Cargando…

Short Monocortical Screws at C4-C6 Lateral Masses as Novel Mid-cervical Anchor in Cervical Laminoplasty with Instrumented Fusion: Surgical Outcomes Compared with C5 Pedicle Screws as Mid-cervical Anchor

INTRODUCTION: This retrospective study compared rates of bony fusion and screw loosening after multilevel posterior decompression and fusion (PDF) with short monocortical screws (SMS) as a novel mid-cervical anchor versus C5 pedicle screws (PS) as a mid-cervical anchor. METHODS: We analyzed 15 conse...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Takeuchi, Kazunari, Yokoyama, Toru, Wada, Kan-ichiro, Itabashi, Taito, Kumagai, Gentaro, Kudo, Hitoshi, Asari, Toru, Sasaki, Eiji, Fujita, Taku, Ishibashi, Yasuyuki
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Japanese Society for Spine Surgery and Related Research 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6834462/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31768448
http://dx.doi.org/10.22603/ssrr.2019-0027
_version_ 1783466489897025536
author Takeuchi, Kazunari
Yokoyama, Toru
Wada, Kan-ichiro
Itabashi, Taito
Kumagai, Gentaro
Kudo, Hitoshi
Asari, Toru
Sasaki, Eiji
Fujita, Taku
Ishibashi, Yasuyuki
author_facet Takeuchi, Kazunari
Yokoyama, Toru
Wada, Kan-ichiro
Itabashi, Taito
Kumagai, Gentaro
Kudo, Hitoshi
Asari, Toru
Sasaki, Eiji
Fujita, Taku
Ishibashi, Yasuyuki
author_sort Takeuchi, Kazunari
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: This retrospective study compared rates of bony fusion and screw loosening after multilevel posterior decompression and fusion (PDF) with short monocortical screws (SMS) as a novel mid-cervical anchor versus C5 pedicle screws (PS) as a mid-cervical anchor. METHODS: We analyzed 15 consecutive patients who underwent C2-T1 PDF with C5 PS as mid-cervical anchor (PS group) and 18 consecutive patients who underwent the procedure with SMS at C4-C6 as mid-cervical anchor (SMS group). Radiological outcomes, including rates of bony fusion at each level and screw loosening, and clinical outcomes, including Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score, neck pain, neck disability index (NDI), and EuroQol 5 Dimension (EQ-5D), were compared between groups. In the SMS group, screw perforation types and appropriate screw insertion procedure were also investigated. RESULTS: The fusion rate at C2/3 in the SMS group (56%) was significantly higher than that in PS group (13%; P = 0.0272). None of the patients had SMS loosening postoperatively. Clinical outcomes, including JOA score, neck pain, NDI, and EQ-5D, did not differ between the groups. In the SMS group, facet perforation was the most common type of perforation. The recommended direction for SMS insertion at C4-C6 was 35°-37° in the cranial direction and 25°-30° in the medial direction; the recommended screw length was 10 mm. CONCLUSIONS: SMS at C4-C6 was as effective as C5 PS as a mid-cervical anchor in PDF, according to clinical and radiological outcomes. The fusion rate at C2/3 in the SMS group was significantly higher than that in the PS group. There was no postoperative loosening of the C5 PS or C4-C6 SMS in either group.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6834462
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher The Japanese Society for Spine Surgery and Related Research
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68344622019-11-25 Short Monocortical Screws at C4-C6 Lateral Masses as Novel Mid-cervical Anchor in Cervical Laminoplasty with Instrumented Fusion: Surgical Outcomes Compared with C5 Pedicle Screws as Mid-cervical Anchor Takeuchi, Kazunari Yokoyama, Toru Wada, Kan-ichiro Itabashi, Taito Kumagai, Gentaro Kudo, Hitoshi Asari, Toru Sasaki, Eiji Fujita, Taku Ishibashi, Yasuyuki Spine Surg Relat Res Original Article INTRODUCTION: This retrospective study compared rates of bony fusion and screw loosening after multilevel posterior decompression and fusion (PDF) with short monocortical screws (SMS) as a novel mid-cervical anchor versus C5 pedicle screws (PS) as a mid-cervical anchor. METHODS: We analyzed 15 consecutive patients who underwent C2-T1 PDF with C5 PS as mid-cervical anchor (PS group) and 18 consecutive patients who underwent the procedure with SMS at C4-C6 as mid-cervical anchor (SMS group). Radiological outcomes, including rates of bony fusion at each level and screw loosening, and clinical outcomes, including Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score, neck pain, neck disability index (NDI), and EuroQol 5 Dimension (EQ-5D), were compared between groups. In the SMS group, screw perforation types and appropriate screw insertion procedure were also investigated. RESULTS: The fusion rate at C2/3 in the SMS group (56%) was significantly higher than that in PS group (13%; P = 0.0272). None of the patients had SMS loosening postoperatively. Clinical outcomes, including