Article

Increased in-hospital complications after primary posterior versus primary anterior cervical fusion.

Department of Anesthesiology, Hospital for Special Surgery, Weill Medical College of Cornell University, 535 East 70th Street, New York, NY 10021, USA.
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research (Impact Factor: 2.79). 03/2011; 469(3):649-57. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-010-1549-4
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Although anterior (ACDF) and posterior cervical fusion (PCDF) are relatively common procedures and both are associated with certain complications, the relative frequency and severity of these complications is unclear. Since for some patients either approach might be reasonable it is important to know the relative perioperative risks for decision-making.
The purposes of this study were to: (1) characterize the patient population undergoing ACDF and PCDF; (2) compare perioperative complication rates; (3) determine independent risk factors for adverse perioperative events; and (4) aid in surgical decision-making in cases in which clinical equipoise exists between anterior and posterior cervical fusion procedures.
The National Inpatient Sample was used and entries for ACDF and PCDF between 1998 and 2006 were analyzed. Demographics and complication rates were determined and regression analysis was performed to identify independent risk factors for mortality after ACDF and PCDF.
ACDF had a shorter length of stay and their procedures were more frequently performed at nonteaching institutions. The incidence of complications and mortality was 4.14% and 0.26% among patients undergoing ACDF and 15.35% and 1.44% for patients undergoing PCDF, respectively. When controlling for overall comorbidity burden and other demographic variables, PCDF was associated with a twofold increased risk of a fatal outcome compared with ACDF. Pulmonary, circulatory, and renal disease were associated with the highest odds for in-hospital mortality.
PCDF procedures were associated with higher perioperative rates of complications and mortality compared with ACDF surgeries. Despite limitations, these data should be considered in cases in which clinical equipoise exists between both approaches.
Level II, prognostic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
118 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although the frequency of spinal surgical procedures has been increasing, particularly in patients of age 65 and over (geriatric), multiple overlapping comorbidities increase their risk/complication rates. Nevertheless, sometimes these high-risk geriatric patients are considered for "unnecessary", too much (instrumented fusions), or too little [minimally invasive surgery (MIS)] spine surgery. In a review of the literature and reanalysis of data from prior studies, attention was focused on the increasing number of operations offered to geriatric patients, their increased comorbidities, and the offers for "unnecessary" spine fusions, including both major open and MIS procedures. In the literature, the frequency of spine operations, particularly instrumented fusions, has markedly increased in patients of age 65 and older. Specifically, in a 2010 report, a 28-fold increase in anterior discectomy and fusion was observed for geriatric patients. Geriatric patients with more comorbid factors, including diabetes, hypertension, coronary artery disease (prior procedures), depression, and obesity, experience higher postoperative complication rates and costs. Sometimes "unnecessary", too much (instrumented fusions), and too little (MIS spine) surgeries were offered to geriatric patients, which increased the morbidity. One study observed a 10% complication rate for decompression alone (average age 76.4), a 40% complication rate for decompression/limited fusion (average age 70.4), and a 56% complication rate for full curve fusions (average age 62.5). Increasingly, spine operations in geriatric patients with multiple comorbidities are sometimes "unnecessary", offer too much surgery (instrumentation), or too little surgery (MIS).
    Surgical Neurology International 01/2011; 2:188. · 1.18 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Study Design Randomized clinical trial. Objective To examine the effectiveness of cervical traction in addition to exercise for specific subgroups of patients with neck pain. Background Cervical traction is frequently used but its effectiveness has not been adequately examined. A critique of existing studies is a failure to target patients most likely to respond. Traction is typically recommended for patients with cervical radiculopathy. A prediction rule has been described identifying a narrower subgroup of patients likely to respond. Methods Patients with neck pain and signs of radiculopathy were randomized to 4 weeks of treatment with exercise, exercise with mechanical traction, or exercise with over-door traction. Baseline assessment included subgrouping rule status. Primary (Neck Disability Index (NDI) scored 0-100) and secondary outcomes (neck and arm pain intensity) were assessed after 4 weeks and 6 and 12 months. Primary analyses examined 2-way treatment by time interactions. Secondary analyses examined validity of the subgrouping rule by adding 3-way interactions. Results Eighty-six patients (53.5% female, mean age 46.9 years) were enrolled in the study. Intention-to-treat analysis found lower NDI scores in the mechanical traction group after 6 months compared to the exercise group (mean difference between groups = 13.3; 95% CI: 5.6, 21.0) or over-door traction group (mean difference between groups = 8.1; 95% CI: 0.8, 15.3); and compared to the exercise group after 12 months (mean difference between groups = 9.8; 95% CI: 0.2, 19.4). Secondary outcomes favored mechanical traction at several time points. Subgrouping rule validity was supported on the NDI at the 6 month time point only. Conclusion Adding mechanical traction to exercise for patients with cervical radiculopathy resulted in lower disability and pain, particularly at long-term follow-ups. The study protocol was registered with http://ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00979108. Level of Evidence Therapy, level 2b. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther, Epub 9 January 2014. doi:10.2519/jospt.2014.5065.
    The Journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy. 01/2014;
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The sequelae of atlantoaxial instability (AAI) range from axial neck pain to life-threatening neurologic injury. Instrumentation and fusion of the C1-2 joint is often indicated in the setting of clinical or biomechanical instability. This is the first clinical report of anterior Smith-Robinson C1-2 transarticular screw (TAS) fixation for AAI. The first patient presented with ischemic brain tissue secondary to post-traumatic C1-2 segment instability from a MVC 7 years prior to presentation. The second patient presented with a 3 year history of persistent right-sided neck and upper scalp pain. Both were treated with transarticular C1-2 fusion through decortication of the atlantoaxial facet joints and TAS fixation via the anterior Smith-Robinson approach. At 16 months follow-up, the first patient maintained painless range of motion of the cervical spine and denied sensorimotor deficits. The second patient reported 90% improvement in her pre-operative symptoms of neck pain and paresthesia. Anterior Smith-Robinson C1-2 TAS fixation provides a useful alternative to the posterior Goel and Magerl techniques for C1-2 stabilization and fusion.
    Journal of craniovertebral junction and spine 07/2013; 4(2):85-9.

Full-text (2 Sources)

View
23 Downloads
Available from
May 28, 2014