-
European Spine Journal : Official... Nov 2020Cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) has become an increasingly popular treatment for cervical degenerative disc disease. One potential complication is osteolysis. However,...
PURPOSE
Cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) has become an increasingly popular treatment for cervical degenerative disc disease. One potential complication is osteolysis. However, current literature on this topic appears limited. The purpose of this study is to elucidate the incidence, aetiology, consequence, and subsequent treatment of this complication.
METHODS
A systematic literature review was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. Studies discussing the causes, incidence and management of osteolysis after a CA were included.
RESULTS
A total of nine studies were included. We divided these studies into two groups: (1) large case series in which an active radiological evaluation for osteolysis was performed (total = six studies), (2) case report studies, which discussed symptomatic cases of osteolysis (total = three). The incidence of asymptomatic osteolysis ranged from 8 to 64%; however, only one study reported an incidence of < 10% and when this case was excluded the incidence ranged from 44 to 64%. Severe asymptomatic bone loss (exposure of the implant) was found in less than 4% of patients. Bone loss from osteolysis appeared to occur early (< 1 year) after surgery and late (> 1 year) as well. Symptomatic patients with osteolysis often required revision surgery. These patients required removal of implant and conversion to fusion in the majority of the cases.
CONCLUSIONS
Osteolysis after CDA is common; however, the majority of cases have only mild or asymptomatic presentations that do not require revision surgery. The timing of osteolysis varies significantly. This may be due to differences in the aetiology of osteolysis.
Topics: Arthroplasty; Cervical Vertebrae; Diskectomy; Humans; Intervertebral Disc Degeneration; Osteolysis; Spinal Fusion; Total Disc Replacement; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32865650
DOI: 10.1007/s00586-020-06578-2 -
European Spine Journal : Official... Mar 2023Various factors have been examined in relation to cage subsidence risk, including cage material, cage geometry, bone mineral density, device type, surgical level, bone... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Various factors have been examined in relation to cage subsidence risk, including cage material, cage geometry, bone mineral density, device type, surgical level, bone graft, and patient age. The present study aims to compare and synthesize the literature of both clinical and biomechanical studies to evaluate and present the factors associated with cage subsidence.
METHODS
A comprehensive search of the literature from January 2003 to December 2021 was conducted using the PubMed and ScienceDirect databases by following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Following the screening for inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 49 clinical studies were included. Correlations between clinical and biomechanical studies are also discussed.
RESULTS
Patients treated with the cage and plate combination had a lower subsidence rate than patients with the stand-alone cage. Overall, Polyetheretherketone material was shown to have a lower subsidence rate than titanium and other materials. The subsidence rate was also higher when the surgery was performed at levels C5-C7 than at levels C2-C5. No significant correlation was found between age and cage subsidence clinically.
CONCLUSIONS
Cage subsidence increases the stress on the anterior fixation system and may cause biomechanical instability. Severe cage subsidence decreases the Cobb angle and intervertebral height, which may cause destabilization of the implant system, such as screw/plate loosening or breakage of the screw/plate. Various factors have been shown to influence the risk of cage subsidence. Examining clinical research alongside biomechanical studies offers a more comprehensive understanding of the subject.
Topics: Humans; Diskectomy; Polyethylene Glycols; Ketones; Bone Plates; Bone Screws
PubMed: 36708398
DOI: 10.1007/s00586-023-07530-w -
The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery.... Nov 2022Adjacent segment disease (ASD) following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with plating (ACDF-P) may yield a poor prognosis or reoperation. This review aimed to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Adjacent segment disease (ASD) following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with plating (ACDF-P) may yield a poor prognosis or reoperation. This review aimed to summarize risk factors for radiographic ASD (RASD) and clinical ASD (CASD) after ACDF-P.
METHODS
Six electronic databases were searched from inception to October 30, 2021. Four reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full-text articles to identify relevant studies. Methodological quality of the included studies was evaluated. Meta-analyses for risk factors were conducted, if possible.
RESULTS
Sixteen cohort and 3 case-control studies (3,563 participants) were included. These studies showed low (n = 2), moderate (n = 9), and high (n = 8) risk of bias. One risk factor for RASD was pooled for 2 meta-analyses based on the follow-up period. Four different risk factors for CASD at ≥4 years were pooled for meta-analyses. Limited evidence showed that multi-level fusion, greater asymmetry in total or functional cross-sectional area of the cervical paraspinal muscle, and preoperative degeneration in a greater number of segments were associated with a higher RASD incidence <4 years after ACDF-P. In contrast, no significant risk factors were identified for CASD <4 years after ACDF-P. At ≥4 years after ACDF-P, limited evidence supported that both cephalad and caudal plate-to-disc distances of <5 mm were associated with a higher RASD incidence, and very limited evidence supported that developmental canal stenosis, preoperative RASD, unfused C5-C6 or C6-C7 adjacent segments, use of autogenous bone graft, and spondylosis-related ACDF-P were associated with a higher CASD incidence.
