Cargando…
Outcomes Evaluation of Zero-Profile Devices Compared to Stand-Alone PEEK Cages for the Treatment of Three- and Four-Level Cervical Disc Disease
Background: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is a well-accepted treatment option for patients with cervical spine disease. Three- and four-level discectomies are known to be associated with a higher complication rate and lower fusion rate than single-level surgery. This study was perfo...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Cureus
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5059158/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27738574 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.775 |
_version_ | 1782459388555952128 |
---|---|
author | Gerszten, Peter C Paschel, Erin Mashaly, Hazem Sabry, Hatem Jalalod'din, Hasan Saoud, Khaled |
author_facet | Gerszten, Peter C Paschel, Erin Mashaly, Hazem Sabry, Hatem Jalalod'din, Hasan Saoud, Khaled |
author_sort | Gerszten, Peter C |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is a well-accepted treatment option for patients with cervical spine disease. Three- and four-level discectomies are known to be associated with a higher complication rate and lower fusion rate than single-level surgery. This study was performed to evaluate and compare zero-profile fixation and stand-alone PEEK cages for three- and four-level ACDF. Methods: Two cohorts of patients who underwent ACDF for the treatment of three- and four-level disease were compared. Thirty-three patients underwent implantation of zero-profile devices that included titanium screw fixation (Group A). Thirty-five patients underwent implantation of stand-alone PEEK cages without any form of screw fixation (Group B). Results: In Group A, twenty-seven patients underwent a three-level and six patients a four-level ACDF, with a total of 105 levels. In Group B, thirty patients underwent a three-level and five patients underwent a four-level ACDF, with a total number of 110 levels. In Group A, the mean preoperative visual analog scale score (VAS) for arm pain was 6.4 (range 3-8), and the mean postoperative VAS for arm pain decreased to 2.5 (range 1-7). In group B, the mean preoperative VAS of arm pain was 7.1 (range 3-10), and the mean postoperative VAS of arm pain decreased to 2 (range 0-4). In Group A, four patients (12%) developed dysphagia, and in Group B, three patients (9%) developed dysphagia. Conclusions: This study found zero-profile instrumentation and PEEK cages to be both safe and effective for patients who underwent three- and four-level ACDF, comparable to reported series using plate devices. Rates of dysphagia for the cohort were much lower than reports using plate devices. Zero-profile segmental fixation devices and PEEK cages may be considered as viable alternatives over plate fixation for patients requiring multi-level anterior cervical fusion surgery. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5059158 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Cureus |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-50591582016-10-13 Outcomes Evaluation of Zero-Profile Devices Compared to Stand-Alone PEEK Cages for the Treatment of Three- and Four-Level Cervical Disc Disease Gerszten, Peter C Paschel, Erin Mashaly, Hazem Sabry, Hatem Jalalod'din, Hasan Saoud, Khaled Cureus Neurosurgery Background: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is a well-accepted treatment option for patients with cervical spine disease. Three- and four-level discectomies are known to be associated with a higher complication rate and lower fusion rate than single-level surgery. This study was performed to evaluate and compare zero-profile fixation and stand-alone PEEK cages for three- and four-level ACDF. Methods: Two cohorts of patients who underwent ACDF for the treatment of three- and four-level disease were compared. Thirty-three patients underwent implantation of zero-profile devices that included titanium screw fixation (Group A). Thirty-five patients underwent implantation of stand-alone PEEK cages without any form of screw fixation (Group B). Results: In Group A, twenty-seven patients underwent a three-level and six patients a four-level ACDF, with a total of 105 levels. In Group B, thirty patients underwent a three-level and five patients underwent a four-level ACDF, with a total number of 110 levels. In Group A, the mean preoperative visual analog scale score (VAS) for arm pain was 6.4 (range 3-8), and the mean postoperative VAS for arm pain decreased to 2.5 (range 1-7). In group B, the mean preoperative VAS of arm pain was 7.1 (range 3-10), and the mean postoperative VAS of arm pain decreased to 2 (range 0-4). In Group A, four patients (12%) developed dysphagia, and in Group B, three patients (9%) developed dysphagia. Conclusions: This study found zero-profile instrumentation and PEEK cages to be both safe and effective for patients who underwent three- and four-level ACDF, comparable to reported series using plate devices. Rates of dysphagia for the cohort were much lower than reports using plate devices. Zero-profile segmental fixation devices and PEEK cages may be considered as viable alternatives over plate fixation for patients requiring multi-level anterior cervical fusion surgery. Cureus 2016-09-10 /pmc/articles/PMC5059158/ /pubmed/27738574 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.775 Text en Copyright © 2016, Gerszten et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Neurosurgery Gerszten, Peter C Paschel, Erin Mashaly, Hazem Sabry, Hatem Jalalod'din, Hasan Saoud, Khaled Outcomes Evaluation of Zero-Profile Devices Compared to Stand-Alone PEEK Cages for the Treatment of Three- and Four-Level Cervical Disc Disease |
title | Outcomes Evaluation of Zero-Profile Devices Compared to Stand-Alone PEEK Cages for the Treatment of Three- and Four-Level Cervical Disc Disease |
title_full | Outcomes Evaluation of Zero-Profile Devices Compared to Stand-Alone PEEK Cages for the Treatment of Three- and Four-Level Cervical Disc Disease |
title_fullStr | Outcomes Evaluation of Zero-Profile Devices Compared to Stand-Alone PEEK Cages for the Treatment of Three- and Four-Level Cervical Disc Disease |
title_full_unstemmed | Outcomes Evaluation of Zero-Profile Devices Compared to Stand-Alone PEEK Cages for the Treatment of Three- and Four-Level Cervical Disc Disease |
title_short | Outcomes Evaluation of Zero-Profile Devices Compared to Stand-Alone PEEK Cages for the Treatment of Three- and Four-Level Cervical Disc Disease |
title_sort | outcomes evaluation of zero-profile devices compared to stand-alone peek cages for the treatment of three- and four-level cervical disc disease |
topic | Neurosurgery |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5059158/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27738574 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.775 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT gersztenpeterc outcomesevaluationofzeroprofiledevicescomparedtostandalonepeekcagesforthetreatmentofthreeandfourlevelcervicaldiscdisease AT paschelerin outcomesevaluationofzeroprofiledevicescomparedtostandalonepeekcagesforthetreatmentofthreeandfourlevelcervicaldiscdisease AT mashalyhazem outcomesevaluationofzeroprofiledevicescomparedtostandalonepeekcagesforthetreatmentofthreeandfourlevelcervicaldiscdisease AT sabryhatem outcomesevaluationofzeroprofiledevicescomparedtostandalonepeekcagesforthetreatmentofthreeandfourlevelcervicaldiscdisease AT jalaloddinhasan outcomesevaluationofzeroprofiledevicescomparedtostandalonepeekcagesforthetreatmentofthreeandfourlevelcervicaldiscdisease AT saoudkhaled outcomesevaluationofzeroprofiledevicescomparedtostandalonepeekcagesforthetreatmentofthreeandfourlevelcervicaldiscdisease |