Home | About JCVJS | Editorial board | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Archives | Instructions | Subscribe | Advertise | Contact us |   Login 
Journal of Craniovertebral Junction and Spine
Search Articles   
    
Advanced search   
 


 
   Table of Contents  
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 9  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 223-226  

Preliminary results of anterior cervical arthroplasty by porous alumina ceramic cage for cervical disc herniation surgery


1 Department of Neurosurgery, Center Clinical, Chirurgie de Rachis, Soyaux, France
2 Department of Neursurgery, Neurosurgical Clinic of Dr. Gharaei, Tehran, Iran
3 Department of Neurosurgery, Werner Forssmann Hospital, Academic Hospital of Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Rudolf-Breitscheid, Eberswalde, Germany
4 Department of Orthopedics, Rottal-Inn-Kliniken GmbH, Eggenfelden, Bayern, Germany

Date of Web Publication21-Jan-2019

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Keyvan Mostofi
Department of Neurosurgery, Centre Clinical, Chirurgie de Rachis, Soyaux
France
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jcvjs.JCVJS_95_18

Rights and Permissions
   Abstract 


Objective: Anterior cervical arthroplasty (ACA) is the gold standard surgery in severe or unresponsive cases of cervical disc herniation, uncarthrosis, and foraminal stenosis. The aim of this study is to establish the impact and outcome evaluations of managing the patients operated for cervical arthroplasty by the intersomatic porous alumina ceramic cervical cages (PACC). The authors describe their experience in the area to allow the comparison of effectiveness of ceramic cages versus other interbody fusion cages.
Materials and Methods: Between April 2015 and September 2018, we operated 118 for ACA by using PACC. Among them, 52 were female and 66 were male, with an average age of 46.78 years.
Results: The mean symptoms duration was 14.1 months. The most frequent level of the disorder was C5–C6 followed by C6–C7 level. Mean follow-up was 3.3 years. The Neck Disability Index (NDI) and the visual analog scale (VAS) were used to evaluate the patients status. No significant differences were observed between our results and literature data regarding operative time, duration of hospitalization, and NDI; however, we observed a shorter period and higher rate of bony fusion.
Conclusion: The results from the present study corroborate that implementing of PACC is a good alternative treatment for the patient operated by ACA for cervical disc herniation or foraminal cervical stenosis.

Keywords: Cervical arthroplasty, cervical spinal cord, cervical spondylosis, cervical vertebrae, degenerative spine disease, herniated cervical disc, uncarthrosis


How to cite this article:
Mostofi K, Moghaddam BG, Peyravi M, Khouzani RK. Preliminary results of anterior cervical arthroplasty by porous alumina ceramic cage for cervical disc herniation surgery. J Craniovert Jun Spine 2018;9:223-6

How to cite this URL:
Mostofi K, Moghaddam BG, Peyravi M, Khouzani RK. Preliminary results of anterior cervical arthroplasty by porous alumina ceramic cage for cervical disc herniation surgery. J Craniovert Jun Spine [serial online] 2018 [cited 2019 Sep 15];9:223-6. Available from: http://www.jcvjs.com/text.asp?2018/9/4/223/250490




   Introduction Top


Anterior cervical discectomy (ACD) with intersomatic graft is the gold standard in the treatment of cervical disc herniation. ACD without graft would be performed in the first half of the 20th century.[1],[2],[3] Although the latter has a few supporters up to now,[4],[5] since the initial description, most surgeons perform ACD with interbody fusion– first by bone graft and after that by allograft bone and different interbody cages-with or without instrumentation.[6],[7],[8],[9],[10],[11],[12],[13],[14],[15],[16],[17],[18],[19] As a matter of fact, according to several studies, ACD without intersomatic graft would lead to kyphosis, upper-crossed syndrome, and cervicobrachial neuralgia.[1],[3],[5],[6],[7],[18],[20],[21],[22] Since 1990, cervical cages under several categories and materials have been marked. Different authors shared their experiences in significant numbers of studies. The purpose of this study is to introduce our experience in ACD with intersomatic graft by the porous alumina ceramic cervical cages (PACC) and to compare our results with those of the other authors.


   Materials and Methods Top


Between April 2015 and August 2018, we operated 118 patients for ACD with graft by PACC. PACC are based on the natural mineral and designed specifically to medical use.[23] The mean age of the patients was 46.78 (27–71) with an average duration of symptoms of 6.45 months (2 months– 3 years). The mean symptoms duration was 14.1 months. We operated 66 male patients and 52 female patients (female/male ratio = 1/1, 27). A total of 59 patients were operated at C5–C6, 38 patients at C6–C7, 24 patients at C4–C5, five patients at C3–C4, and four patients at C7–D1. Twelve patients had been operated at two levels. All patients had cervicobrachial neuralgia (radiculalgia and cervical pain). The patient with cervical myelopathy were excluded from the study. [Table 1] demonstrates the patient's baseline and characteristics.
Table 1: Patients baseline and characteristics

Click here to view


The length of hospital stay was one night. Patients wear the cervical collar for few days after surgery used for reducing pain and avoiding too much cervical movement. All patients underwent X-ray imaging of the cervical spine on the day after surgery, week 6, months 6, year 1, and year 2 postoperatively. They were examined clinically at 6 and 12 weeks, 6 months, one and 2 years postoperatively and evaluated with a visual analog scale (VAS) ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain imaginable) and with the Neck Disability Index (NDI), which ranges from 0 to 50 (0%–100%). The mean duration of follow-up was 3.3 years. All patients had anteroposterior and lateral cervical spine X-rays 6 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year after surgery.


