Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Advance Online Publication
    • Archive
  • About Us
    • About ISASS
    • About the Journal
    • Author Instructions
    • Editorial Board
    • Reviewer Guidelines & Publication Criteria
  • More
    • Advertise
    • Subscribe
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Join Us
  • Reprints & Permissions
  • Sponsored Content
  • Other Publications
    • ijss

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
International Journal of Spine Surgery
  • My alerts
International Journal of Spine Surgery

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Advance Online Publication
    • Archive
  • About Us
    • About ISASS
    • About the Journal
    • Author Instructions
    • Editorial Board
    • Reviewer Guidelines & Publication Criteria
  • More
    • Advertise
    • Subscribe
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Join Us
  • Reprints & Permissions
  • Sponsored Content
  • Follow ijss on Twitter
  • Visit ijss on Facebook
Research ArticleFull Length Article
Open Access

The effect of minimally invasive posterior cervical approaches versus open anterior approaches on neck pain and disability

Jeffrey A. Steinberg and John W. German
International Journal of Spine Surgery January 2012, 6 55-61; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsp.2011.11.003
Jeffrey A. Steinberg
Division of Neurosurgery, Albany Medical Center, Albany, NY
BS
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
John W. German
Division of Neurosurgery, Albany Medical Center, Albany, NY
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: GermanJ@mail.amc.edu
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Tables

    • View popup
    Table 1

    Demographics

    miPCD (n = 35)ACF (n = 28)Statistical significance
    Sex24 M and 11 F14 M and 14 F P = NS
    Age (mean ± SD) (y)53. 4 ± 14.950.2 ± 8.1 P = NS
    BMI (mean ± SD) (kg/m2)27.9 ± 4.030.1 ± 5.78 P = NS
    • Abbreviations: ACF, anterior cervical diskectomy or corpectomy with interbody fusion; BMI, body mass index; F, female; M, male; miPCD, minimally invasive posterior cervical decompression; NS, not significant.

    • View popup
    Table 2

    Work status

    miPCD (n = 35)ACF (n = 28)Statistical significance
    Employed (n)16 (46%)13 (46%) P = NS
    Not employed (n)5 (14%)8 (29%) P = NS
    Disabled (n)7 (20%)3 (11%) P = NS
    Retired (n)7 (20%)4 (14%) P = NS
    • Abbreviations: ACF, anterior cervical diskectomy or corpectomy with interbody fusion; miPCD, minimally invasive posterior cervical decompression; NS, not significant.

    • View popup
    Table 3

    Medical history

    miPCD (n = 35)ACF (n = 28)Statistical significance
    No. of comorbidities (mean ± SD)2.9 ± 2.62.7 ± 1.6 P = NS
    Charlson index (mean ± SD)1.9 ± 1.91.6 ± 1.3 P = NS
    Depression (n)6 (17%)9 (32%) P = NS
    Anxiety (n)3 (8.5%)2 (7%) P = NS
    Other psychiatric illness (n)2 (6%)1 (3.5%) P = NS
    Tobacco use (n)14 (40%)10 (36%) P = NS
    Ethanol use (n)18 (51%)9 (32%) P = NS
    Drug allergies (n)11 (31%)9 (43%) P = NS
    • Abbreviations: ACF, anterior cervical diskectomy or corpectomy with interbody fusion; miPCD, minimally invasive posterior cervical decompression; NS, not significant.

    • View popup
    Table 4

    Medications

    miPCD (n = 35)ACF (n = 28)Statistical significance
    Narcotics (n)9 (26%)6 (21%) P = NS
    NSAIDs (n)21 (60%)18 (64%) P = NS
    Acetaminophen (n)7 (20%)3 (11%) P = NS
    Muscle relaxants (n)7 (20%)8 (29%) P = NS
    Anticonvulsants (n)4 (11%)6 (20%) P = NS
    Psychiatric medications (n)10 (29%)11 (39%) P = NS
    • Abbreviations: ACF, anterior cervical diskectomy or corpectomy with interbody fusion; miPCD, minimally invasive posterior cervical decompression; NS, not significant; NSAIDs, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

    • View popup
    Table 5

    Preoperative outcome index scores

    miPCDACFStatistical significance
    NDI (mean ± SD)42.70 ± 21.34 (n = 27)47.32 ± 16.68 (n = 22) P = NS
    Neck VAS score (mean ± SD)4.93 ± 2.98 (n = 24)5.24 ± 2.32 (n = 19) P = NS
    SF-12 PCS (mean ± SD)32.33 ± 8.73 (n = 23)31.85 ± 7.91 (n = 15) P = NS
    SF-12 MCS (mean ± SD)43.38 ± 12.71 (n = 23)41.90 ± 11.66 (n = 15) P = NS
    • Abbreviations: ACF, anterior cervical diskectomy or corpectomy with interbody fusion; miPCD, minimally invasive posterior cervical decompression; NS, not significant.

    • View popup
    Table 6

    Operative data

    miPCD (n = 35)ACF (n = 28)Statistical significance
    No. of levels decompressed (mean ± SD)2.1 ± 0.91.5 ± 0.8 P <.05
    Fusion (n)1 (3.0%)28 (100%) P <.05
    Foraminotomy (n)14 (40%)17 (61%) P = NS
    Instrumentation (n)1 (3.0%)27 (96%) P < .05
    IVF (mean ± SD) (mL)2377 ± 6932330 ± 724 P = NS
    Urine output (mean ± SD) (mL)384 ± 243400 ± 309 P = NS
    Estimated blood loss (mean ± SD) (mL)98 ± 131103 ± 127 P = NS
    Blood transfusion (n)1 (3.0%)0 (0.0%) P = NS
    CSF leak (n)0 (0.0%)0 (0.0%) P = NS
    Procedure time (mean ± SD) (min)187 ± 80 (n = 32)164 ± 56 (n = 27) P = NS
    Case time (mean ± SD) (min)270 ± 85 (n = 32)243 ± 59 (n = 27) P = NS
    Wound complications (n)0 (0.0%)1 (3.5%) P = NS
    Need for further surgery (n)0 (0.0%)2 (7.0%) P = NS
    • Abbreviations: ACF, anterior cervical diskectomy or corpectomy with interbody fusion; CSF, cerebrospinal fluid; IVF, intravenous fluid; miPCD, minimally invasive posterior cervical decompression; NS, not significant.

    • View popup
    Table 7

    Length of stay and disposition

    miPCD (n = 35)ACF (n = 28)Statistical significance
    Length of stay (mean ± SD) (d)2.0 ± 1.71.9 ± 1.2 P = NS
    Discharge home (n)24 (68.5%)26 (93%) P < .05
    • Abbreviations: ACF, anterior cervical diskectomy or corpectomy with interbody fusion; miPCD, minimally invasive posterior cervical decompression; NS, not significant.

    • View popup
    Table 8

    Perioperative change in NDI

    Follow-up periodmiPCDACFStatistical significance
    6mo P = NS
     No. of patients1813
     Change in NDI (mean ± SD)−15.10 ± 14.90−11.76 ± 16.73
     Success rate44%31%
    1y P = NS
     No. of patients2113
     Change in NDI (mean ± SD)−9.42 ± 15.96−10.69 ± 18.98
     Success rate38%31%
    ≥2y P < .05
     No. of patients1211
     Change in NDI (mean ± SD)−10.41 ± 14.65−24.36 ± 15.76
     Length (mean ± SD) (y)2.9 ± 1.02.4 ± 0.7
     Success rate42%72%
    Last P = NS
     No. of patients2722
     Change in NDI (mean ± SD)−9.22 ± 13.45−14.77 ± 18.57
     Length (mean ± SD) (y)1.8 ± 1.21.7 ± 1.0
     Success rate33%50%
    • Abbreviations: ACF, anterior cervical diskectomy or corpectomy with interbody fusion; miPCD, minimally invasive posterior cervical decompression; NS, not significant.

