Short Monocortical Screws at C4-C6 Lateral Masses as Novel Mid-cervical Anchor in Cervical Laminoplasty with Instrumented Fusion: Surgical Outcomes Compared with C5 Pedicle Screws as Mid-cervical Anchor.
Lateral mass screw
Mid-cervical anchor
Pedicle screw
Posterior decompression and fusion
Posterior fusion
Journal
Spine surgery and related research
ISSN: 2432-261X
Titre abrégé: Spine Surg Relat Res
Pays: Japan
ID NLM: 101718059
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2019
2019
Historique:
received:
11
04
2019
accepted:
29
05
2019
entrez:
27
11
2019
pubmed:
27
11
2019
medline:
27
11
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
This retrospective study compared rates of bony fusion and screw loosening after multilevel posterior decompression and fusion (PDF) with short monocortical screws (SMS) as a novel mid-cervical anchor versus C5 pedicle screws (PS) as a mid-cervical anchor. We analyzed 15 consecutive patients who underwent C2-T1 PDF with C5 PS as mid-cervical anchor (PS group) and 18 consecutive patients who underwent the procedure with SMS at C4-C6 as mid-cervical anchor (SMS group). Radiological outcomes, including rates of bony fusion at each level and screw loosening, and clinical outcomes, including Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score, neck pain, neck disability index (NDI), and EuroQol 5 Dimension (EQ-5D), were compared between groups. In the SMS group, screw perforation types and appropriate screw insertion procedure were also investigated. The fusion rate at C2/3 in the SMS group (56%) was significantly higher than that in PS group (13%; SMS at C4-C6 was as effective as C5 PS as a mid-cervical anchor in PDF, according to clinical and radiological outcomes. The fusion rate at C2/3 in the SMS group was significantly higher than that in the PS group. There was no postoperative loosening of the C5 PS or C4-C6 SMS in either group.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31768448
doi: 10.22603/ssrr.2019-0027
pmc: PMC6834462
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
295-303Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2019 by The Japanese Society for Spine Surgery and Related Research.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare that there are no relevant conflicts of interest.
Références
J Neurosurg. 2003 Jul;99(1 Suppl):132-6
pubmed: 12859074
Eur Spine J. 2009 Sep;18(9):1293-9
pubmed: 19488794
J Neurosurg Spine. 2017 Oct;27(4):415-420
pubmed: 28498072
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1991 Mar;16(3 Suppl):S56-63
pubmed: 2028342
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005 Nov 15;30(22):2544-9
pubmed: 16284593
Eur Spine J. 2014 Oct;23(10):2189-95
pubmed: 25095759
Eur Spine J. 2018 Jun;27(6):1349-1357
pubmed: 29177553
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000 Nov 15;25(22):2893-8
pubmed: 11074676
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1997 May 1;22(9):977-82
pubmed: 9152447
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1992 Mar;17(3 Suppl):S41-3
pubmed: 1314432
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1991 Oct;16(10 Suppl):S548-51
pubmed: 1801270
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005 Dec 15;30(24):2800-5
pubmed: 16371908
Health Policy. 1990 Dec;16(3):199-208
pubmed: 10109801
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2016 Dec 15;41(24):1891-1895
pubmed: 27120063
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1992 Oct;17(10 Suppl):S442-6
pubmed: 1440041