Objective To explore the anatomic basis for theanterior approach screw fixation through the C2 vertebral body into the C1 lateral mass and toinvestigate its primary clinical application. Methods Twenty-one adult corpse specimens were anatomically measured. The minimum lateral angle α, the maximum lateral angle β, and the maximum posterior angle γ were calculated based on the data from the anatomic measurement. All the specimens were given an X-ray examination, the minimum lateral angle α, the maximum lateral angle β, and the maximum posterior angle γ were measured. The statistical analysis was made on the data obtained from the calculation in the specimens and the measurement in the X-ray films. The simulation of the approach was made onthe specimen. From October 2004 to July 2006, the simulated approach was used in 5 patients (3 males, 2 females; age, 30-55 years; illness course, 3 months-2 years) with the old atlanto-axial joint dislocation . The Frankel grading system revealed the spinal cord injury degree as follows: 1 patientwas in Grade B, 2 in Grade C, and 2 in Grade D. All the patients were treated with this surgical approach. The postoperative X-ray and CT examinations were performed. Results Angle α was 14.0±1.6°, β was 30.0±2.3°, γ was 29.0±2.9°. No significant difference existed between the angles calculated in the specimens and measured in the X-ray films (Pgt;0.05). The angles for the practical application during operation were as follows: α was 11.2±1.6°, β was 28.8±2.3°, and γ was 29.3±2.9°. The follow-up for an average of 14 months revealed that 1 patient recovered to Grade C, 1 to Grade D2, and 3 to Grade D3 in the spinal cord function according the modified Frankel grading system.Conclusion The anterior approach screw fixation through the C2 vertebral body into the C1 lateral massis feasible and safe in treatment of the old atlantoaxial joint dislocation ifthe screw insertion is exact in direction. This technique only makes the atlas temporarily stable, and so the posterior bone graft should be added into the atlantoaxial joint immediately in the one- or two-stage operation so as to achieve a long-lasting stability.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of three-dimensional (3D) printing artificial vertebral body and interbody fusion Cage in anterior cervical disectomy and fusion (ACCF) combined with anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACDF).MethodsThe clinical data of 29 patients with multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy who underwent ACCF combined with ACDF between May 2018 and December 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 13 patients were treated with 3D printing artificial vertebral body and 3D printing Cage as 3D printing group and 16 patients with ordinary titanium mesh Cage (TMC) and Cage as TMC group. There was no significant difference in gender, age, surgical segment, Nurick grade, disease duration, and preoperative Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, visual analogue scale (VAS) score, and Cobb angle of fusion segment between the two groups (P>0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, hospitalization stay, complications, and implant fusion at last follow-up were recorded and compared between the two groups; JOA score was used to evaluate neurological function before operation, immediately after operation, at 6 months after operation, and at last follow-up; VAS score was used to evaluate upper limb and neck pain. Cobb angle of fusion segment was measured and the difference between the last follow-up and the immediate after operation was calculated. The height of the anterior border (HAB) and the height of the posterior border (HPB) were measured immediately after operation, at 6 months after operation, and at last follow-up, and the subsidence of implant was calculated.ResultsThe operation time of 3D printing group was significantly less than that of TMC group (t=3.336, P=0.002); there was no significant difference in hospitalization stay and intraoperative blood loss between the two groups (P>0.05). All patients were followed up 12-19 months (mean, 16 months). There was no obvious complication in both groups. There were significant differences in JOA score, VAS score, and Cobb angle at each time point between the two groups (P<0.05). There was an interaction between time and group in the JOA score (F=3.705, P=0.025). With time, the increase in JOA score was different between the 3D printing group and the TMC group, and the increase in the 3D printing group was greater. There was no interaction between time and group in the VAS score (F=3.038, P=0.065), and there was no significant difference in the score at each time point between the two groups (F=0.173, P=0.681). The time of the Cobb angle interacted with the group (F=15.581, P=0.000). With time, the Cobb angle of the 3D printing group and the TMC group changed differently. Among them, the 3D printing group increased more and the TMC group decreased more. At last follow-up, there was no significant difference in the improvement rate of JOA score between the two groups (t=0.681, P=0.502), but the Cobb angle difference of the 3D printing group was significantly smaller than that of the TMC group (t=5.754, P=0.000). At last follow-up, the implant fusion rate of the 3D printing group and TMC group were 92.3% (12/13) and 87.5% (14/16), respectively, and the difference was not significant (P=1.000). The incidence of implant settlement in the 3D printing group and TMC group at 6 months after operation was 15.4% (2/13) and 18.8% (3/16), respectively, and at last follow-up were 30.8% (4/13) and 56.3% (9/16), respectively, the differences were not significant (P=1.000; P=0.264). The difference of HAB and the difference of HPB in the 3D printing group at 6 months after operation and last follow-up were significantly lower than those in the TMC group (P<0.05).ConclusionFor patients with multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy undergoing ACCF combined with ACDF, compared with TMC and Cage, 3D printing artificial vertebrae body and 3D printing Cage have the advantages of shorter operation time, better reduction of height loss of fusion vertebral body, and maintenance of cervical physiological curvature, the early effectiveness is better.
Objective To investigate the surgical method and prel iminary cl inical result of managing the patient with lumbar burst fracture but not suitable for single-level fixation and fusion surgery with the reservation of the fractured vertebral body and the anterior decompression. Methods From September 2007 to December 2008, 11 patients with lumbar burst fracture underwent the removal of the posterior superior corner of the injured vertebral body, the removal of the inferior intervertebral disc adjacent to the injured vertebral body, bone graft fusion, and internal fixation. There were 8 males and3 females aged 21-48 years old (average 29.4 years old). All the fractures caused by fall ing from high places. Imaging exams confirmed all the fractures were Denis type B burst fracture. The fracture level was at the L1 in 4 cases, the L2 in 4 cases, the L3 in 2 cases, and the L4 in 1 case. Before operation, the nerve function was graded as grade B in 4 cases, grade C in 3 cases, and grade D in 4 cases according to Frankel scales; the visual analogue scale (VAS) was (7.30 ± 0.98) points; lateral X-ray films displayed the kyphosis Cobb angel was (24.94 ± 12.21)°; the adjacent superior and inferior intervertebral disc height was (12.78 ± 1.52) mm and (11.68 ± 1.04) mm, respectively; CT scan showed the vertebral canal sagittal diameter was (9.56 ± 2.27) mm; CT three-dimensional reconstruction revealed that the intact part of the injured vertebra was less than 50% vertebra body height and the fracture l ine crossed the pedicle. The time from injury to operation was 3-11 days (average 4.8 days). The neurological and radiological evaluations were carried out immediately and 3 months after operation, respectively, and compared with the condition before operation. Results All the patients successfully underwent the surgery. The wound all healed by first intention. All the patients were followed up for 6-18 months (average 14 months). All the patients had a certain degree of nerve function recovery. The Frankel scales in all the patients were increased by 1-2 grade immediately and 3 months after operation. The VAS score was (2.80 ± 1.49) points immediately after operation and (1.54 ± 0.48) points 3 months after operation, suggesting there were significant differences among three time points (P lt; 0.05). The vertebral canal sagittal diameter was significantly enlarged to (18.98 ± 4.82) mm immediately after operation and was (19.07 ± 4.37) mm 3 months after operation. The Cobb angle was (7.78 ± 4.52)° immediately after operation and (8.23 ± 3.57)° 3 months after operation. There were significant differences between before and after operation (P lt; 0.05). For the adjacent superior and inferior intervertebral disc height, there was no significant difference when the value immediately or 3 months after operation was compared with that of before operation (P gt; 0.05). X-ray films and CT scan 3 months after operation showed good internal fixation without theoccurrence of loosing and displacement. Conclusion For the treatment of lumbar burst fracture, the method of reserving the injured vertebral body and anterior decompression can decompress the vertebral canal and shorten the duration for bony fusion.
ObjectiveTo review the present situation of experimental study and clinical application of middle and lower cervical anterior transpedicular screw (CATPS) fixation.
MethodsThe literature on the CATPS fixation was reviewed and summarized.
ResultsThere is a safe area to implement the CATPS fixation and anterior decompression, and fusion can be done at the same time. It can provide a new idea for surgical treatment of complex cervical disease. Although it has so many advantages, its complex operating methods and optimal design of plate should be attended. Long-term effectiveness and specific indications still should be researched.
ConclusionMiddle and lower cervical anterior transpedicular screw is an effective and safe fixation for cervical diseases. But the time for clinical use is short, the long-term effectiveness, surgical technique, and internal fixation devices are still need further study.
Objective To introduce and evaluate the efficacy of microsurgical decompression and titanium cage implants fusion with anterior plating in cervical spondylitic radiculopathy. Methods From September 2000 to September 2002, 54consecutive patients were treated with anterior microsurgical decompression followed by intervertebral fusion using a titanium cage packed with autogenous cancellous bone graft and an anterior cervical plating.There were 31 males and 23 females, with an average age of 45.2 years (38-65 years). The disease course was 5-19 months. The locations were C3,4 in 3 cases, C4,5 in 25, C5,6 in 21 and C6,7in 5 cases. The bony endplates were preserved to prevent cage subsidence. Thirty-nine cases suffered from monosegmental fusion and 15 cases did bisegmental fusion. The Cobb angle was 0.80±0.31° before operation. Results All wounds healed by first intention and no complications of vertebral artery injury, vertebralnerve injury and leakage of cerebrospinal fluid occurred. Dysphagia occurred within2 weeks in 2 cases, hoarseness occurred and recovered without treatment in 1 case, and pain in upper limbs aggravated and was relieved after 1 month of conservative treatment in 1 case. Fiftyfour patients were followed 12-36 months(16.4 months on average). The X-ray films showed no breakage of screws and robs and olisthy of implants. Fusion was achieved in 53 patients and the fusion rate was 98.2%. The Cobb angles were 5.50±0.22° after operation and 5.20±0.17° at final followup, showing significant differences when compared with before operation(Plt;0.01). According to Odom’s criteria, the resultswere excellent in 24 cases, good in 22 cases and fair in 8 cases, the excellentand good rate was 85.2%.Conclusion Anterior cervical microsurgical decompression is a safely and effectively treatment option in patients with cervical spondylitic radiculopathy caused by protrusion of intervertebral disc(1-2 discs) and by degenerative osteophyte. Titanium cage interbody fusion with concomitant use of anterior plating provides immediate biomechanical stability, successfully restores and maintains posterior interbody height and cervic、al lordosis to ensure satisfactory longtime outcomes.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of the anterior and posterior approach for the treatment in ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL) of the cervical spine.MethodsAn electronical search was conducted in PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, WanFang Data and CNKI from inception to December 2016 to collect studies which compared the anterior cervical approach with posterior approach for OPLL. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk bias of included studies and then RevMan 5.3 software was used to perform meta-analysis.ResultsA total of 20 studies involving 1 263 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: compared with the posterior approach group, the anterior approach group had higher postoperative JOA score (MD=0.98, 95%CI 0.52 to 1.44, P<0.000 1), higher improvement (MD=12.18, 95% CI 6.65 to 17.71, P<0.000 1), higher re-operation rate (OR=3.21, 95%CI 1.70 to 6.08, P=0.000 3), longer operation time (MD=53.43, 95%CI 12.77 to 94.09, P=0.01) and more bleeding (MD=122.88, 95%CI 39.56 to 206.20, P=0.004), respectively. There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications between two groups (OR=1.49, 95%CI 0.88 to 2.51, P=0.14).ConclusionThe anterior approach for the treatment in OPLL of the cervical spine can achieve better postoperative neurological improvement and lower neurological deterioration, while the posterior approach for the treatment in OPLL has lower re-operation rate, less blood loss and shorter operation time. The incidence of complications between two groups is similar. Due to limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high quality studies are needed to verify above conclusion.
