Clinical practice. Cervical Radiculopathy

Division of Rheumatology, Toronto Western Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.
New England Journal of Medicine (Impact Factor: 55.87). 08/2005; 353(4):392-9. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMcp043887
Source: PubMed
1 Follower
21 Reads
  • Source
    • "Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is a common surgical intervention for patients suffering from symptomatic cervical degenerative disc disease (DDD) with myelopathy and/or radiculopathy [1] [2]. ACDF procedures typically result in excellent clinical outcomes [3] [4] [5]. However, ACDF relies upon the establishment of a solid fusion and is associated with decreased motion at the fused segments and accelerated adjacent segment disease (ASD) [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Pseudarthrosis occurs after approximately 2-20% of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) procedures; it is unclear if posterior or anterior revision should be pursued. In this study, we retrospectively evaluate the outcomes in 22 patients with pseudarthrosis following ACDF and revision via posterior cervical fusion (PCF). Baseline demographics, preoperative symptoms, operative data, time to fusion failure, symptoms of pseudarthrosis, and revision method were assessed. Fusion outcome and clinical outcome were determined at last follow-up (LFU). Thirteen females (59%) and 9 (41%) males experienced pseudarthrosis at a median of 11 (range: 3-151)months after ACDF. Median age at index surgery was 51 (range: 33-67)years. All patients with pseudarthrosis presented with progressive neck pain, with median visual analog scale (VAS) score of 8 (range: 0-10), and/or myeloradiculopathy. Patients with pseudarthrosis <12months compared to >12months after index surgery were older (p=0.013), had more frequent preoperative neurological deficits (p=0.064), and lower baseline VAS scores (p=0.006). Fusion was successful after PCF in all patients, with median time to fusion of 10 (range: 2-14)months. Eighteen patients fused both anteriorly and posteriorly, two patients fused anteriorly only, and two patients fused posteriorly only. Median VAS neck score at LFU significantly improved from the time of pseudarthrosis (p=0.012). While uncommon, pseudarthrosis may occur after ACDF. All patients achieved successful fusion after subsequent posterior cervical fusion, with 91% fusing a previous anterior pseudarthrosis after posterior stabilization. Neck pain significantly improved by LFU in the majority of patients in this study.
    Journal of Clinical Neuroscience 10/2015; DOI:10.1016/j.jocn.2015.07.019 · 1.38 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "There are various methods of managing cervical radiculopathy. The symptoms generally improve after conservative treatment2,3), however short-term disability has been known to be improved by surgical treatment6,17). Surgical treatment of cervical radiculopathy has been mainly classified into anterior and posterior approaches. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective Posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF) is a motion-preserving surgical technique. The objective was to determine whether PCF alter cervical motion as a long-term influence. Methods Thirty one patients who followed up more than 36 months after PCF for cervical radiculopathy from January 2004 to September 2008 were enrolled in this study. The range of motion (ROM) of whole cervical spine, the operated segment, the cranial and the caudal adjacent segment were obtained. The clinical result and the change of ROMs were compared with those in the patients performed anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) during the same period. Results In PCF group, the ROM of whole cervical spine had no significant difference in statistically at preoperative and last follow up. The operated segment ROM was significantly decreased from 11.02±5.72 to 8.82±6.65 (p<0.05). The ROM of cranial adjacent segment was slightly increased from 10.42±5.13 to 11.02±5.41 and the ROM of caudal adjacent segment was decreased from 9.44±6.26 to 8.73±5.92, however these data were not meaningful statistically. In ACDF group, the operated ROM was decreased and unlike in PCF group, especially the ROM of caudal adjacent segment was increased from 9.39±4.21 to 11.33±5.07 (p<0.01). Conclusion As part of the long-term effects of PCF on cervical motion, the operated segment motions decreased but were preserved after PCF. However, unlikely after ACDF, the ROMs of the adjacent segment did not increase after PCF. PCF, by maintaining the motion of the operated segment, imposes less stress on the adjacent segments. This may be one of its advantages.
    03/2014; 11(1):1-6. DOI:10.14245/kjs.2014.11.1.1
  • Source
    • "Cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) is a clinically symptomatic condition caused by compression of the spinal cord due to degeneration. It is a significant cause of disability in the adult population [1]–[3], notably causing progressive degenerative changes in the cervical spine of patients over 55 years of age [4], [5]. CSM is a common cause of neurological morbidity, and can substantially decrease quality of life [6]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Both anterior cervical discectomy with fusion (ACDF) and anterior cervical corpectomy with fusion (ACCF) are used to treat cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM), however, there is considerable controversy as to whether ACDF or ACCF is the optimal treatment for this condition. To compare the clinical outcomes, complications, and surgical trauma between ACDF and ACCF for the treatment of CSM, we conducted a meta-analysis. We conducted a comprehensive search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Google Scholar and Cochrane databases, searching for relevant controlled trials up to July 2013 that compared ACDF and ACCF for the treatment of CSM. We performed title and abstract screening and full-text screening independently and in duplicate. A random effects model was used for heterogeneous data; otherwise, a fixed effect model was used to pool data, using mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes and odds ratio (OR) for dichotomous outcomes. Of 2157 citations examined, 15 articles representing 1372 participants were eligible. Overall, there were significant differences between the two treatment groups for hospital stay (M = -5.60, 95% CI = -7.09 to -4.11), blood loss (MD = -151.35, 95% CI = -253.22 to -49.48), complications (OR = 0.50, 95% CI = 0.35 to 0.73) and increased lordosis of C2-C7 (MD = 3.70, 95% CI = 0.96 to 6.45) and fusion segments angles (MD = 3.38, 95% CI = 2.54 to 4.22). However, there were no significant differences in the operation time (MD = -9.34, 95% CI = -42.99 to 24.31), JOA (MD = 0.24, 95% CI = -0.10 to 0.57), VAS (MD = -0.06, 95% CI = -0.81 to 0.70), NDI (MD = -1.37, 95% CI = -3.17 to 0.43), Odom criteria (OR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.60 to 1.30) or fusion rate (OR = 1.17, 95% CI = 0.34 to 4.11). Based on this meta-analysis, although complications and increased lordosis are significantly better in the ACDF group, there is no strong evidence to support the routine use of ACDF over ACCF in CSM.
    PLoS ONE 01/2014; 9(1):e87191. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0087191 · 3.23 Impact Factor
Show more