    • View popup
    Table 9

    Threshold analysis for NDI

    Follow-up periodmiPCDACFStatistical significance
    6mo P = NS
     No. of patients2118
     NDI (mean ± SD)26.47 ± 24.5627.55 ± 17.29
     Success rate71%72%
    1y P = NS
     No. of patients2818
     NDI (mean ± SD)34.28 ± 24.2235.00 ± 21.50
     Success rate61%61%
    ≥2 y P < .05
     No. of patients1513
     NDI (mean ± SD)41.06 ± 21.2620.61 ± 14.77
     Length (mean ± SD) (y)2.6 ± 1.12.5 ± 0.8
     Success rate60%92%
    Last P = NS
     No. of patients3528
     NDI (mean ± SD)32.48 ± 21.0631.51 ± 21.18
     Length (mean ± SD) (y)1.7 ± 1.21.7 ± 1.0
     Success rate69%68%
    • Abbreviations: ACF, anterior cervical diskectomy or corpectomy with interbody fusion; miPCD, minimally invasive posterior cervical decompression; NS, not significant.

    • View popup
    Table 10

    Perioperative change in neck VAS score

    Follow-up periodmiPCDACFStatistical significance
    6mo P = NS
     No. of patients1610
     Neck VAS score (mean ± SD)−2.03 ± 2.64−2.29 ± 1.65
     Success rate62.5%70%
    1y P = NS
     No. of patients2011
     Neck VAS score (mean ± SD)−1.93 ± 3.14−2.39 ± 3.14
     Success rate45%45%
    ≥2y P = NS
     No. of patients117
     Neck VAS score (mean ± SD)−1.08 ± 3.73−3.68 ± 3.37
     Length (mean ± SD) (y)2.8 ± 1.02.2 ± 0.4
     Success rate45%85%
    Last P = NS
     No. of patients2419
     Neck VAS score (mean ± SD)−1.65 ± 3.11−2.67 ± 3.00
     Length (mean ± SD) (y)1.8 ± 1.21.4 ± 0.8
     Success rate42%63%
    • Abbreviations: ACF, anterior cervical diskectomy or corpectomy with interbody fusion; miPCD, minimally invasive posterior cervical decompression; NS, not significant.

    • View popup
    Table 11

    Threshold analysis for neck VAS score

    Follow-up periodmiPCDACFStatistical significance
    6 mo P = NS
     No. of patients2017
     Neck VAS score (mean ± SD)2.77 ± 2.982.23 ± 2.47
     Success rate70%82%
    1y P = NS
     No. of patients2818
     Neck VAS score (mean ± SD)2.70 ± 2.802.36 ± 2.37
     Success rate75%78%
    ≥2 y P = NS
     No. of patients1512
     Neck VAS score (mean ± SD)3.28 ± 3.151.37 ± 2.05
     Length (mean ± SD)2.7 ± 0.9 y2.6 ± 0.8 y
     Success rate66%91%
    Last P = NS
     No. of patients3528
     Neck VAS score (mean ± SD)2.62 ± 2.812.21 ± 2.46
     Length (mean ± SD)1.7 ± 1.1 y1.6 ± 1.0 y
     Success rate71%82%
    • Abbreviations: ACF, anterior cervical diskectomy or corpectomy with interbody fusion; miPCD, minimally invasive posterior cervical decompression; NS, not significant.

    • View popup
    Table 12

    Patient satisfaction index

    Follow-up periodmiPCDACFStatistical significance
    6 mo P = NS
     No. of patients1716
     Patient satisfaction index (mean ± SD)4.29 ± 0.984.0 ± 0.96
    1y P = NS
     No. of patients2817
     Patient satisfaction index (mean ± SD)3.80 ± 1.203.76 ± 1.25
    ≥2 y P = NS
     No. of patients1412
     Patient satisfaction index (mean ± SD)3.92 ± 1.494.25 ± 0.86
     Length (mean ± SD) (y)2.7 ± 1.02.6 ± 0.8
    Last P = NS
     No. of patients3528
     Patient satisfaction index (mean ± SD)4.00 ± 1.183.82 ± 1.18
     Length (mean ± SD) (y)1.7 ± 1.11.6 ± 1.0
    • Abbreviations: ACF, anterior cervical diskectomy or corpectomy with interbody fusion; miPCD, minimally invasive posterior cervical decompression; NS, not significant.

