scholarly journals A comparison of contiguous two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion using a structural allograft versus a Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage: the results of a three-year follow-up

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ing How Moo ◽  
Carmen Jia Wen Kam ◽  
Maksim Wen Sheng Lai ◽  
William Yeo ◽  
Reuben Chee Cheong Soh
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Peek Cage ◽  
Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Structural Allograft

scholarly journals A Comparison of Contiguous Two-level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion using a Structural Allograft versus a Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Cage: The Results of a Three-Year Follow-up

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
ING HOW MOO ◽  
Carmen Jia Wen Kam ◽  
Maksim Wen Sheng Lai ◽  
William Yeo ◽  
Reuben Chee Cheong Soh
Keyword(s):  
Neck Pain ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Plate Fixation ◽  
Neck Disability Index ◽  
Anterior Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Peek Cage ◽  
Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Structural Allograft ◽  
Cage Subsidence

Abstract Background: Allografts and polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages are the two most commonly used material in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). However, their effectiveness in in two-level ACDF remains controversial. The primary aim of this retrospective study is to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of two-level ACDF with plate fixation using either a structural allograft or a PEEK cage. Methods: From 2010 to 2015, 88 consecutive patients underwent a two-level ACDF of which 53 used an allograft and 35 patients with a PEEK cage. All PEEK cages were filled with local autografts. All clinical outcomes were prospectively collected preoperatively, at six months and at two years after surgery. Clinical efficacy was evaluated using visual analogue scale for neck pain and limb pain, the Neck Pain and Disability Score, Neck Disability Index, Neurogenic Symptom Score, and the Japan Orthopedic Association score. Radiological outcomes were assessed preoperatively, immediately after surgery, and at the final follow-up. Results: A preoperative comparison revealed no difference between the two patient groups in terms of age, gender, body mass index, smoking status, preoperative symptoms, operated levels, and follow-up (mean= 42.8 months). No difference in improvements in the clinical outcome between the two groups was observed. Both groups showed significant improvement in mean disc height, segmental height, and segmental lordosis postoperatively. The fusion rates for PEEK cage was 100% at both levels while the fusion rates for allograft group was 98.1% at cephalad level and 94.2% at caudad level (p>0.05). Subsidence at the cephalad level occurred in 22.9% (8/35) segments in the PEEK group and 7.7% (4/52) segments in the allograft group (p=0.057). At the caudal level, a higher cage subsidence was noted in the PEEK group compared to the allograft group [37.1% (13/35) versus 15.4% (8/52)] (p=0.02). Overall, subsidence was noted in 30% (21/70) of the PEEK group and in 11% (12/104) of the allograft group (p<0.05). Conclusion: The use of PEEK cages resulted in a higher rate of subsidence in two-level ACDF as compared to allograft. Two-level ACDF using either allografts or PEEK cages resulted in similar clinical outcomes, radiological improvements in alignment and fusion rates.

scholarly journals A Comparison of Contiguous Two-level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion using a Structural Allograft versus a Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Cage: The Results of a Three-Year Follow-up

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
ING HOW MOO ◽  
Carmen Jia Wen Kam ◽  
Maksim Wen Sheng Lai ◽  
William Yeo ◽  
Reuben Chee Cheong Soh
Keyword(s):  
Neck Pain ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Plate Fixation ◽  
Neck Disability Index ◽  
Anterior Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Peek Cage ◽  
Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Structural Allograft ◽  
Cage Subsidence

Abstract Background: The effectiveness of graft type in two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with plate fixation remains controversial. The primary aim of this retrospective study is to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of two-level anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) with plate fixation using either a structural allograft or a polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage. Methods: From 2010 to 2015, 88 consecutive patients underwent a two-level ACDF of which 53 used an allograft and 35 patients with a PEEK cage. All clinical outcomes were prospectively collected preoperatively, at six months and at two years after surgery. Clinical efficacy was evaluated using visual analogue scale for neck pain and limb pain, the Neck Pain and Disability Score, Neck Disability Index, Neurogenic Symptom Score, and the Japan Orthopedic Association score. Radiological outcomes were assessed preoperatively, immediately after surgery, and at the final follow-up. Results: A preoperative comparison revealed no difference between the two patient groups in terms of age, gender, body mass index, smoking status, preoperative symptoms, operated levels, and follow-up (mean= 42.8 months). No difference in improvements in the clinical outcome between the two groups was observed. Both groups showed significant improvement in mean disc height, segmental height, and segmental lordosis postoperatively. The fusion rates for PEEK cage was 100% at both levels while the fusion rates for allograft group was 98.1% at cephalad level and 94.2% at caudad level (p>0.05). Subsidence at the cephalad level occurred in 22.9% (8/35) segments in the PEEK group and 7.7% (4/52) segments in the allograft group (p=0.057). At the caudal level, a higher cage subsidence was noted in the PEEK group compared to the allograft group [37.1% (13/35) versus 15.4% (8/52)] (p=0.02). Overall, subsidence was noted in 30% (21/70) of the PEEK group and in 11% (12/104) of the allograft group (p<0.05). Conclusion: The use of PEEK cages resulted in a higher rate of subsidence in two-level ACDF as compared to allograft. Two-level ACDF using either allografts or PEEK cages resulted in similar clinical outcomes, radiological improvements in alignment and fusion rates.

scholarly journals A Comparison of Contiguous Two-level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion using a Structural Allograft versus a Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Cage: The Results of a Three-Year Follow-up

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
ING HOW MOO ◽  
Carmen Jia Wen Kam ◽  
Maksim Wen Sheng Lai ◽  
William Yeo ◽  
Reuben Chee Cheong Soh
Keyword(s):  
Neck Pain ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Plate Fixation ◽  
Neck Disability Index ◽  
Anterior Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Peek Cage ◽  
Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Structural Allograft ◽  
Cage Subsidence

Abstract Background: Allografts and polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages are the two most commonly used material in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). However, their effectiveness in in two-level ACDF remains controversial. The primary aim of this retrospective study is to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of two-level ACDF with plate fixation using either a structural allograft or a PEEK cage. Methods: From 2010 to 2015, 88 consecutive patients underwent a two-level ACDF of which 53 used an allograft and 35 patients with a PEEK cage. All PEEK cages were filled with local autografts. All clinical outcomes were prospectively collected preoperatively, at six months and at two years after surgery. Clinical efficacy was evaluated using visual analogue scale for neck pain and limb pain, the Neck Pain and Disability Score, Neck Disability Index, Neurogenic Symptom Score, and the Japan Orthopedic Association score. Radiological outcomes were assessed preoperatively, immediately after surgery, and at the final follow-up. Results: A preoperative comparison revealed no difference between the two patient groups in terms of age, gender, body mass index, smoking status, preoperative symptoms, operated levels, and follow-up (mean= 42.8 months). No difference in improvements in the clinical outcome between the two groups was observed. Both groups showed significant improvement in mean disc height, segmental height, and segmental lordosis postoperatively. The fusion rates for PEEK cage was 100% at both levels while the fusion rates for allograft group was 98.1% at cephalad level and 94.2% at caudad level (p>0.05). Subsidence at the cephalad level occurred in 22.9% (8/35) segments in the PEEK group and 7.7% (4/52) segments in the allograft group (p=0.057). At the caudal level, a higher cage subsidence was noted in the PEEK group compared to the allograft group [37.1% (13/35) versus 15.4% (8/52)] (p=0.02). Overall, subsidence was noted in 30% (21/70) of the PEEK group and in 11% (12/104) of the allograft group (p<0.05). Conclusion: The use of PEEK cages resulted in a higher rate of subsidence in two-level ACDF as compared to allograft. Two-level ACDF using either allografts or PEEK cages resulted in similar clinical outcomes, radiological improvements in alignment and fusion rates.

scholarly journals A Comparison of Contiguous Two-level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion using a Structural Allograft versus a Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Cage: The Results of a Three-Year Follow-up

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
ING HOW MOO ◽  
Carmen Jia Wen Kam ◽  
Maksim Wen Sheng Lai ◽  
William Yeo ◽  
Reuben Chee Cheong Soh
Keyword(s):  
Neck Pain ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Plate Fixation ◽  
Neck Disability Index ◽  
Anterior Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Peek Cage ◽  
Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Structural Allograft ◽  
Cage Subsidence

Abstract Background: Allografts and polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages are the two most commonly used material in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). However, their effectiveness in in two-level ACDF remains controversial. The primary aim of this retrospective study is to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of two-level ACDF with plate fixation using either a structural allograft or a PEEK cage. Methods: From 2010 to 2015, 88 consecutive patients underwent a two-level ACDF of which 53 used an allograft and 35 patients with a PEEK cage. All PEEK cages were filled with local autografts. All clinical outcomes were prospectively collected preoperatively, at six months and at two years after surgery. Clinical efficacy was evaluated using visual analogue scale for neck pain and limb pain, the Neck Pain and Disability Score, Neck Disability Index, Neurogenic Symptom Score, and the Japan Orthopedic Association score. Radiological outcomes were assessed preoperatively, immediately after surgery, and at the final follow-up. Results: A preoperative comparison revealed no difference between the two patient groups in terms of age, gender, body mass index, smoking status, preoperative symptoms, operated levels, and follow-up (mean= 42.8 months). No difference in improvements in the clinical outcome between the two groups was observed. Both groups showed significant improvement in mean disc height, segmental height, and segmental lordosis postoperatively. The fusion rates for PEEK cage was 100% at both levels while the fusion rates for allograft group was 98.1% at cephalad level and 94.2% at caudad level (p>0.05). Subsidence at the cephalad level occurred in 22.9% (8/35) segments in the PEEK group and 7.7% (4/52) segments in the allograft group (p=0.057). At the caudal level, a higher cage subsidence was noted in the PEEK group compared to the allograft group [37.1% (13/35) versus 15.4% (8/52)] (p=0.02). Overall, subsidence was noted in 30% (21/70) of the PEEK group and in 11% (12/104) of the allograft group (p<0.05). Conclusion: The use of PEEK cages resulted in a higher rate of subsidence in two-level ACDF as compared to allograft. Two-level ACDF using either allografts or PEEK cages resulted in similar clinical outcomes, radiological improvements in alignment and fusion rates.

scholarly journals A Comparison of Contiguous Two-level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion using a Structural Allograft versus a Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Cage: The Results of a Three-Year Follow-up

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
ING HOW MOO ◽  
Carmen Jia Wen Kam ◽  
Maksim Wen Sheng Lai ◽  
William Yeo ◽  
Reuben Chee Cheong Soh
Keyword(s):  
Neck Pain ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Plate Fixation ◽  
Neck Disability Index ◽  
Anterior Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Peek Cage ◽  
Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Structural Allograft ◽  
Cage Subsidence

Abstract Background: Allografts and polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages are the two most commonly used material in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). However, their effectiveness in in two-level ACDF remains controversial. The primary aim of this retrospective study is to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of two-level ACDF with plate fixation using either a structural allograft or a PEEK cage. Methods: From 2010 to 2015, 88 consecutive patients underwent a two-level ACDF of which 53 used an allograft and 35 patients with a PEEK cage. All PEEK cages were filled with local autografts. All clinical outcomes were prospectively collected preoperatively, at six months and at two years after surgery. Clinical efficacy was evaluated using visual analogue scale for neck pain and limb pain, the Neck Pain and Disability Score, Neck Disability Index, Neurogenic Symptom Score, and the Japan Orthopedic Association score. Radiological outcomes were assessed preoperatively, immediately after surgery, and at the final follow-up. Results: A preoperative comparison revealed no difference between the two patient groups in terms of age, gender, body mass index, smoking status, preoperative symptoms, operated levels, and follow-up (mean= 42.8 months). No difference in improvements in the clinical outcome between the two groups was observed. Both groups showed significant improvement in mean disc height, segmental height, and segmental lordosis postoperatively. The fusion rates for PEEK cage was 100% at both levels while the fusion rates for allograft group was 98.1% at cephalad level and 94.2% at caudad level (p>0.05). Subsidence at the cephalad level occurred in 22.9% (8/35) segments in the PEEK group and 7.7% (4/52) segments in the allograft group (p=0.057). At the caudal level, a higher cage subsidence was noted in the PEEK group compared to the allograft group [37.1% (13/35) versus 15.4% (8/52)] (p=0.02). Overall, subsidence was noted in 30% (21/70) of the PEEK group and in 11% (12/104) of the allograft group (p<0.05). Conclusion: The use of PEEK cages resulted in a higher rate of subsidence in two-level ACDF as compared to allograft. Two-level ACDF using either allografts or PEEK cages resulted in similar clinical outcomes, radiological improvements in alignment and fusion rates.

scholarly journals Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion performed using structural allograft or polyetheretherketone: pseudarthrosis and revision surgery rates with minimum 2-year follow-up

2020 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 562-569
Author(s):  
Minghao Wang ◽  
Dean Chou ◽  
Chih-Chang Chang ◽  
Ankit Hirpara ◽  
Yilin Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Revision Surgery ◽  
Plate Fixation ◽  
Anterior Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Anterior Plate ◽  
Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Posterior Surgery ◽  
Structural Allograft ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Surgery Rates

OBJECTIVEBoth structural allograft and PEEK have been used for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). There are reports that PEEK has a higher pseudarthrosis rate than structural allograft. The authors compared pseudarthrosis, revision, subsidence, and loss of lordosis rates in patients with PEEK and structural allograft.METHODSThe authors performed a retrospective review of patients who were treated with ACDF at their hospital between 2005 and 2017. Inclusion criteria were adult patients with either PEEK or structural allograft, anterior plate fixation, and a minimum 2-year follow-up. Exclusion criteria were hybrid PEEK and allograft cases, additional posterior surgery, adjacent corpectomies, infection, tumor, stand-alone or integrated screw and cage devices, bone morphogenetic protein use, or lack of a minimum 2-year follow-up. Demographic variables, number of treated levels, interbody type (PEEK cage vs structural allograft), graft packing material, pseudarthrosis rates, revision surgery rates, subsidence, and cervical lordosis changes were collected. These data were analyzed by Pearson’s chi-square test (or Fisher’s exact test, according to the sample size and expected value) and Student t-test.RESULTSA total of 168 patients (264 levels total, mean follow-up time 39.5 ± 24.0 months) were analyzed. Sixty-one patients had PEEK, and 107 patients had structural allograft. Pseudarthrosis rates for 1-level fusions were 5.4% (PEEK) and 3.4% (allograft) (p > 0.05); 2-level fusions were 7.1% (PEEK) and 8.1% (allograft) (p > 0.05); and ≥ 3-level fusions were 10% (PEEK) and 11.1% (allograft) (p > 0.05). There was no statistical difference in the subsidence magnitude between PEEK and allograft in 1-, 2-, and ≥ 3-level ACDF (p > 0.05). Postoperative lordosis loss was not different between cohorts for 1- and 2-level surgeries.CONCLUSIONSIn 1- and 2-level ACDF with plating involving the same number of fusion levels, there was no statistically significant difference in the pseudarthrosis rate, revision surgery rate, subsidence, and lordosis loss between PEEK cages and structural allograft.

scholarly journals PEEK interbody devices for multilevel anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: association with more than 6-fold higher rates of pseudarthrosis compared to structural allograft

2020 ◽  
Vol 32 (5) ◽  
pp. 696-702 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zoe E. Teton ◽  
Barry Cheaney ◽  
James T. Obayashi ◽  
Khoi D. Than
Keyword(s):  
Logistic Regression ◽  
Data Analysis ◽  
Tobacco Use ◽  
Revision Surgery ◽  
Smoking Status ◽  
Anterior Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Radiographic Evidence ◽  
Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Structural Allograft

OBJECTIVECommon interbody graft options for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) include allograft and polyetheretherketone (PEEK). PEEK has gained popularity due to its radiolucent properties and a modulus of elasticity similar to that of bone. PEEK devices also result in higher billing costs than allograft, which may drive selection. A previous study found a 5-fold higher rate of pseudarthrosis with the use of PEEK devices compared with structural allograft in single-level ACDF. Here the authors report on the occurrence of pseudarthrosis with PEEK devices versus structural allograft in patients who underwent multilevel ACDF.METHODSThe authors retrospectively reviewed 81 consecutive patients who underwent a multilevel ACDF and had radiographic follow-up for at least 1 year. Data were collected on age, sex, BMI, tobacco use, pseudarthrosis, and rate of reoperation for pseudarthrosis. Logistic regression was used for data analysis.RESULTSOf 81 patients, 35 had PEEK implants and 46 had structural allograft. There were no significant differences between age, sex, smoking status, or BMI in the 2 groups. There were 26/35 (74%) patients with PEEK implants who demonstrated radiographic evidence of pseudarthrosis, compared with 5/46 (11%) patients with structural allograft (p < 0.001, OR 22.2). Five patients (14%) with PEEK implants required reoperation for pseudarthrosis, compared with 0 patients with allograft (p = 0.013).CONCLUSIONSThis study reinforces previous findings on 1-level ACDF outcomes and suggests that the use of PEEK in multilevel ACDF results in statistically significantly higher rates of radiographic pseudarthrosis and need for revision surgery than allograft. Surgeons should consider these findings when determining graft options, and reimbursement policies should reflect these discrepancies.

scholarly journals Safety and Efficiency of Biomimetic Nanohydroxyapatite/Polyamide 66 Composite in Rabbits and Primary Use in Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hui Xu ◽  
Yan Wang ◽  
Xiaojing Su ◽  
Xuelian Zhang ◽  
Xuesong Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Spondylosis ◽  
Sagittal Alignment ◽  
Hind Femur ◽  
Anterior Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Peek Cage ◽  
Polyamide 66 ◽  
Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Cage Subsidence ◽  
Cervical Spondylosis Myelopathy

This study was conducted to validate the safety and efficiency of biomimetic nanohydroxyapatite/polyamide 66 (n-HA/PA66) composite in animal model (rabbit) and report its application in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for 4, 12, and 24 weeks. N-HA/PA66 composite was implanted into one-side hind femur defects and the control defects were kept empty as blank controls. A combination of macroscopic and histomorphometric studies was performed up to 24 weeks postoperatively and compared with normal healing. 60 cervical spondylosis myelopathy and radiculopathy patients who were subjected to ACDF using n-HA/PA66 and PEEK cage were involved in this study with six-month minimum follow-up. Their radiographic (cage subsidence, fusion status, and segmental sagittal alignment (SSA)) and clinical (VAS and JOA scales) data before surgery and at each follow-up were recorded and compared. Nanohydroxyapatite/polyamide 66 composite is safe and effective in animal experiment and ACDF.

scholarly journals Evaluation of fusion in a PEEK cage after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion

2015 ◽  
Vol 42 (S1) ◽  
pp. S49-S49
Author(s):  
M Voisin ◽  
F Saunders ◽  
D Yen ◽  
P Fenton
Keyword(s):  
Bone Graft ◽  
Anterior Cervical Discectomy ◽  
High Rate ◽  
Peek Cage ◽  
Radiographic Evidence ◽  
Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Plain Films ◽  
Graft Interface ◽  
Intervertebral Cage

Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) is the gold standard treatment for cervical spondylosis but there is a lack of consensus in the literature regarding which type of bone graft is superior: autograft or allograft. The purpose of this study is to evaluate fusion after ACDF using a stand-alone intervertebral cage packed with autologous cervical bone shavings acquired during the procedure. Twenty patients that underwent single-level ACDF from 2011 to 2014 using a stand-alone polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage were recruited. Patients were evaluated for evidence of bone fusion by plain films and CT scan. Fusion was primarily assessed by grading the level of trabecular bridging bone across the bone-graft interface. Odom’s criteria were used to assess clinical outcome. All interbody disc spaces achieved successful fusion at follow-up. A total of 80% (16/20) of patients had radiographic evidence of trabecular bone present both within and around the cage. The other 20% exhibited bridging bone within the cage but had evidence of minor radiolucent gaps and lack of bridging bone completely surrounding the cage. Eighty percent of patients reported excellent/good clinical outcomes. ACDF using a PEEK stand-alone cage with autograft bone shavings has a high rate of fusion and avoids potential complications of classic autograft harvesting and decreased allograft fusion rates.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document