Clinical impact of 3-level anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) on the occipito-atlantoaxial complex: a retrospective study of patients who received a zero-profile anchored spacer versus cage-plate construct

被引:13
|
作者
Xiao, Bowei [1 ]
Wu, Bingxuan [1 ]
Rong, Tianhua [1 ]
Cui, Wei [1 ]
Sang, Dacheng [1 ]
Liu, Baoge [1 ]
机构
[1] Capital Med Univ, Beijing Tiantan Hosp, Dept Orthopaed Surg, 119 South 4th Ring West RD, Beijing 100070, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Cervical spondylosis; Spinal fusion device; Cervical atlas; Axis; Anterior cervical decompression and fusion; MOTION; SPINE; ALIGNMENT; RANGE; FLEXION; EXTENSION; ADULTS;
D O I
10.1007/s00586-021-06974-2
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Purpose To evaluate changes in the sagittal parameters of the occipito-atlantoaxial complex after three-level anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) and identify the influential factors by comparing ACDF with a zero-profile anchored spacer (ACDF-Z) versus a cage-plate construct (ACDF-P). Methods The cohort comprised 106 patients who underwent three-level contiguous ACDF-Z or ACDF-P for cervical radiculopathy and/or myelopathy. Standing, flexion, and extension radiographs of cervical spine were obtained preoperatively, and 3 and 12 months postoperatively. The assessed cervical sagittal parameters were the platform angle of the axis, Cobb angle, and range of motion (ROM) of C2-7, C0-, and C1-2. Results In both the ACDF-Z and ACDF-P groups, the Cobb angle of the upper cervical spine decreased and the C0-1 ROM increased from preoperatively to 3 and 12 months postoperatively (P < 0.01). The alignment restoration was lost at 12 months compared with 3 months in the ACDF-Z group, but not in the ACDF-P group (P < 0.01). The ACDF-P group showed more loss of C2-7 ROM and more compensatory changes in C0-2 ROM than the ACDF-Z group (P < 0.05). Conclusion The Cobb angle decreased and ROM increased significantly as compensatory changes of the atlantooccipital or atlantoaxial joint after both types of ACDF, which may accelerate degeneration. The zero-profile anchored spacer had less impact on the occipito-atlantoaxial complex but was worse at maintaining the alignment restoration, which were contrary to the cage-plate construct. Surgeons should be aware of the impact of multi-level ACDFs on the occipito-atlantoaxial complex.
引用
收藏
页码:3656 / 3665
页数:10
相关论文
共 28 条
  • [21] Comparison of Clinical Outcomes Following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion with Zero-Profile Anchored Spacer-ROI-C-Fixation and Combined Intervertebral Cage and Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Retrospective Study from a Single Center
    He, Shuangjun
    Zhou, Zhangzhe
    Lv, Nanning
    Shao, Xiaofeng
    Zhou, Xinfeng
    Wang, Yaowei
    Wu, Shuhua
    Chen, Kangwu
    Zhou, Lijian
    Qian, Zhonglai
    MEDICAL SCIENCE MONITOR, 2021, 27
  • [22] Comparison of Zero-profile Anchored Spacer Versus Plate-and-Cage After 1-Level ACDF With Complete Uncinate Process Resection A 3-Year Assessment of Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes
    Noh, Sung Hyun
    Park, Jeong Yoon
    Kuh, Sung Uk
    Chin, Dong Kyu
    Kim, Keun Su
    Cho, Yong Eun
    Kim, Kyung Hyun
    CLINICAL SPINE SURGERY, 2021, 34 (05): : 176 - 182
  • [23] Cervical Stand-Alone Polyetheretherketone Cage versus Zero-Profile Anchored Spacer in Single-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion : Minimum 2-Year Assessment of Radiographic and Clinical Outcome
    Cho, Hyun-Jun
    Hur, Junseok W.
    Lee, Jang-Bo
    Han, Jin-Sol
    Cho, Tai-Hyoung
    Park, Jung-Yul
    JOURNAL OF KOREAN NEUROSURGICAL SOCIETY, 2015, 58 (02) : 119 - 124
  • [24] Clinical Outcomes between Stand-Alone Zero-Profile Spacers and Cervical Plate with Cage Fixation for Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Retrospective Analysis of 166 Patients
    Sommaruga, Samuel
    Camara-Quintana, Joaquin
    Patel, Kishan
    Nouri, Aria
    Tessitore, Enrico
    Molliqaj, Granit
    Panchagnula, Shreyas
    Robinson, Michael
    Virojanapa, Justin
    Sun, Xin
    Melnikov, Fjodor
    Kolb, Luis
    Schaller, Karl
    Abbed, Khalid
    Cheng, Joseph
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE, 2021, 10 (14)
  • [25] Two-level Anterior Cervical Corpectomy and Fusion versus Posterior Open-door Laminoplasty for the Treatment of Cervical Ossification of Posterior Longitudinal Ligament: A Comparison of the Clinical Impact on the Occipito-Atlantoaxial Complex
    Li, Junhu
    Li, Qiujiang
    Wang, Linnan
    Deng, Zhipeng
    Zheng, Shuxin
    Wang, Lei
    Song, Yueming
    ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY, 2024, 16 (07) : 1603 - 1613
  • [26] Zero-profile implant versus conventional cage–plate construct in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the treatment of single-level degenerative cervical spondylosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Alafate Kahaer
    Ruilin Chen
    Muzaipaer Maitusong
    Peierdun Mijiti
    Paerhati Rexiti
    Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, 17
  • [27] Comparison of the clinical effects of zero-profile anchored spacer (ROI-C) and conventional cage-plate construct for the treatment of noncontiguous bilevel of cervical degenerative disc disease (CDDD) A minimum 2-year follow-up
    Lu, Yingjie
    Bao, Weiguo
    Wang, Zongyi
    Zhou, Feng
    Zou, Jun
    Jiang, Weimin
    Yang, Huilin
    Zhang, Zhiming
    Zhu, Xuesong
    MEDICINE, 2018, 97 (05)
  • [28] Is the Zero-P Spacer Suitable for 3-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Surgery in Terms of Sagittal Alignment Reconstruction: A Comparison Study with Traditional Plate and Cage System
    Guo, Jing
    Jin, Weiming
    Shi, Yan
    Guan, Zhiping
    Wen, Jian
    Huang, Yongcan
    Yu, Binsheng
    BRAIN SCIENCES, 2022, 12 (11)