CONCLUSIONS
Although several risk factors for RASD and CASD development after ACDF-P were identified, the supporting evidence was very limited to limited. Future prospective studies should extend the existing knowledge by more robustly identifying risk factors for RASD and CASD after ACDF-P to inform clinical practice.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Prognostic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Topics: Humans; Cervical Vertebrae; Spinal Fusion; Prospective Studies; Diskectomy; Risk Factors; Intervertebral Disc Degeneration
PubMed: 36321969
DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.21.01494 -
Journal of Neurological Surgery. Part... Jul 2023In this study, we systematically analyze the differences in complications between anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion (ACDF) and anterior cervical corpectomy and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparison of Complications between Anterior Cervical Diskectomy and Fusion versus Anterior Cervical Corpectomy and Fusion in Two- and Three-Level Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: A Meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
In this study, we systematically analyze the differences in complications between anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion (ACDF) and anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) in two- and three-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM).
METHODS
We performed a systematic search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane databases, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, CNKI, and Wan Fang Data for all relevant studies. All statistical analyses were performed using Review Manager version 5.3.
RESULTS
A total of 11 articles with 849 study subjects were included, with 474 patients in the ACDF group and 375 patients in the ACCF group. The results of the meta-analysis showed that in C5 palsy (odds ratio [OR]: 0.41; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.16-1.06), pseudarthrosis (OR: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.23-5.07), dysphagia (OR: 1.06; 95% CI: 0.60-1.86), infection (OR: 0.41; 95% CI: 0.16-1.09), cerebrospinal fluid leakage (OR: 1.21; 95% CI: 0.39-3.73), graft dislodgment (OR: 0.28; 95% CI: 0.06-1.37), and hematoma (OR: 0.32; 95% CI: 0.06-1.83), there are no significant differences between the ACDF and ACCF groups, whereas total complication (OR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.31-0.80) showed that the ACDF group had a significantly lower morbidity than the ACCF group. Furthermore, the three-level subgroup of ACDF had significantly better results in C5 palsy (OR: 0.31; 95% CI: 0.11-0.88), infection (OR: 0.22; 95% CI: 0.05-0.94), graft dislodgment (OR: 0.07; 95% CI: 0.01-0.40), and total complication (OR: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.23-0.60) compared with the ACCF subgroup.
CONCLUSION
In general, postoperative pseudarthrosis, dysphagia, cerebrospinal fluid leakage, hematoma, C5 palsy, infection, and graft dislodgment did not differ significantly between the two groups. Total complication was significantly less in the ACDF group compared to the ACCF group. In the three-level subgroup, the morbidity of C5 palsy, infection, and graft dislodgment was significantly lower in ACDF than in ACCF.
Topics: Humans; Cervical Vertebrae; Deglutition Disorders; Diskectomy; Pseudarthrosis; Retrospective Studies; Spinal Cord Diseases; Spinal Fusion; Spondylosis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35777419
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1747926 -
European Spine Journal : Official... Jul 2022To evaluate the impact of discectomy on back muscles (e.g. multifidus muscle (MM)) morphology in patients with lumbar disc herniation (LDH) following discectomy surgery,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The association between changes in multifidus muscle morphology and back pain scores following discectomy surgery for lumbar disc herniation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
PURPOSE
To evaluate the impact of discectomy on back muscles (e.g. multifidus muscle (MM)) morphology in patients with lumbar disc herniation (LDH) following discectomy surgery, address the association of back muscles morphology with pain score preoperatively and post-operatively, and investigate the relationships between the changes from pre- to post-operative back muscles measurements and pain score (primary outcome) and disability score (secondary outcome) change following discectomy if any.
METHODS
We searched three online databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. In LDH patients, eligible for discectomy surgery, pre- and post-operative and the changes from pre- to post-operative of back and/or leg pain with Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and multifidus muscle morphology, were considered as primary outcomes. Cochrane Risk-of-Bias 2 tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) were used to assess the methodological quality of RCTs and observational studies, respectively. Standardize mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) was evaluated. A meta-regression analysis was conducted. GRADE approach was used to summarize the strength of evidence.
RESULTS
One RCT and five observational studies were included in the analysis of 489 patients with LDH undergoing discectomy surgery. The mean overall follow-up was 64.9 weeks (6 to 148.7 weeks). There was a significant negative relationship between the change from pre- to post-operative cross-sectional area (CSA) in MM and change in VAS back pain [regression coefficient = -0.01, (95% CI = -0.02, -0.01), p = 0.044] after discectomy surgery. No significant relationship between preoperative CSA in MM and preoperative/post-operative clinical (any of the follow-up periods) scores could be established.
CONCLUSION
The results of this study found very low-quality grade evidence for an association between higher reduction of CSA in MM and less reductions of back pain scores following discectomy surgery for patients with LDH. Due to the heterogeneity and methodological limitations, further studies will improve understanding and aid preoperative counselling.
Topics: Back Pain; Diskectomy; Humans; Intervertebral Disc Displacement; Lumbar Vertebrae; Paraspinal Muscles
PubMed: 35325300
DOI: 10.1007/s00586-022-07181-3 -
European Spine Journal : Official... Feb 2024This systematic review aims to investigate the complication rate of endoscopic spine surgeries, stratifying them by technique, district and kind of procedure performed.
PURPOSE
This systematic review aims to investigate the complication rate of endoscopic spine surgeries, stratifying them by technique, district and kind of procedure performed.
METHODS
This study was conducted according to the PRISMA statement. The literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, Cochrane Register, OTseeker and ScienceDirect database. Types of studies included were observational studies (cohort studies, case-control studies and case series) and randomised or quasi-randomised clinical with human subjects. No restrictions on publication year were applied. Repeated articles, reviews, expert's comments, congress abstracts, technical notes and articles not in English were excluded. Several data were extracted from the articles. In particular, data of perioperative (≤ 3 months) and late (> 3 months) complications were collected and grouped according to: (1) surgical technique [uniportal full-endoscopic spine surgery (UESS) or unilateral biportal endoscopic spine surgery (UBESS)]; (2) spinal district treated [cervical, thoracic or lumbar] and (3) type of procedure [discectomy/decompression or fusion]. Complication analysis was performed in subgroups with at least 100 patients to have clinically meaningful statistical validity.
RESULTS
A total of 117 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. Of the 117 records included, 95 focused their research on UESS (14 LOE V, 33 LOE IV, 43 LOE III and five LOE II) and 23 on UBESS (three LOE V, eight LOE IV, 10 LOE III and two LOE II). A total of 20,020 patients were extracted to investigate the incidence of different perioperative and late complications, 10,405 for UESS and 9615 for UBESS.
CONCLUSION
The present study summarises the complications reported in the literature for spinal endoscopic procedures. On the one hand, the most relevant described were perioperative complications (transient neurological deficit, dural tear and dysesthesia) that are especially meaningful for endoscopic discectomy and decompression. On the other hand, late complications, such as mechanical implant failure, are more common in endoscopic interbody fusion.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
I.
Topics: Humans; Databases, Factual; Diskectomy; Endoscopy; Lumbosacral Region; Spine
PubMed: 37587257
DOI: 10.1007/s00586-023-07891-2 -
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and... Oct 2023Given the inconclusive literature on operative time, pain relief, functional outcomes, and complications, this meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy of Unilateral... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparative efficacy of unilateral biportal endoscopy and micro-endoscopic discectomy in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Given the inconclusive literature on operative time, pain relief, functional outcomes, and complications, this meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopy (UBE) and Micro-Endoscopic Discectomy (MED) in treating Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis (DLSS).
METHODS
A thorough literature search was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines and based on the PICO framework. The study interrogated four primary databases-PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library-on August 16, 2023, without time restrictions. The search employed a strategic selection of keywords and was devoid of language barriers. Studies were included based on strict criteria, such as the diagnosis, surgical intervention types, and specific outcome measures. Quality assessment was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and statistical analysis was executed through Stata version 17.
RESULTS
The meta-analysis incorporated 9 articles out of an initial yield of 1,136 potential studies. Considerable heterogeneity was observed in surgical duration, but no statistically significant difference was identified (MD = - 2.11, P = 0.56). For VAS scores assessing lumbar and leg pain, UBE was statistically superior to MED (MD = - 0.18, P = 0.013; MD = - 0.15, P = 0.006, respectively). ODI scores demonstrated no significant difference between the two surgical methods (MD = - 0.57, P = 0.26). UBE had a lower incidence of complications compared to those receiving MED (OR = 0.54, P = 0.036).
CONCLUSIONS
UBE and MED exhibited comparable surgical durations and disability outcomes as measured by ODI. However, UBE demonstrated superior efficacy in alleviating lumbar and leg pain based on VAS scores. The findings present an intricate evaluation of the two surgical interventions for DLSS, lending valuable insights for clinical decision-making.
Topics: Humans; Spinal Stenosis; Endoscopy; Diskectomy; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Pain; Lumbar Vertebrae; Treatment Outcome; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37907922
DOI: 10.1186/s13018-023-04322-2 -
European Spine Journal : Official... Nov 2021To evaluate the impact of discectomy on disc height (DH) in lumbar disc herniation (LDH) patients following discectomy surgery and address the association of DH change... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
To evaluate the impact of discectomy on disc height (DH) in lumbar disc herniation (LDH) patients following discectomy surgery and address the association of DH change with pain score change.
METHODS
We searched three online databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. In LDH patients, eligible for discectomy surgery, the changes in pre- and post-operative back and/or leg pain score and DH and/or disc height index (DHI) were considered as primary outcomes. Standardize mean difference (SMD) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were evaluated. The GRADE approach was used to summarize the strength of evidence.
RESULTS
Two RCTs and sixteen observational studies were included in the analysis of 893 LDH patients undergoing discectomy surgery. The mean overall follow-up was 211 weeks. There was a statistically significant reduction in DH (14.4% reduction: SMD = -0.74 (95% CI = -0.86 to -0.61)) and DHI (11.5% reduction: SMD = -0.81 (95% CI = -0.97 to -0.65)) following discectomy surgery. There was a significant relationship between the reduction in DH and decrease in back pain score (r = 0.68, (95% CI = 0.07-1.30), p = 0.034) after discectomy surgery. No significant relationship between DHI change and decrease in clinical pain scores (back and leg pain) could be established.
CONCLUSION
Discectomy surgery produces significant and quantifiable reductions in DH and DHI. Additionally, the reduction in DH is responsible for the decrease in back pain scores post discectomy, but further studies will improve understanding and aid preoperative counselling.
Topics: Back Pain; Diskectomy; Diskectomy, Percutaneous; Endoscopy; Humans; Intervertebral Disc Displacement; Lumbar Vertebrae; Pain Measurement; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34114106
DOI: 10.1007/s00586-021-06891-4 -
Clinical Spine Surgery Aug 2023A systematic review and meta-analysis. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
STUDY DESIGN
A systematic review and meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the safety and efficacy of local steroid application (LSA) on dysphagia after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA
Dysphagia is one of the most common adverse events in the early postoperative period of ACDF. LSA is reported as an effective method to reduce the swelling of soft tissues, thereby decreasing the incidence of dysphagia. However, the safety and efficacy of LSA on dysphagia after ACDF need to be systematically reviewed and analyzed.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search was carried out in the database PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Clinical key, Cochrane library, and Wiley Online Library to screen papers that report LSA in ACDF surgery. The Cochrane Collaboration tool and a methodological index for nonrandomized studies were used for the assessment of study quality. Data were analyzed with the Review Manager 5.3 software.
RESULTS
A total of 10 studies were included. The results revealed no significant differences between the steroid group and the control group in ACDF regarding postoperative drainage, estimated blood loss, and neck disability index score ( P > 0.05). LSA significantly alleviates visual analog scale score for neck pain (or odynophagia) ( P < 0.05), reduces the length of hospital stay (weighted mean difference, -1.00 (-1.05 to -0.95); P < 0.001), and mitigates dysphagia rate and prevertebral soft-tissue swelling in the early postoperative period ( P < 0.05). There seemed to be no significant increase in the complication rate and steroid-related adverse events in the steroid group compared with the control group ( P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
LSA shows advantages in reducing the length of hospital stay, decreasing dysphagia rate, and mitigating prevertebral soft-tissue swelling in the early postoperative period of ACDF. Further large-scale studies are urgently required for the development of a standard protocol for LSA and further analysis of potential delay complications.
Topics: Humans; Deglutition Disorders; Postoperative Complications; Diskectomy; Neck Pain; Steroids; Cervical Vertebrae; Spinal Fusion; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 36727904
DOI: 10.1097/BSD.0000000000001433 -
International Journal of Environmental... Aug 2022Modic changes (MCs) are believed to be potential pain generators in the lumbar and cervical spine, but it is currently unclear if their presence affects postsurgical... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Modic changes (MCs) are believed to be potential pain generators in the lumbar and cervical spine, but it is currently unclear if their presence affects postsurgical outcomes. We performed a systematic review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. All studies evaluating cervical or lumbar spine postsurgical outcomes in patients with documented preoperative MCs were included. A total of 29 studies and 6013 patients with 2688 of those patients having preoperative MCs were included. Eight included studies evaluated cervical spine surgery, eleven evaluated lumbar discectomies, nine studied lumbar fusion surgery, and three assessed lumbar disc replacements. The presence of cervical MCs did not impact the clinical outcomes in the cervical spine procedures. Moreover, most studies found that MCs did not significantly impact the clinical outcomes following lumbar fusion, lumbar discectomy, or lumbar disc replacement. A meta-analysis of the relevant data found no significant association between MCs and VAS back pain or ODI following lumbar discectomy. Similarly, there was no association between MCs and JOA or neck pain following ACDF procedures. Patients with MC experienced statistically significant improvements following lumbar or cervical spine surgery. The postoperative improvements were similar to patients without MCs in the cervical and lumbar spine.
Topics: Cervical Vertebrae; Diskectomy; Humans; Lumbar Vertebrae; Lumbosacral Region; Neck Pain; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 36011795
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191610158