A Novel Cervical Vertebral Bone Quality Score Independently Predicts Cage Subsidence After Anterior Cervical Diskectomy and Fusion.
Journal
Neurosurgery
ISSN: 1524-4040
Titre abrégé: Neurosurgery
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7802914
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 04 2023
01 04 2023
Historique:
received:
04
08
2022
accepted:
23
09
2022
pubmed:
3
2
2023
medline:
21
3
2023
entrez:
2
2
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Surgeons can preoperatively assess bone quality using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry or computed tomography; however, this is not feasible for all patients. Recently, a MRI-based scoring system was used to evaluate the lumbar spine's vertebral bone quality. To create a similar MRI-based scoring system for the cervical spine (C-VBQ), correlate C-VBQ scores with computed tomography-Hounsfield units (HU), and evaluate the utility of this scoring system to independently predict cage subsidence after single-level anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion (ACDF). Demographic, procedure-related, and radiographic data were collected for patients. Pearson correlation test was used to determine the correlation between C-VBQ and HU. Cage subsidence was defined as ≥3 mm loss of fusion segmental height. A multivariate logistic regression model was built to determine the correlation between potential risk factors for subsidence. Of 59 patients who underwent single-level ACDF, subsidence was found in 17 (28.8%). Mean C-VBQ scores were 2.22 ± 0.36 for no subsidence levels and 2.83 ± 0.38 ( P < .001) for subsidence levels. On multivariate analysis, a higher C-VBQ score was significantly associated with subsidence (odds ratio = 1.85, 95% CI = 1.39-2.46, P < .001) and was the only significant independent predictor of subsidence after ACDF. There was a significant negative correlation between HU and C-VBQ (r 2 = -0.49, P < .001). We found that a higher C-VBQ score was significantly associated with cage subsidence after ACDF. Furthermore, there was a significant negative correlation between C-VBQ and HU. The C-VBQ score may be a valuable tool for assessing preoperative bone quality and independently predicting cage subsidence after ACDF.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Surgeons can preoperatively assess bone quality using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry or computed tomography; however, this is not feasible for all patients. Recently, a MRI-based scoring system was used to evaluate the lumbar spine's vertebral bone quality.
OBJECTIVE
To create a similar MRI-based scoring system for the cervical spine (C-VBQ), correlate C-VBQ scores with computed tomography-Hounsfield units (HU), and evaluate the utility of this scoring system to independently predict cage subsidence after single-level anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion (ACDF).
METHODS
Demographic, procedure-related, and radiographic data were collected for patients. Pearson correlation test was used to determine the correlation between C-VBQ and HU. Cage subsidence was defined as ≥3 mm loss of fusion segmental height. A multivariate logistic regression model was built to determine the correlation between potential risk factors for subsidence.
RESULTS
Of 59 patients who underwent single-level ACDF, subsidence was found in 17 (28.8%). Mean C-VBQ scores were 2.22 ± 0.36 for no subsidence levels and 2.83 ± 0.38 ( P < .001) for subsidence levels. On multivariate analysis, a higher C-VBQ score was significantly associated with subsidence (odds ratio = 1.85, 95% CI = 1.39-2.46, P < .001) and was the only significant independent predictor of subsidence after ACDF. There was a significant negative correlation between HU and C-VBQ (r 2 = -0.49, P < .001).
CONCLUSION
We found that a higher C-VBQ score was significantly associated with cage subsidence after ACDF. Furthermore, there was a significant negative correlation between C-VBQ and HU. The C-VBQ score may be a valuable tool for assessing preoperative bone quality and independently predicting cage subsidence after ACDF.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36729684
doi: 10.1227/neu.0000000000002269
pii: 00006123-202304000-00015
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
779-786Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
Copyright © Congress of Neurological Surgeons 2022. All rights reserved.
Références
Lopez CD, Boddapati V, Lombardi JM, et al. Recent trends in medicare utilization and reimbursement for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Spine J. 2020;20(11):1737-1743.
McDermott KW, Liang L. Overview of Operating Room Procedures During Inpatient Stays in U.S. Hospitals. Published 2018. Accessed April 27, 2022. https://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/reports/statbriefs/sb281-Operating-Room-Procedures-During-Hospitalization-2018.jsp . 2022.
Lord EL, Cohen JR, Buser Z, et al. Trends, costs, and complications of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with and without bone morphogenetic protein in the United States Medicare Population. Global Spine J. 2017;7(7):603-608.
Verla T, Xu DS, Davis MJ, et al. Failure in cervical spinal fusion and current management modalities. Semin Plast Surg. 2021;35(1):10-13.
Yee TJ, Swong K, Park P. Complications of anterior cervical spine surgery: a systematic review of the literature. J Spine Surg. 2020;6(1):302-322.
Igarashi H, Hoshino M, Omori K, et al. Factors influencing interbody cage subsidence following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Clin Spine Surg. 2019;32(7):297-302.
Narain AS, Hijji FY, Haws BE, et al. Risk factors for medical and surgical complications after 1-2-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion procedures. Int J Spine Surg. 2020;14(3):286-293.
