11/21/2023 0 Comments Cervical spine alignment device![]() More recently, there has been an increase in the use of the LSC, which does not require an anterior plate and minimizes cervical soft tissue disruption, thereby reducing the profile of the construct. ![]() ![]() At follow-up, there was no significant difference in clinical outcome between patients with adjacent segment changes and patients with any findings in sequential image studies ( Table 2).ĪPCs for ACDF are effective in achieving immediate stability, improving cervical sagittal alignment, and increasing fusion rates, with a low profile of current anterior plating systems. No significant differences were found in adjacent segment changes between patients with single level or multilevel procedures. ![]() We observed that nine patients (17%) had adjacent segment changes in follow-up studies, but none had symptomatology attributable to the findings identified using imaging ( Fig. 1) No significant difference was found between single or multilevel disease in cervical angle improvement (5.2° versus 6.1°, p=0.56) ( Table 2). There was a mean 5.7° change in cervical spine curvature, including a postoperative improvement in Cobb angle from 30.7° to 35.9°, which was a significant difference ( p≤0.001) ( Fig. No significant difference was found between subsidence and no-subsidence groups in NDI score (14.7 versus 16.1, p=0.5) or VAS scale (2.3 versus 2.4, p=0.21) ( Table 2). The cervical level that had higher indices of pseudoarthrosis and subsidence was C5–6 (88.8% of fusion and 13.8% of subsidence). No significant difference was found between fusion and no-fusion groups in NDI score (16.3 versus 13.5, p=0.45) or VAS scale (2.4 versus 2.3, p=0.74) ( Table 2).Ĭage subsidence was found in six patients (11.3%) with no significant difference between single or multilevel procedures. There was a significant difference between the single and multilevel disease groups ( p=0.04), but no difference between two- or three-level disease groups with regard to fusion indices. 2A) 95.8% of patients with single level disease achieved postoperative fusion versus 75.9% of patients with multilevel disease. The present study describes the clinical and radiographic outcomes with LSC for single and multilevel cervical degenerative disease.įusion was documented in 84.9% of patients ( Fig. Several modifications to the original procedure have been developed, such as locking stand-alone cages (LSC), with the intent to reduce soft tissue disruption anterior to the vertebrae as well as to reduce postoperative dysphagia and the profile of the construct, thereby maximizing ACDF benefits. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is the treatment of choice for several cervical spinal diseases the goal of this procedure is to improve patient symptoms and spine stability and restore lordosis.Īnterior plate construct (APC), as described by Smith and Robinson, has been the ‘gold standard’ technique for ACDF. If supportive medical treatment and physical therapy fail to relieve clinical symptoms, or if neurological deficits are present, surgery is indicated. Cervical spondylosis disorders are common problems in clinical practice.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |