criteria. Radiological evaluations were also conducted using radiography and Computerized tomography (CT) scans and considered the following factors; bony fusion, cervical stability and disc space height (DSH) changes. The post- operative outcomes were evaluated at the following intervals; 2 weeks, 3 and 6 months. RESULTS: The clinical outcomes demonstrated insignificant difference among the three treated groups throughout their follow up period. ABG group showed significant lower satisfactory functional outcomes (68.1%) compared to PMMA and PEEK groups (85% and 88.9%, respectively) at the 2-week post operative evaluation, but the ABG group showed closer functional outcomes to the PMMA and PEEK groups at the 3 and 6-month post operative evaluations. Despite the inferior bony fusion rates of the PMMA group (30%) compared to ABG group (86.3%) and PEEK group (77.7%) at the 6-month post operative evaluation, the clinical and functional outcomes were comparable. CONCLUSIONS: Bone-filled PMMA implant is a reliable treatment option; despite its inferior fusion rate at the 6-month postoperative evaluation, it still provides acceptable segmental stability, satisfactory clinical and functional outcomes that are comparable to ABG and PEEK grafting procedures.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3201081
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher Medknow Publications Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-32010812011-10-25 Comparative evaluation of bone–filled Polymethylmethacrylate implant, autograft fusion, and Polyetheretherketone cervical cage fusion for the treatment of single –level cervical disc disease. Orief, Tamer Ramadan, Ismael Seddik, Zaki Kamal, Marwan Rahmany, Mohamed Takayasu, Masakazu Asian J Neurosurg Original Article BACKGROUND: The objective of this study is to compare the clinical, functional, and radiological outcomes of using bone-filled Polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) implant as an inexpensive alternative to Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage and Autologous bone graft (ABG) fusion after anterior cervical discectomy (ACD) for the treatment of single level cervical disc disease. METHODS: 60 patients were prospectively randomized according to the material used for fusion after ACD into: 1) PMMA implant; 2) ABG; and 3) PEEK implant. The clinical outcomes were evaluated using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), whereas the functional outcomes were evaluated using Odom's criteria. Radiological evaluations were also conducted using radiography and Computerized tomography (CT) scans and considered the following factors; bony fusion, cervical stability and disc space height (DSH) changes. The post- operative outcomes were evaluated at the following intervals; 2 weeks, 3 and 6 months. RESULTS: The clinical outcomes demonstrated insignificant difference among the three treated groups throughout their follow up period. ABG group showed significant lower satisfactory functional outcomes (68.1%) compared to PMMA and PEEK groups (85% and 88.9%, respectively) at the 2-week post operative evaluation, but the ABG group showed closer functional outcomes to the PMMA and PEEK groups at the 3 and 6-month post operative evaluations. Despite the inferior bony fusion rates of the PMMA group (30%) compared to ABG group (86.3%) and PEEK group (77.7%) at the 6-month post operative evaluation, the clinical and functional outcomes were comparable. CONCLUSIONS: Bone-filled PMMA implant is a reliable treatment option; despite its inferior fusion rate at the 6-month postoperative evaluation, it still provides acceptable segmental stability, satisfactory clinical and functional outcomes that are comparable to ABG and PEEK grafting procedures. Medknow Publications Pvt Ltd 2010 /pmc/articles/PMC3201081/ /pubmed/22028758 Text en © Asian Journal of Neurosurgery http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Orief, Tamer
Ramadan, Ismael
Seddik, Zaki
Kamal, Marwan
Rahmany, Mohamed
Takayasu, Masakazu
Comparative evaluation of bone–filled Polymethylmethacrylate implant, autograft fusion, and Polyetheretherketone cervical cage fusion for the treatment of single –level cervical disc disease.
title Comparative evaluation of bone–filled Polymethylmethacrylate implant, autograft fusion, and Polyetheretherketone cervical cage fusion for the treatment of single –level cervical disc disease.
title_full Comparative evaluation of bone–filled Polymethylmethacrylate implant, autograft fusion, and Polyetheretherketone cervical cage fusion for the treatment of single –level cervical disc disease.
title_fullStr Comparative evaluation of bone–filled Polymethylmethacrylate implant, autograft fusion, and Polyetheretherketone cervical cage fusion for the treatment of single –level cervical disc disease.
title_full_unstemmed Comparative evaluation of bone–filled Polymethylmethacrylate implant, autograft fusion, and Polyetheretherketone cervical cage fusion for the treatment of single –level cervical disc disease.
title_short Comparative evaluation of bone–filled Polymethylmethacrylate implant, autograft fusion, and Polyetheretherketone cervical cage fusion for the treatment of single –level cervical disc disease.
title_sort comparative evaluation of bone–filled polymethylmethacrylate implant, autograft fusion, and polyetheretherketone cervical cage fusion for the treatment of single –level cervical disc disease.
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3201081/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22028758
work_keys_str_mv AT orieftamer comparativeevaluationofbonefilledpolymethylmethacrylateimplantautograftfusionandpolyetheretherketonecervicalcagefusionforthetreatmentofsinglelevelcervicaldiscdisease
AT ramadanismael comparativeevaluationofbonefilledpolymethylmethacrylateimplantautograftfusionandpolyetheretherketonecervicalcagefusionforthetreatmentofsinglelevelcervicaldiscdisease
AT seddikzaki comparativeevaluationofbonefilledpolymethylmethacrylateimplantautograftfusionandpolyetheretherketonecervicalcagefusionforthetreatmentofsinglelevelcervicaldiscdisease
AT kamalmarwan comparativeevaluationofbonefilledpolymethylmethacrylateimplantautograftfusionandpolyetheretherketonecervicalcagefusionforthetreatmentofsinglelevelcervicaldiscdisease
AT rahmanymohamed comparativeevaluationofbonefilledpolymethylmethacrylateimplantautograftfusionandpolyetheretherketonecervicalcagefusionforthetreatmentofsinglelevelcervicaldiscdisease
AT takayasumasakazu comparativeevaluationofbonefilledpolymethylmethacrylateimplantautograftfusionandpolyetheretherketonecervicalcagefusionforthetreatmentofsinglelevelcervicaldiscdisease