Cargando…
Complications and Risk Factors Using Structural Allograft Versus Synthetic Cage: Analysis 17 783 Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusions Using a National Registry
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To determine the rates of perioperative complications in patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with allograft versus synthetic cage. METHODS: A large national administrative health care database was queried for ACDF pr...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6562209/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31218196 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568218797096 |
_version_ | 1783426251555340288 |
---|---|
author | Goz, Vadim Buser, Zorica D’Oro, Anthony Wang, Christopher Yoon, S. Tim Park, Jong-Beom Youssef, Jim A. Meisel, Hans-Joerg Wang, Jeffrey C. Brodke, Darrel S. |
author_facet | Goz, Vadim Buser, Zorica D’Oro, Anthony Wang, Christopher Yoon, S. Tim Park, Jong-Beom Youssef, Jim A. Meisel, Hans-Joerg Wang, Jeffrey C. Brodke, Darrel S. |
author_sort | Goz, Vadim |
collection | PubMed |
description | STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To determine the rates of perioperative complications in patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with allograft versus synthetic cage. METHODS: A large national administrative health care database was queried for ACDF procedures performed between 2007 and 2014 using ICD-9 (International Statistical Classification of Diseases, 9th revision) and CPT (Current Procedural Terminology) codes. Cases that utilized structural allograft and synthetic cages were identified via CPT codes. Gender, age, frequency of obesity, cigarette use, diabetes, and number of levels fused were compared between the 2 cohorts using χ(2) test. Complications within 90 days were identified via ICD-9 codes and compared between the 2 cohorts. Revision rates within 2 years were noted. RESULTS: A total of 10 648 ACDF cases using synthetic cages and 7135 ACDFs using structural allograft were identified. The demographics between the 2 cohorts were similar. Overall complication rate was 8.71% in the synthetic cage group compared with 7.76% in the structural allograft group (P < .01). Use of synthetic cage was associated with higher rate of respiratory complications, 0.57% compared with 0.31% in the structural allograft cohort (P = .03), while use of structural allograft was associated with a higher rate of dysphagia, 0.64% compared with 0.33% (P < .01). Revision rate at 2 years was 0.50% and 0.56% in the synthetic cage and allograft groups, respectively (P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: This data suggests that synthetic cages are associated with a marginally higher overall rate of complications with similar revision rates. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6562209 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-65622092019-06-19 Complications and Risk Factors Using Structural Allograft Versus Synthetic Cage: Analysis 17 783 Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusions Using a National Registry Goz, Vadim Buser, Zorica D’Oro, Anthony Wang, Christopher Yoon, S. Tim Park, Jong-Beom Youssef, Jim A. Meisel, Hans-Joerg Wang, Jeffrey C. Brodke, Darrel S. Global Spine J Original Articles STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To determine the rates of perioperative complications in patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with allograft versus synthetic cage. METHODS: A large national administrative health care database was queried for ACDF procedures performed between 2007 and 2014 using ICD-9 (International Statistical Classification of Diseases, 9th revision) and CPT (Current Procedural Terminology) codes. Cases that utilized structural allograft and synthetic cages were identified via CPT codes. Gender, age, frequency of obesity, cigarette use, diabetes, and number of levels fused were compared between the 2 cohorts using χ(2) test. Complications within 90 days were identified via ICD-9 codes and compared between the 2 cohorts. Revision rates within 2 years were noted. RESULTS: A total of 10 648 ACDF cases using synthetic cages and 7135 ACDFs using structural allograft were identified. The demographics between the 2 cohorts were similar. Overall complication rate was 8.71% in the synthetic cage group compared with 7.76% in the structural allograft group (P < .01). Use of synthetic cage was associated with higher rate of respiratory complications, 0.57% compared with 0.31% in the structural allograft cohort (P = .03), while use of structural allograft was associated with a higher rate of dysphagia, 0.64% compared with 0.33% (P < .01). Revision rate at 2 years was 0.50% and 0.56% in the synthetic cage and allograft groups, respectively (P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: This data suggests that synthetic cages are associated with a marginally higher overall rate of complications with similar revision rates. SAGE Publications 2018-09-06 2019-06 /pmc/articles/PMC6562209/ /pubmed/31218196 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568218797096 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Goz, Vadim Buser, Zorica D’Oro, Anthony Wang, Christopher Yoon, S. Tim Park, Jong-Beom Youssef, Jim A. Meisel, Hans-Joerg Wang, Jeffrey C. Brodke, Darrel S. Complications and Risk Factors Using Structural Allograft Versus Synthetic Cage: Analysis 17 783 Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusions Using a National Registry |
title | Complications and Risk Factors Using Structural Allograft Versus
Synthetic Cage: Analysis 17 783 Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusions Using a
National Registry |
title_full | Complications and Risk Factors Using Structural Allograft Versus
Synthetic Cage: Analysis 17 783 Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusions Using a
National Registry |
title_fullStr | Complications and Risk Factors Using Structural Allograft Versus
Synthetic Cage: Analysis 17 783 Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusions Using a
National Registry |
title_full_unstemmed | Complications and Risk Factors Using Structural Allograft Versus
Synthetic Cage: Analysis 17 783 Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusions Using a
National Registry |
title_short | Complications and Risk Factors Using Structural Allograft Versus
Synthetic Cage: Analysis 17 783 Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusions Using a
National Registry |
title_sort | complications and risk factors using structural allograft versus
synthetic cage: analysis 17 783 anterior cervical discectomy and fusions using a
national registry |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6562209/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31218196 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568218797096 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT gozvadim complicationsandriskfactorsusingstructuralallograftversussyntheticcageanalysis17783anteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionsusinganationalregistry AT buserzorica complicationsandriskfactorsusingstructuralallograftversussyntheticcageanalysis17783anteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionsusinganationalregistry AT doroanthony complicationsandriskfactorsusingstructuralallograftversussyntheticcageanalysis17783anteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionsusinganationalregistry AT wangchristopher complicationsandriskfactorsusingstructuralallograftversussyntheticcageanalysis17783anteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionsusinganationalregistry AT yoonstim complicationsandriskfactorsusingstructuralallograftversussyntheticcageanalysis17783anteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionsusinganationalregistry AT parkjongbeom complicationsandriskfactorsusingstructuralallograftversussyntheticcageanalysis17783anteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionsusinganationalregistry AT youssefjima complicationsandriskfactorsusingstructuralallograftversussyntheticcageanalysis17783anteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionsusinganationalregistry AT meiselhansjoerg complicationsandriskfactorsusingstructuralallograftversussyntheticcageanalysis17783anteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionsusinganationalregistry AT wangjeffreyc complicationsandriskfactorsusingstructuralallograftversussyntheticcageanalysis17783anteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionsusinganationalregistry AT brodkedarrels complicationsandriskfactorsusingstructuralallograftversussyntheticcageanalysis17783anteriorcervicaldiscectomyandfusionsusinganationalregistry |