JOA score, neck pain, NDI, and EQ-5D, did not differ between the groups. In the SMS group, facet perforation was the most common type of perforation. The recommended direction for SMS insertion at C4-C6 was 35°-37° in the cranial direction and 25°-30° in the medial direction; the recommended screw length was 10 mm. CONCLUSIONS: SMS at C4-C6 was as effective as C5 PS as a mid-cervical anchor in PDF, according to clinical and radiological outcomes. The fusion rate at C2/3 in the SMS group was significantly higher than that in the PS group. There was no postoperative loosening of the C5 PS or C4-C6 SMS in either group. The Japanese Society for Spine Surgery and Related Research 2019-06-21 /pmc/articles/PMC6834462/ /pubmed/31768448 http://dx.doi.org/10.22603/ssrr.2019-0027 Text en Copyright © 2019 by The Japanese Society for Spine Surgery and Related Research https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Spine Surgery and Related Research is an Open Access journal distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. To view the details of this license, please visit (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Article
Takeuchi, Kazunari
Yokoyama, Toru
Wada, Kan-ichiro
Itabashi, Taito
Kumagai, Gentaro
Kudo, Hitoshi
Asari, Toru
Sasaki, Eiji
Fujita, Taku
Ishibashi, Yasuyuki
Short Monocortical Screws at C4-C6 Lateral Masses as Novel Mid-cervical Anchor in Cervical Laminoplasty with Instrumented Fusion: Surgical Outcomes Compared with C5 Pedicle Screws as Mid-cervical Anchor
title Short Monocortical Screws at C4-C6 Lateral Masses as Novel Mid-cervical Anchor in Cervical Laminoplasty with Instrumented Fusion: Surgical Outcomes Compared with C5 Pedicle Screws as Mid-cervical Anchor
title_full Short Monocortical Screws at C4-C6 Lateral Masses as Novel Mid-cervical Anchor in Cervical Laminoplasty with Instrumented Fusion: Surgical Outcomes Compared with C5 Pedicle Screws as Mid-cervical Anchor
title_fullStr Short Monocortical Screws at C4-C6 Lateral Masses as Novel Mid-cervical Anchor in Cervical Laminoplasty with Instrumented Fusion: Surgical Outcomes Compared with C5 Pedicle Screws as Mid-cervical Anchor
title_full_unstemmed Short Monocortical Screws at C4-C6 Lateral Masses as Novel Mid-cervical Anchor in Cervical Laminoplasty with Instrumented Fusion: Surgical Outcomes Compared with C5 Pedicle Screws as Mid-cervical Anchor
title_short Short Monocortical Screws at C4-C6 Lateral Masses as Novel Mid-cervical Anchor in Cervical Laminoplasty with Instrumented Fusion: Surgical Outcomes Compared with C5 Pedicle Screws as Mid-cervical Anchor
title_sort short monocortical screws at c4-c6 lateral masses as novel mid-cervical anchor in cervical laminoplasty with instrumented fusion: surgical outcomes compared with c5 pedicle screws as mid-cervical anchor
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6834462/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31768448
http://dx.doi.org/10.22603/ssrr.2019-0027
work_keys_str_mv AT takeuchikazunari shortmonocorticalscrewsatc4c6lateralmassesasnovelmidcervicalanchorincervicallaminoplastywithinstrumentedfusionsurgicaloutcomescomparedwithc5pediclescrewsasmidcervicalanchor
AT yokoyamatoru shortmonocorticalscrewsatc4c6lateralmassesasnovelmidcervicalanchorincervicallaminoplastywithinstrumentedfusionsurgicaloutcomescomparedwithc5pediclescrewsasmidcervicalanchor
AT wadakanichiro shortmonocorticalscrewsatc4c6lateralmassesasnovelmidcervicalanchorincervicallaminoplastywithinstrumentedfusionsurgicaloutcomescomparedwithc5pediclescrewsasmidcervicalanchor
AT itabashitaito shortmonocorticalscrewsatc4c6lateralmassesasnovelmidcervicalanchorincervicallaminoplastywithinstrumentedfusionsurgicaloutcomescomparedwithc5pediclescrewsasmidcervicalanchor
AT kumagaigentaro shortmonocorticalscrewsatc4c6lateralmassesasnovelmidcervicalanchorincervicallaminoplastywithinstrumentedfusionsurgicaloutcomescomparedwithc5pediclescrewsasmidcervicalanchor
AT kudohitoshi shortmonocorticalscrewsatc4c6lateralmassesasnovelmidcervicalanchorincervicallaminoplastywithinstrumentedfusionsurgicaloutcomescomparedwithc5pediclescrewsasmidcervicalanchor
AT asaritoru shortmonocorticalscrewsatc4c6lateralmassesasnovelmidcervicalanchorincervicallaminoplastywithinstrumentedfusionsurgicaloutcomescomparedwithc5pediclescrewsasmidcervicalanchor
AT sasakieiji shortmonocorticalscrewsatc4c6lateralmassesasnovelmidcervicalanchorincervicallaminoplastywithinstrumentedfusionsurgicaloutcomescomparedwithc5pediclescrewsasmidcervicalanchor
AT fujitataku shortmonocorticalscrewsatc4c6lateralmassesasnovelmidcervicalanchorincervicallaminoplastywithinstrumentedfusionsurgicaloutcomescomparedwithc5pediclescrewsasmidcervicalanchor
AT ishibashiyasuyuki shortmonocorticalscrewsatc4c6lateralmassesasnovelmidcervicalanchorincervicallaminoplastywithinstrumentedfusionsurgicaloutcomescomparedwithc5pediclescrewsasmidcervicalanchor