    • View popup
    Table 13

    Perioperative change in SF-12 PCS

    Follow-up periodmiPCDACFStatistical significance
    6 mo P = NS
     No. of patients1010
     SF-12 PCS (mean ± SD)7.4 ± 9.93.6 ± 9.3
    1y P = NS
     No. of patients176
     SF-12 PCS (mean ± SD)2.8 ± 10.76.3 ± 7.2
    ≥2 y P = NS
     No. of patients98
     SF-12 PCS (mean ± SD)4.8 ± 8.45.0 ± 10.3
     Length (mean ± SD) (y)2.9 ± 1.22.0 ± 0.8
    Last P = NS
     No. of patients2315
     Mean ± SD3.9 ± 9.35.7 ± 10.4
     Length (mean ± SD) (y)1.7 ± 1.21.4 ± 0.9
    • Abbreviations: ACF, anterior cervical diskectomy or corpectomy with interbody fusion; miPCD, minimally invasive posterior cervical decompression; NS, not significant.

    • View popup
    Table 14

    Perioperative change in SF-12 MCS

    Follow-up periodmiPCDACFStatistical significance
    6 mo P = NS
     No. of patients1010
     SF-12 MCS (mean ± SD)5.85 ± 14.722.34 ± 12.79
    1y P = NS
     No. of patients176
     SF-12 MCS (mean ± SD)6.0 ± 11.075.48 ± 17.6
    ≥2 y P = NS
     No. of patients98
     SF-12 MCS (mean ± SD)7.83 ± 11.2510.28 ± 11.53
     Length (mean ± SD) (y)2.9 ± 1.22.3 ± 0.4
    Last P = NS
     No. of patients2315
     SF-12 MCS (mean ± SD)5.14 ± 10.998.70 ± 12.11
     Length (mean ± SD) (y)1.7 ± 1.31.5 ± 0.9
    • Abbreviations: ACF, anterior cervical diskectomy or corpectomy with interbody fusion; miPCD, minimally invasive posterior cervical decompression; NS, not significant.

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

International Journal of Spine Surgery
Vol. 6
1 Jan 2012
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on International Journal of Spine Surgery.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
The effect of minimally invasive posterior cervical approaches versus open anterior approaches on neck pain and disability
(Your Name) has sent you a message from International Journal of Spine Surgery
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the International Journal of Spine Surgery web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
The effect of minimally invasive posterior cervical approaches versus open anterior approaches on neck pain and disability
Jeffrey A. Steinberg, John W. German
International Journal of Spine Surgery Jan 2012, 6 55-61; DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsp.2011.11.003

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
The effect of minimally invasive posterior cervical approaches versus open anterior approaches on neck pain and disability
Jeffrey A. Steinberg, John W. German
International Journal of Spine Surgery Jan 2012, 6 55-61; DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsp.2011.11.003
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Multilevel extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF) and osteotomies for 3-dimensional severe deformity: 25 consecutive cases
  • Pedicle violation and Navigational errors in pedicle screw insertion using the intraoperative O-arm: A preliminary report
  • Strategy for salvage pedicle screw placement: A technical note
Show more Full Length Article

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • cervical spine
  • fusion
  • minimally invasive
  • neck pain
  • outcome
  • spine

Content

  • Current Issue
  • Latest Content
  • Archive

More Information

  • About IJSS
  • About ISASS
  • Privacy Policy

More

  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Feedback

Other Services

  • Author Instructions
  • Join ISASS
  • Reprints & Permissions

© 2025 International Journal of Spine Surgery

International Journal of Spine Surgery Online ISSN: 2211-4599

Powered by HighWire