medigraphic.com
ISSN 2225-4676 (Electronic)

2019, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Rev Cubana Neurol Neurocir 2019; 9 (1)

Simple discectomy and discectomy plus fusion with polymethylmethacrylate discs for the treatment of cervical herniated disc

Lacerda GÁJ, Mazorra PMJ, Mederos VF, Quintana ZJ, Concepción RYA, Valdivieso CGP, Obregón CGM

Language: Spanish
References: 30
Page: 1-17
PDF size: 290.34 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: To compare the results between discectomy plus fusion with polymethylmethacrylate disc grafts and simple discectomy for the surgical treatment of cervical disc herniation.
Methods: A case-control study was carried out. Two groups were formed with patients operated on for cervical disc herniation. Group I (study) included 131 patients who underwent discectomy plus fusion with polymethylmethacrylate discs from January 2007 to December 2017. In group II (historical control), 131 patients were included. They had undergone simple discectomy from January 1996 to December 2006. All of them were operated on at Roberto Rodríguez Fernández Teaching General Hospital in Morón, Ciego de Ávila, in the same operating room, with the same technological availabilities and by the same principal surgeon. All patients were diagnosed with magnetic resonance imaging; the pain was evaluated in the pre- and postoperative period through the Visual Analogue Scale, and the results were categorized according to Ebelin scale. For data analysis, the independence technique based on Chi-square distribution was used to determine the presence of statistical association between categorical variables and, in addition, Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was applied to compare the distributions of the two samples.
Results: The radicular manifestations predominated in both groups, 85.5 % in group I and 83.97 % in group II. In-group I, the involvement of two or more spaces predominated, while in-group II the involvement of only one space predominated. Only 12.21 % in-group I showed complications, compared to group II, 34.35 %. In both groups, the adjacent space syndrome predominated.
Conclusions: There were no statistically significant differences between the groups. Polymethyl methacrylate can be used to create artificial disc graft without risks for patients. Cervical fusion with polymethyl methacrylate discs can be used in other neurosurgery services that do not have availability of other materials for the manufacture of artificial discs.


REFERENCES

  1. Vlasak A, Horinek D, Sames M. Radiographic changes after anterior cervical discectomy and their clinical impact. Acta Neurochir. 2014;156:2153-4.

  2. Plötz GM, Benini A, Kramer M. Micro-technological anterior discectomy without fusion in cervical disk displacement with radicular symptoms. Orthopäde. 1996;25:546-53.

  3. Sonntag VKH, Klara P. Controversy in spine care. Is fusion necessary after anterior cervical discectomy? Spine. 1996;21:1111-3.

  4. Baird EO, Egorova NN, McAnany SJ, Qureshi SA, Hecht AC, Cho SK. National trends in outpatient surgical treatment of degenerative cervical spine disease. Global Spine J. 2014;4:143-50.

  5. Burkhardt JK, Mannion AF, Marbacher S. A comparative effectiveness study of patient-rated and radiographic outcome after 2 types of decompression with fusion for spondylotic myelopathy: anterior cervical discectomy versus corpectomy. Neurosurg Focus. 2013;35:E4.

  6. Quinn JC, Kiely PD, Lebl DR, Hughes AP. Anterior surgical treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy: review article. HSS J. 2015;11:15-25.

  7. Chotai S, Parker SL, Sielatycki JA. Impact of old age on patient-report outcomes and cost utility for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion surgery for degenerative spine disease. Eur Spine J. 2017;26:1236-45.

  8. Massel DH, Mayo BC, Bohl DD. Improvements in neck and arm pain following an anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2017;42(14):E825-E832. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001979

  9. Iyer S, Kim HJ. Cervical radiculopathy. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2016;9:272-80.

  10. Kim HJ, Nemani VM, Piyaskulkaew C, Vargas SR, Riew KD. Cervical radiculopathy: incidence and treatment of 1,420 consecutive cases. Asian Spine J. 2016;10:231-7.

  11. Bärlocher CB, Barth A, Krauss JK, Binggeli R, Seiler RW. Comparative evaluation of microdiscectomy only, autograft fusion, polymethylmethacrylate interposition, and threaded titanium cage fusion for treatment of single-level cervical disc disease: a prospective randomized study in 125 patients. Neurosurg Focus. 2002;12(1):4.

  12. Lotfinia I, Sayyahmelli S, Gavam M. Efficacy of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion on Adjacent Disc Height. Neurosurg Q. 2011;21:137-42.

  13. Matge G. Cervical cage fusion with 5 different implants: 250 cases. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2006;144:539-49.

  14. Grote W, Röttgen P. Die ventrale Fusion bei der zervikalen Osteochondrose und ihre Behandlungsergebnisse. Acta Neurochir. 1967;16:218-40.

  15. González-Darder JM. Evolución de la artrodesis cervical posdiscectomía: injerto óseo, placa, caja intersomática y placa-caja. Neurocirugía. 2006;17:140-7.

  16. Wang MC, Kreuter W, Wolfla CE, Maiman DJ, Deyo RA. Trends and variations in cervical spine surgery in the United States: Medicare beneficiaries, 1992 to 2005. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009;34:955-61.

  17. Santos Coto ICA, Rubino Ruiz R, Rivas Hernández R, Fleites Marrero E. Uso del hueso bovino en la fusión cervical sin instrumentación. Revista Cubana de Ortopedia y Traumatología. 2011;25(1):69-79.

  18. Pereira Riverón R, de Jongh Cobo E, Bermejo Sánchez JC, Fernández Benítez SA. Hidroxiapatita en la estabilización y fusión intervertebral cervical baja. Rev Cubana Cir. 1997;36(3).

  19. Farfan HF, Henry F. Mechanical disorders of the low back. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger;1973.

  20. Lacerda Gallardo AJ, Pérez Leal S, Martín Pardo JC, Montero Álvarez R, Martín Chaviano D, Quintana Záez J. Discectomía cervical microquirúrgica asistida por endoscopía: presentación de dos casos. Rev Cubana Neurol Neurocir [Internet]. 2014 [citado: 4/11/2018];4(1):53-6. Disponible en: http://www.revneuro.sld.cu/index.php/neu/article/download/123/pdf

  21. De Rooij JD, Gadjradj PS, Soria van Hoeve JS, Harhangi BS. Anterior cervical discectomy without fusion for a symptomatic cervical disk herniation. Acta Neurochir. 2017;159:1283-7.

  22. Ebeling V, Reichenberg W, Reulen HJ. Results of microsurgical lumbar discectomy: review of 485 patients. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 1986;81:45-52.

  23. Cloward RB. The anterior approach for removal of ruptured cervical disks. J Neurosurg. 1958;15:602-17.

  24. Adogwa O, Elsamadicy AA, Vuong VD, Mehta AI, Vasquez RA, Cheng Jarlos A, et al. Immediate postoperative pain scores predict neck pain profile up to 1 year following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Global Spine Journal. 2017;8:231-6.

  25. Ting-kui W, Bei-yu W, Ming-dan D, Ying H, Xin R, Hua C, et al. A comparison of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion combined with cervical disc arthroplasty and cervical disc arthroplasty for the treatment of skip-level cervical degenerative disc disease. Medicine. 2017;96:41.

  26. Ting-kui W, Bei-yu W, Yang M, Chen D, Yi Y, Ji-gang L, et al. Multilevel cervical disc replacement versus multilevel anterior discectomy and fusion. A Meta-analysis. Medicine. 2017;96:16.

  27. Zhao-Ming Z, Shi-Yuan Z, Jing-Shen Z, Qian W, Jian-Ting C. Reoperation After Cervical Disc Arthroplasty Versus Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Meta-analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016;474:1307-16.

  28. Gandhi AA, Kode S, DeVries NA. Biomechanical analysis of cervical disc replacement and fusion using single level, two level, and hybrid constructs. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2015;40:1578-85.

  29. Fay LY, Huang WC, Tsai TY. Differences between arthroplasty and anterior cervical fusion in two-level cervical degenerative disc disease. Eur Spine J. 2014;23:627-34.

  30. Grasso G. Clinical and radiological features of hybrid surgery in multilevel cervical degenerative disc disease. Eur Spine J. 2015;24(Suppl):842-8.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com