Subsidence following cervical discectomy and implant-to-bone ratio.

Tytuł:: Subsidence following cervical discectomy and implant-to-bone ratio.
Autorzy:: Godlewski B; Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, With Spinal Surgery Ward. Scanmed St. Raphael Hospital, ul. Adama Bochenka 12, 30-693, Cracow, Poland. .
Bebenek A; Faculty of Medicine, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Cracow, Poland.
Dominiak M; Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, With Spinal Surgery Ward. Scanmed St. Raphael Hospital, ul. Adama Bochenka 12, 30-693, Cracow, Poland.
Karpinski G; Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, With Spinal Surgery Ward. Scanmed St. Raphael Hospital, ul. Adama Bochenka 12, 30-693, Cracow, Poland.
Cieslik P; Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Military Institute of Medicine, Warsaw, Poland.
Pawelczyk T; Department of Affective and Psychotic Disorders, Medical University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland.
Źródło:: BMC musculoskeletal disorders [BMC Musculoskelet Disord] 2022 Aug 04; Vol. 23 (1), pp. 750. Date of Electronic Publication: 2022 Aug 04.
Typ publikacji:: Journal Article; Randomized Controlled Trial
Język:: English
Imprint Name(s):: Original Publication: London : BioMed Central, [2000-
MeSH Terms:: Spinal Fusion*/adverse effects
Spinal Fusion*/methods
Cervical Vertebrae/diagnostic imaging ; Cervical Vertebrae/surgery ; Diskectomy/adverse effects ; Diskectomy/methods ; Humans ; Ketones ; Polyethylene Glycols ; Prostheses and Implants/adverse effects ; Treatment Outcome
References:: Orthopedics. 2016 May 1;39(3):e526-31. (PMID: 27135446)
Cancer. 1950 Jan;3(1):32-5. (PMID: 15405679)
Ortop Traumatol Rehabil. 2020 Aug 31;22(4):213-220. (PMID: 32986004)
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2014 Jul 15;39(16):1280-7. (PMID: 24827519)
J Clin Neurosci. 2018 Jun;52:92-99. (PMID: 29656879)
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2015 Jun;157(6):1063-8. (PMID: 25833304)
Eur Spine J. 2015 Dec;24(12):2832-40. (PMID: 25524227)
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2016 Feb;158(2):349-55. (PMID: 26620448)
Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2016 Mar;142:132-136. (PMID: 26852320)
ScientificWorldJournal. 2014;2014:398396. (PMID: 25110734)
J Clin Neurosci. 2016 Nov;33:83-88. (PMID: 27450282)
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2014 Oct;134(10):1343-51. (PMID: 25099076)
Epidemiology. 2005 Jan;16(1):73-81. (PMID: 15613948)
Eur Spine J. 2008 May;17(5):698-705. (PMID: 18301927)
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000 Jan;25(1):41-5. (PMID: 10647159)
Eur Spine J. 2003 Oct;12(5):513-6. (PMID: 12827473)
Eur Spine J. 2007 Sep;16(9):1395-400. (PMID: 17221174)
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2020 Jan;162(1):89-99. (PMID: 31758260)
Clin Spine Surg. 2017 Jun;30(5):E648-E655. (PMID: 28525492)
Surg Neurol. 2004 Nov;62(5):378-85, discussion 385-6. (PMID: 15518835)
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2022 Jun;164(6):1501-1507. (PMID: 35471708)
Patient Saf Surg. 2014 Nov 07;8(1):43. (PMID: 25408710)
Br J Neurosurg. 2005 Dec;19(6):469-74. (PMID: 16574558)
J Bone Miner Res. 1997 Jan;12(1):89-95. (PMID: 9240730)
Eur Spine J. 2012 Jul;21(7):1374-82. (PMID: 22205113)
J Clin Neurosci. 2012 Dec;19(12):1673-8. (PMID: 23084624)
Neurosurg Rev. 2018 Jan;41(1):267-274. (PMID: 28374128)
Neurosurgery. 2006 Mar;58(3):502-8; discussion 502-8. (PMID: 16528190)
J Spinal Disord Tech. 2014 Feb;27(1):1-10. (PMID: 24441059)
Clin Orthop Surg. 2011 Mar;3(1):16-23. (PMID: 21369474)
Global Spine J. 2022 May;12(4):668-676. (PMID: 33043700)
J Neurosurg Spine. 2006 Jun;4(6):447-53. (PMID: 16776355)
Contributed Indexing:: Keywords: Cage size; Polyetheretherketone (PEEK); Radiological measurements; Subsidence; Titanium-coated PEEK
Substance Nomenclature:: 0 (Ketones)
3WJQ0SDW1A (Polyethylene Glycols)
Entry Date(s):: Date Created: 20220804 Date Completed: 20220808 Latest Revision: 20220808
Update Code:: 20240104
PubMed Central ID:: PMC9351094
DOI:: 10.1186/s12891-022-05698-8
PMID:: 35927645
: Czasopismo naukowe

Pełny tekst

Background: Implant subsidence is an undesirable effect after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). We investigated the relation between the rate of implant subsidence and the ratio of the implant surface area to the surface area of the adjacent bone.
Methods: We operated 170 disc spaces in a group of 104 patients. Two types of implants were used: 1) PEEK (polyetheretherketone) cages and 2) titanium-coated (TC) PEEK cages. Patients were randomised to receive a specific implant using a randomisation table. All implants had a surface area of 1.61 cm 2 . Based on computed tomography images, bone surface areas were calculated for vertebral bodies immediately adjacent to the interbody implants. The implant-to-bone surface ratio was then calculated for each disc space. Implant subsidence was assessed over 12 months of follow-up, and associations between implant subsidence, the type of implant, and the implant-to-bone surface ratio were investigated.
Results: Twelve months after the surgery, computed tomography was performed on 86 patients (144 disc spaces). Furthermore, in 166 disc spaces and 102 patients, conventional radiographs were obtained. Subsidence was observed in 21% of the examined intervertebral spaces, and it was more frequently associated with higher values of bone surface area and lower values of the implant-to-bone surface ratio. The type of implant (PEEK vs TC-PEEK cages) did not significantly influence the rate of implant subsidence.
Conclusions: Implant subsidence was significantly related to the value of a coefficient representing the ratio of the implant's surface area to the bone surface area of the adjacent vertebral bodies, with subsidence occurring significantly more rarely for coefficient values ≥ 0.37.
(© 2022. The Author(s).)

Zaloguj się, aby uzyskać dostęp do pełnego tekstu.

Informacja