Skip to main content
Log in

The effects of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with stand-alone cages at two contiguous levels on cervical alignment and outcomes

  • Clinical Article
  • Published:
Acta Neurochirurgica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) using stand-alone cages is an effective method of treating degenerative disease. However, stand-alone cages are reported to have a relatively high incidence of implant subsidence with secondary kyphotic deformity particularly after multilevel ACDF. The purpose of our article was to investigate clinical and radiological outcomes after ACDF using stand-alone cages, at two contiguous levels, with a particular focus on changes in regional alignment and the correlation between alignment of the operated cervical levels and the entire cervical spine.

Methods

Twenty-seven patients with 54 levels and a mean age of 50.8 years were enrolled between January 2005 and August 2006. They underwent ACDF using polyetheretherketone cages packed with demineralized bone matrix without plate fixation at two contiguous levels. Mean follow-up period was 25.5 months (range, 13–60). Clinical outcome was evaluated using two Visual Analog Scales and the Neck Disability Index (NDI). We assessed fusion, regional alignment (RA) of the operated levels and cervical global alignment (GA) preoperatively in the immediate 1-week postoperative period and at the final follow-up. An interspinous distance ≥2 mm was used as an indicator of pseudoarthrosis at each level.

Findings

All patients showed improvements in clinical outcome, with 96% of patients showing mild NDI scores (<14). Radiological solid fusion was obtained at 48 of 54 levels (88.9%) and in 21 of 27 patients (77.8%). Lower cervical levels were significantly more vulnerable to pseudoarthrosis (100%). Fusion rate had no significant correlation with outcome (p > 0.05). RA of the operated levels was improved at the final follow-up compared with preoperatively in 76% of patients, although it had decreased compared with the immediate postoperative period due to subsidence in 84% of patients. In total, 80.8% of patients showed improvements in GA. Furthermore, improvements in RA showed a significant positive correlation with those in GA (p = 0.001), although improvement in RA and GA did not correlate significantly with clinical outcome (p > 0.05).

Conclusions

Though some degree of subsidence occurred in most cases, RA had improved at the last follow-up compared with preoperatively, which contributed to the significant improvement in GA. However, improvement of RA and GA was not correlated with outcomes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Barsa P, Suchomel P (2007) Factors affecting sagittal malalignment due to cage subsidence in standalone cage assisted anterior cervical fusion. Eur Spine J 16:1395–1400

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bartels RHMA, Donk R, Feuth T (2006) Subsidence of stand-alone cervical carbon fiber cages. Neurosurgery 58:502–508

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Cannada LK, Scherping SC, Yoo JU, Jones PK, Emery SE (2003) Pseudoarthrosis of the cervical spine: a comparison of radiographic diagnostic measures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 28:46–51

    Google Scholar 

  4. Cho DY, Lee WY, Sheu PC (2004) Treatment of multilevel cervical fusion with cages. Surg Neurol 62:378–385, discussion 385-376

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Cloward R (2007) The anterior approach for removal of ruptured cervical disks. 1958. J Neurosurg Spine 6:496–511

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Demircan MN, Kutlay AM, Colak A, Kaya S, Tekin T, Kibici K, Ungoren K (2007) Multilevel cervical fusion without plates, screws or autogenous iliac crest bone graft. J Clin Neurosci 14:723–728

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Etebar S, Cahill DW (1999) Risk factors for adjacent-segment failure following lumbar fixation with rigid instrumentation for degenerative instability. J Neurosurg 90:163–169

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Fujibayashi S, Neo M, Nakamura T (2008) Stand-alone interbody cage versus anterior cervical plate for treatment of cervical disc herniation: sequential changes in cage subsidence. J Clin Neurosci 15:1017–1022

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Gercek E, Arlet V, Delisle J, Marchesi D (2003) Subsidence of stand-alone cervical cages in anterior interbody fusion: warning. Eur Spine J 12:513–516

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Heidecke V, Rainov NG, Marx T, Burkert W (2000) Outcome in Cloward anterior fusion for degenerative cervical spinal disease. Acta Neurochir Wien 142:283–291

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Jackson RP, McManus AC (1994) Radiographic analysis of sagittal plane alignment and balance in standing volunteers and patients with low back pain matched for age, sex, and size. A prospective controlled clinical study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 19:1611–1618

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Kaiser M, Mummaneni P, Matz P, Anderson P, Groff M, Heary R, Holly L, Ryken T, Choudhri T, Vresilovic E, Resnick D (2009) Radiographic assessment of cervical subaxial fusion. J Neurosurg Spine 11:221–227

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kaiser MG, Haid RW Jr, Subach BR, Barnes B, Rodts GE Jr (2002) Anterior cervical plating enhances arthrodesis after discectomy and fusion with cortical allograft. Neurosurgery 50:229–236, discussion 236-228

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Katsuura A, Hukuda S, Imanaka T, Miyamoto K, Kanemoto M (1996) Anterior cervical plate used in degenerative disease can maintain cervical lordosis. J Spinal Disord 9:470–476

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Katsuura A, Hukuda S, Saruhashi Y, Mori K (2001) Kyphotic malalignment after anterior cervical fusion is one of the factors promoting the degenerative process in adjacent intervertebral levels. Eur Spine J 10:320–324

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kulkarni A, Hee H, Wong H (2007) Solis cage (PEEK) for anterior cervical fusion: preliminary radiological results with emphasis on fusion and subsidence. Spine J 7:205–209

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kumar MN, Baklanov A, Chopin D (2001) Correlation between sagittal plane changes and adjacent segment degeneration following lumbar spine fusion. Eur Spine J 10:314–319

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lee H, Nicholson L, Adams R, Maher C, Halaki M, Bae S-S (2006) Development and psychometric testing of Korean language versions of 4 neck pain and disability questionnaires. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 31:1841–1845

    Google Scholar 

  19. Oda I, Cunningham BW, Buckley RA, Goebel MJ, Haggerty CJ, Orbegoso CM, McAfee PC (1999) Does spinal kyphotic deformity influence the biomechanical characteristics of the adjacent motion segments? An in vivo animal model. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 24:2139–2146

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Park P, Garton H, Gala V, Hoff J, McGillicuddy J (2004) Adjacent segment disease after lumbar or lumbosacral fusion: review of the literature. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 29:1938–1944

    Google Scholar 

  21. Smith GW, Robinson RA (1958) The treatment of certain cervical-spine disorders by anterior removal of the intervertebral disc and interbody fusion. J Bone Joint Surg 40A:607–624

    Google Scholar 

  22. Thom C, Leheta O, Krauss J, Zevgaridis D (2006) A prospective randomized comparison of rectangular titanium cage fusion and iliac crest autograft fusion in patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy. J Neurosurg Spine 4:1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Topuz K, Colak A, Kaya S, Simşek H, Kutlay M, Demircan M, Velioğlu M (2009) Two-level contiguous cervical disc disease treated with peek cages packed with demineralized bone matrix: results of 3-year follow-up. Eur Spine J 18:238–243

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Vavruch L, Hedlund R, Javid D, Leszniewski W, Shalabi A (2002) A prospective randomized comparison between the cloward procedure and a carbon fiber cage in the cervical spine: a clinical and radiologic study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 27:1694–1701

    Google Scholar 

  25. Wang JC, McDonough PW, Endow KK, Delamarter RB (2000) Increased fusion rates with cervical plating for two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 25:41–45

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Wang JC, McDonough PW, Kanim LE, Endow KK, Delamarter RB (2001) Increased fusion rates with cervical plating for three-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 26:643–646

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Wright IP, Eisenstein SM (2007) Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion without instrumentation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32:772–774, discussion 775

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflicts of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Youn-Kwan Park.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Korean versions of neck disability questionnaires (DOC 42 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Moon, H.J., Kim, J.H., Kim, JH. et al. The effects of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with stand-alone cages at two contiguous levels on cervical alignment and outcomes. Acta Neurochir 153, 559–565 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-010-0879-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-010-0879-z

Keywords

Navigation