Guzman JZ, Feldman ZM, McAnany S, Hecht AC, Qureshi SA, Cho SK. Osteoporosis in cervical spine surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2016;41(8):662-668.
Dipaola CP, Bible JE, Biswas D, Dipaola M, Grauer JN, Rechtine GR. Survey of spine surgeons on attitudes regarding osteoporosis and osteomalacia screening and treatment for fractures, fusion surgery, and pseudoarthrosis. Spine J. 2009;9(7):537-544.
Lee HJ, You ST, Kim JH, Kim IS, Sung JH, Hong JT. Significance of cervical spine computed tomography hounsfield units to predict bone mineral density and the subsidence after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Clin Spine Surg. 2021;34(8):E450-E457.
Ehresman J, Pennington Z, Schilling A, et al. Novel MRI-based score for assessment of bone density in operative spine patients. Spine J. 2020;20(4):556-562.
von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61(4):344-349.
Bandirali M, Di Leo G, Papini GDE, et al. A new diagnostic score to detect osteoporosis in patients undergoing lumbar spine MRI. Eur Radiol. 2015;25(10):2951-2959.
Kaiser JT, Reddy V, Lugo-Pico JG. Anatomy, head and neck, cervical vertebrae. In: StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing LLC; 2022.
Schreiber JJ, Anderson PA, Rosas HG, Buchholz AL, Au AG. Hounsfield units for assessing bone mineral density and strength: a tool for osteoporosis management. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93(11):1057-1063.
Karikari IO, Jain D, Owens TR, et al. Impact of subsidence on clinical outcomes and radiographic fusion rates in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a systematic review. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2014;27(1):1-10.
Jang HJ, Chin DK, Kim KH, Park JY. Does graft position affect subsidence after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion? Global Spine J. 2022;12(4):668-676.
Lee JS, Son DW, Lee SH, et al. The effect of hounsfield unit value with conventional computed tomography and intraoperative distraction on postoperative intervertebral height reduction in patients following stand-alone anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2022;65(1):96-106.
Wang S, Zhu J, Sun K, et al. Clinical impact and imaging results after a modified procedure of ACDF: a prospective case-controlled study based on ninety cases with two-year follow-up. BMC Musculoskeletal Disord. 2021;22(1):605.
Zhang B, Li S, Miao D, Zhao C, Wang L. Risk factors of cage subsidence in patients with ossification of posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL) after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Med Sci Monit. 2018;24:4753-4759.
Fujibayashi S, Neo M, Nakamura T. Stand-alone interbody cage versus anterior cervical plate for treatment of cervical disc herniation: sequential changes in cage subsidence. J Clin Neurosci. 2008;15(9):1017-1022.
Gu Y, Yang HL, Chen L, et al. Use of an integrated anterior cervical plate and cage device (PCB) in cervical anterior fusion. J Clin Neurosci. 2009;16(11):1443-1448.
Joo YH, Lee JW, Kwon KY, Rhee JJ, Lee HK. Comparison of fusion with cage alone and plate instrumentation in two-level cervical degenerative disease. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2010;48(4):342-346.
Joung YI, Oh SH, Ko Y, Yi HJ, Lee SK. Subsidence of cylindrical cage (AMSLU TM Cage): postoperative 1 year follow-up of the cervical anterior interbody fusion. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2007;42(5):367-370.
Lin HL, Cho DY, Liu YF, Lee WY, Lee HC, Chen CC. Change of cervical balance following single to multi-level interbody fusion with cage. Br J Neurosurg. 2008;22(6):758-763.
Smith GW, Robinson RA. The treatment of certain cervical-spine disorders by anterior removal of the intervertebral disc and interbody fusion. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1958;40(3):607-624.
Jacobs W, Willems PC, Kruyt M, et al. Systematic review of anterior interbody fusion techniques for single- and double-level cervical degenerative disc disease. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011;36(14):E950-E960.
Chen F, He W, Mahaney K, et al. Alternative grafts in anterior cervical fusion. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2013;115(10):2049-2055.
Kulkarni AG, Hee HT, Wong HK. Solis cage (PEEK) for anterior cervical fusion: preliminary radiological results with emphasis on fusion and subsidence. Spine J. 2007;7(2):205-209.
Matge G. Cervical cage fusion with 5 different implants: 250 cases. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2002;144(6):539-549; discussion 550.
Song KJ, Choi BY. Current concepts of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a review of literature. Asian Spine J. 2014;8(4):531-539.
Noordhoek I, Koning MT, Jacobs WCH, Vleggeert-Lankamp CLA. Incidence and clinical relevance of cage subsidence in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a systematic review. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2018;160(4):873-880.
Tye GW, Graham RS, Broaddus WC, Young HF. Graft subsidence after instrument-assisted anterior cervical fusion. J Neurosurg. 2002;97(2 suppl):186-192.
Kao TH, Wu CH, Chou YC, Chen HT, Chen WH, Tsou HK. Risk factors for subsidence in anterior cervical fusion with stand-alone polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages: a review of 82 cases and 182 levels. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2014;134(10):1343-1351.
Jin ZY, Teng Y, Wang HZ, Yang HL, Lu YJ, Gan MF. Comparative analysis of cage subsidence in anterior cervical decompression and fusion: zero profile anchored spacer (ROI-C) vs. conventional cage and plate construct. Front Surg. 2021;8:736680.
Zeng J, Duan Y, Yang Y, et al. Anterior corpectomy and reconstruction using dynamic cervical plate and titanium mesh cage for cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a minimum 5-year follow-up study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018;97(5):e9724.
Brenke C, Dostal M, Scharf J, Weiß C, Schmieder K, Barth M. Influence of cervical bone mineral density on cage subsidence in patients following stand-alone anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Eur Spine J. 2015;24(12):2832-2840.
Demontiero O, Vidal C, Duque G. Aging and bone loss: new insights for the clinician. Ther Adv Musculoskelet Dis. 2012;4(2):61-76.
Park SB, Chung CK. Strategies of spinal fusion on osteoporotic spine. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2011;49(6):317-322.
McCoy S, Tundo F, Chidambaram S, Baaj AA. Clinical considerations for spinal surgery in the osteoporotic patient: a comprehensive review. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2019;180:40-47.
Wang Y, Videman T, Boyd SK, Battié MC. The distribution of bone mass in the lumbar vertebrae: are we measuring the right target?. Spine J. 2015;15(11):2412-2416.
Löffler MT, Jacob A, Valentinitsch A, et al. Improved prediction of incident vertebral fractures using opportunistic QCT compared to DXA. Eur Radiol. 2019;29(9):4980-4989.
Zaman M, Shah A, Singal R, Kirmani A, Bhat AR, Singal RP. Role of dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scan in the diagnosis of chronic low back pain—a prospective randomized controlled study in osteoporotic patients hospitalized in a Tertiary Care Institute. Maedica (Bucur). 2018;13(2):120-124.
Mao SS, Li D, Syed YS, et al. Thoracic quantitative computed tomography (QCT) can sensitively monitor bone mineral metabolism: comparison of thoracic QCT vs lumbar QCT and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in detection of age-relative change in bone mineral density. Acad Radiol. 2017;24(12):1582-1587.
Ebbesen EN, Thomsen JS, Beck-Nielsen H, Nepper-Rasmussen HJ, Mosekilde L. Lumbar vertebral body compressive strength evaluated by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, quantitative computed tomography, and ashing. Bone. 1999;25(6):713-724.
Colantonio DF, Saxena SK, Vanier A, Rodkey D, Tintle S, Wagner SC. Cervical spine computed tomography hounsfield units accurately predict low bone mineral density of the femoral neck. Clin Spine Surg. 2020;33(2):E58-E62.
Wang M, Mummaneni PV, Xi Z, et al. Lower Hounsfield units on CT are associated with cage subsidence after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. J Neurosurg Spine. 2020;33(4):425-432.
Hakalo J, Wronski J, Ciupik L. [Subsidence and its effect on the anterior plate stabilization in the course of cervical spondylodesis. Part I: definition and review of literature]. Neurol Neurochir Pol. 2003;37(4):903-915.
Chen Y, Wang X, Lu X, et al. Comparison of titanium and polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages in the surgical treatment of multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a prospective, randomized, control study with over 7-year follow-up. Eur Spine J. 2013;22(7):1539-1546.
Haffer H, Muellner M, Chiapparelli E, et al. Bone Quality in patients with osteoporosis undergoing lumbar fusion surgery-analysis of the MRI-based vertebral bone quality score and the bone microstructure derived from microcomputed tomography. Spine J. 2022;22(10):1642-1650.
Meunier P, Aaron J, Edouard C, Vlgnon G. Osteoporosis and the replacement of cell populations of the marrow by adipose tissue. A quantitative study of 84 iliac bone biopsies. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1971;80:147-154.
Shah LM, Hanrahan CJ. MRI of spinal bone marrow: part I, techniques and normal age-related appearances. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011;197(6):1298-1308.
Ehresman J, Ahmed AK, Lubelski D, et al. Vertebral bone quality score and postoperative lumbar lordosis associated with need for reoperation after lumbar fusion. World Neurosurg. 2020;140:e247-e252.
Ehresman J, Schilling A, Yang X, et al. Vertebral bone quality score predicts fragility fractures independently of bone mineral density. Spine J. 2021;21(1):20-27.
Ehresman J, Schilling A, Pennington Z, et al. A novel MRI-based score assessing trabecular bone quality to predict vertebral compression fractures in patients with spinal metastasis. J Neurosurg Spine. 2019;32(4):499-506.
Hu YH, Yeh YC, Niu CC, et al. Novel MRI-based vertebral bone quality score as a predictor of cage subsidence following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. J Neurosurg Spine. 2022;37(5):654-662.
Anderst WJ, Thorhauer ED, Lee JY, Donaldson WF, Kang JD. Cervical spine bone mineral density as a function of vertebral level and anatomic location. Spine J. 2011;11(7):659-667.