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

Comparison of the recovery rate of visual analog scale and post-traumatic neck scores between groups.ACDF anterior C2/3 discectomy and interbody fusion, VAS visual analog scale, PTNC post-traumatic neck scores.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

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

Fig3: Comparison of the recovery rate of visual analog scale and post-traumatic neck scores between groups.ACDF anterior C2/3 discectomy and interbody fusion, VAS visual analog scale, PTNC post-traumatic neck scores.

Mentions: Both groups showed a significant improvement in VAS score at final follow-up (Table 2), with an improvement of 4.9 points in the ACDF with PEEK cage group (P < 0.001) and 4.4 points in the ACDF with plating group (P < 0.001). Similar trend was also found in PTNC score, with an improvement of 51.1 points in the ACDF with PEEK cage group (P < 0.001) and 45.1 points in the ACDF with plating group (P < 0.001, Table 2). The differences between the groups with regard to the recovery rate of VAS and PTNC at the final follow-up were not significant (P > 0.05, Figure 3).Figure 3


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)

Comparison of the recovery rate of visual analog scale and post-traumatic neck scores between groups.ACDF anterior C2/3 discectomy and interbody fusion, VAS visual analog scale, PTNC post-traumatic neck scores.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

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

Fig3: Comparison of the recovery rate of visual analog scale and post-traumatic neck scores between groups.ACDF anterior C2/3 discectomy and interbody fusion, VAS visual analog scale, PTNC post-traumatic neck scores.
Mentions: Both groups showed a significant improvement in VAS score at final follow-up (Table 2), with an improvement of 4.9 points in the ACDF with PEEK cage group (P < 0.001) and 4.4 points in the ACDF with plating group (P < 0.001). Similar trend was also found in PTNC score, with an improvement of 51.1 points in the ACDF with PEEK cage group (P < 0.001) and 45.1 points in the ACDF with plating group (P < 0.001, Table 2). The differences between the groups with regard to the recovery rate of VAS and PTNC at the final follow-up were not significant (P > 0.05, Figure 3).Figure 3

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