   Results Top


The results were evaluated for pain with VAS, for ability and to manage in everyday life by the NDI and for bone fusion by the X-ray. [Table 2] demonstrates preoperative and postoperative evaluation of patients by VAS and NDI.
Table 2: Preoperative and postoperative visual analog scale and neck disability index

Click here to view


The radiological results were evaluated by the lateral radiographs. The fusion was defined by the disappearance of the border between vertebral endplates and implant borders [Figure 1].
Figure 1: Postoperative (1 month) radiograph lateral view of cervical spine demonstrates bony fusion after anterior cervical discectomy of C5–C6 using porous alumina ceramic cervical cages

Click here to view


The fusion was obtained in 107 patients at 6 months and in 112 patients at 1 year [Table 3].
Table 3: Radiograph fusion

Click here to view



   Discussion Top


The interest of PACC lies in biomaterial micro-porous substitutes which reproduces the trabecular pattern bone. It mimics the porosity of cancellous bone and has approximately the same diameter. The average diameter of cancellous bone is 639 μm, and the average diameter of PACC is 591 μm [Figure 2]. This porous structure allows ingrowth of the bone cells and blood vessels and secondary osteogenesis.[23],[24] The material has an open porosity varying from 200 to 600 μm. Medium degree of mechanical strength varies from 20 MPa to 60 MPa. It is also chemically inert.[23],[25] In our series, no infection was recognized. Finiels using the same implant in 61 patients reported any complication of this type[23] and this, notwithstanding the mean rate of infection is of 0.07%–1.6% in the medical literature.[25],[26],[27],[28] Fusion rate is an important criterion for a good outcome. It varies from 71.4% to 92.1% for single-disc implant without instrumentation.[29],[30],[31],[32],[33],[34],[35] Fusion is considered as no evidence of radiolucency between the vertebral bodies and implant and continuous trabecular bone bridges in the disc space. In our series, we achieved a fusion rate of 90.67% in 6 months and 94.92% in 1 year after surgery [Figure 1]. These results are widely more than the average rate reported in most articles. As [Table 2] shows, there was an important improvement on the VAS and NDI. Six months after surgery, mean score of NDI was reduced to 19.52, and 1 year after surgery to 20.21 while before surgery it was 64.12. These results are comparable with the literature data.[36],[37],[38],[39],[40] A similar situation exists with mean score of VAS. Average pain intensity was 7.01 in the preoperative period. It was reduced to 3.02 in 3 months, to 1.95 in 6 months, and to 1.99 in 1 year after surgery [Table 3]. A total of 97 patients were on working age. Among them, 81 patients were on sick-leave before surgery. Sixty-three patients (77.78%) returned to work 1 month postoperatively and among the remaining 18 patients, 12 returned to work 2 months after surgery. All in all, 2 months after surgery, 75 patients (92%, 59%) were able to work in their profession.
Figure 2: Microscopic structure of porous alumina ceramic cervical cages

Click here to view



   Conclusion Top


PACC is an autologous bone implant in bioceramic. It is inert and nonabsorbable and allows a good, rapid, and sustainable bone fusion. We believe that, based on these attributes, PACC is a promising alternative for used implants in ACD with graft.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
   References Top

1.
Denaro V, Di Martino A. Cervical spine surgery: An historical perspective. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2011;469:639-48.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Murphy MG, Gado M. Anterior cervical discectomy without interbody bone graft. J Neurosurg 1972;37:71-4.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Konduru S, Findlay G. Anterior cervical discectomy: To graft or not to graft? Br J Neurosurg 2009;23:99-103.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
de Rooij JD, Gadjradj PS, Soria van Hoeve JS, Harhangi BS. Anterior cervical discectomy without fusion for a symptomatic cervical disk herniation. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2017;159:1283-7.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Nandoe Tewarie RD, Bartels RH, Peul WC. Long-term outcome after anterior cervical discectomy without fusion. Eur Spine J 2007;16:1411-6.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Smith GW, Robinson RA. The treatment of certain cervical-spine disorders by anterior removal of the intervertebral disc and interbody fusion. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1958;40-A: 607-24.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Cloward RB. The anterior approach for removal of ruptured cervical disks. J Neurosurg 1958;15:602-17.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Mayo BC, Massel DH, Bohl DD, Long WW, Modi KD, Singh K, et al. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: The surgical learning curve. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2016;41:1580-5.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Cabraja M, Oezdemir S, Koeppen D, Kroppenstedt S. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: Comparison of titanium and polyetheretherketone cages. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2012;13:172.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Hacker RJ. A randomized prospective study of an anterior cervical interbody fusion device with a minimum of 2 years of follow-up results. J Neurosurg 2000;93:222-6.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Cabraja M, Kroppenstedt S. Bone grafting and substitutes in spine surgery. J Neurosurg Sci 2012;56:87-95.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Fernström U. Arthroplasty with intercorporal endoprothesis in herniated disc and in painful disc. Acta Chir Scand Suppl 1966;357:154-9.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Schmieder K, Wolzik-Grossmann M, Pechlivanis I, Engelhardt M, Scholz M, Harders A, et al. Subsidence of the wing titanium cage after anterior cervical interbody fusion: 2-year follow-up study. J Neurosurg Spine 2006;4:447-53.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Abdallah A, Taha AM. Cages or plates for anterior interbody fusion for cervical radiculopathy: Single and double levels. Egypt Orthop J 2016;51:65-70.  Back to cited text no. 14
  [Full text]  
15.
Salame K, Ouaknine GE, Razon N, Rochkind S. The use of carbon fiber cages in anterior cervical interbody fusion: Report of 100 cases. Neurosurg Focus 2002;12:E1.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Smith MW, Romano DR, McEntire BJ, Bal BS. A single center retrospective clinical evaluation of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion comparing allograft spacers to silicon nitride cages. J Spine Surg 2018;4:349-60.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Findlay C, