Limits...
Anterior-only stabilization using cage versus plating with bone autograft for the treatment of type II/IIA Hangman's fracture combined with intervertebral disc injury.

Wei F, Pan X, Zhou Z, Cui S, Zhong R, Wang L, Gao M, Chen N, Liang Z, Zou X, Huang S, Liu S - J Orthop Surg Res (2015)

Bottom Line: Perioperative parameters were compared.The operative time and blood loss were significantly less in the ACDF with cage group compared with that in the ACDF with plating group (P < 0.05).All patients recovered without any adverse effects.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Spine Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital and Orthopedic Research Institute of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China. suifeng720@163.com.

ABSTRACT

Background: Anterior C2/3 discectomy and interbody fusion (ACDF) with plating is increasingly performed as the primary treatment of unstable Hangman's fracture; however, plate-related complications, such as screw back-out, plate fracture and soft-tissue injury, is not uncommon. Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage has now been developed to provide initial stability before fusion; however, whether and how ACDF with PEEK cage offer better clinical results compared with ACDF with plating in management of Hangman's fracture remains unknown. This study compares the efficacy of ACDF with plating to that of ACDF with PEEK cage in management of type II/IIA Hangman's fractures (according to Levine and Edwards classification) retrospectively.

Methods: From February 2006 to March 2012, a total of 21 patients with type II/IIA Hangman's fractures combined with intervertebral disc injury underwent ACDF with PEEK cage, and 28 patients underwent ACDF with plating. Perioperative parameters were compared. The average follow-up period was 50.3 months (range 27-76 months). The clinical outcome (visual analog scale (VAS), American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) scale, and clinical post-traumatic neck score (PTNC)) and radiological outcome (translation of C2, local kyphotic angle (LKA), and fusion status of C2/3) was compared retrospectively.

Results: The operative time and blood loss were significantly less in the ACDF with cage group compared with that in the ACDF with plating group (P < 0.05). All patients showed neurological recovery and achieved solid fusion. There were no significant differences in the clinical and radiological outcomes at final follow-up between groups, except in the LKA and the correction loss rate of LKA which were higher in the ACDF with plating group (P < 0.05). Donor-site pain occurred in two patients (10.1%) within 6 months after operation in the ACDF with plating group and none in the ACDF with cage group. All patients recovered without any adverse effects.

Conclusions: ACDF with PEEK cage is effective and reliable in management of type II/IIA Hangman's fractures and is more cost-effective due to shorter operative time and less blood loss requirements.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Diagram showing the local kyphotic angle and translation. α is the angle between inferior border of C2 and C3. β is the distance between posterior boarders of C2 and C3.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4362826&req=5

Fig2: Diagram showing the local kyphotic angle and translation. α is the angle between inferior border of C2 and C3. β is the distance between posterior boarders of C2 and C3.

Mentions: Routine anteroposterior and lateral X-ray films were performed for all the patients before and immediately after surgery, at 3, 6, 12 months, and those with the patient upright at the final follow-up. Local kyphotic angle (LKA) of C2/3 and the anterior translation (AT) of C2 (Figure 2) were measured on X-ray films. The LKA was defined as the angle formed by lines drawn along the inferior endplate of axis and the inferior endplate of C3 [27]. AT was measured as the distance between parallel lines drawn through the posterior border of C3 and the inferior endplate of C2 [28]. Measurements were done on digital radiographs with inbuilt software to measure distance and angles up to the accuracy of 0.01 mm and 0.1° respectively (Philips DICOM Viewer R2.5, Philips Medical Systems Nederland B.V., Best, The Netherlands).The correction of each radiological parameter was calculated by subtracting preoperative parameter from that after operation. The correction loss is the difference between initial postoperative and the parameter at the final follow-up evaluation. The relative percentage of correction loss was calculated as the quotient of the total correction loss over the total correction [29].Figure 2


Anterior-only stabilization using cage versus plating with bone autograft for the treatment of type II/IIA Hangman's fracture combined with intervertebral disc injury.

Wei F, Pan X, Zhou Z, Cui S, Zhong R, Wang L, Gao M, Chen N, Liang Z, Zou X, Huang S, Liu S - J Orthop Surg Res (2015)

Diagram showing the local kyphotic angle and translation. α is the angle between inferior border of C2 and C3. β is the distance between posterior boarders of C2 and C3.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4362826&req=5

Fig2: Diagram showing the local kyphotic angle and translation. α is the angle between inferior border of C2 and C3. β is the distance between posterior boarders of C2 and C3.
Mentions: Routine anteroposterior and lateral X-ray films were performed for all the patients before and immediately after surgery, at 3, 6, 12 months, and those with the patient upright at the final follow-up. Local kyphotic angle (LKA) of C2/3 and the anterior translation (AT) of C2 (Figure 2) were measured on X-ray films. The LKA was defined as the angle formed by lines drawn along the inferior endplate of axis and the inferior endplate of C3 [27]. AT was measured as the distance between parallel lines drawn through the posterior border of C3 and the inferior endplate of C2 [28]. Measurements were done on digital radiographs with inbuilt software to measure distance and angles up to the accuracy of 0.01 mm and 0.1° respectively (Philips DICOM Viewer R2.5, Philips Medical Systems Nederland B.V., Best, The Netherlands).The correction of each radiological parameter was calculated by subtracting preoperative parameter from that after operation. The correction loss is the difference between initial postoperative and the parameter at the final follow-up evaluation. The relative percentage of correction loss was calculated as the quotient of the total correction loss over the total correction [29].Figure 2

Bottom Line: Perioperative parameters were compared.The operative time and blood loss were significantly less in the ACDF with cage group compared with that in the ACDF with plating group (P < 0.05).All patients recovered without any adverse effects.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Spine Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital and Orthopedic Research Institute of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China. suifeng720@163.com.

ABSTRACT

Background: Anterior C2/3 discectomy and interbody fusion (ACDF) with plating is increasingly performed as the primary treatment of unstable Hangman's fracture; however, plate-related complications, such as screw back-out, plate fracture and soft-tissue injury, is not uncommon. Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage has now been developed to provide initial stability before fusion; however, whether and how ACDF with PEEK cage offer better clinical results compared with ACDF with plating in management of Hangman's fracture remains unknown. This study compares the efficacy of ACDF with plating to that of ACDF with PEEK cage in management of type II/IIA Hangman's fractures (according to Levine and Edwards classification) retrospectively.

Methods: From February 2006 to March 2012, a total of 21 patients with type II/IIA Hangman's fractures combined with intervertebral disc injury underwent ACDF with PEEK cage, and 28 patients underwent ACDF with plating. Perioperative parameters were compared. The average follow-up period was 50.3 months (range 27-76 months). The clinical outcome (visual analog scale (VAS), American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) scale, and clinical post-traumatic neck score (PTNC)) and radiological outcome (translation of C2, local kyphotic angle (LKA), and fusion status of C2/3) was compared retrospectively.

Results: The operative time and blood loss were significantly less in the ACDF with cage group compared with that in the ACDF with plating group (P < 0.05). All patients showed neurological recovery and achieved solid fusion. There were no significant differences in the clinical and radiological outcomes at final follow-up between groups, except in the LKA and the correction loss rate of LKA which were higher in the ACDF with plating group (P < 0.05). Donor-site pain occurred in two patients (10.1%) within 6 months after operation in the ACDF with plating group and none in the ACDF with cage group. All patients recovered without any adverse effects.

Conclusions: ACDF with PEEK cage is effective and reliable in management of type II/IIA Hangman's fractures and is more cost-effective due to shorter operative time and less blood loss requirements.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus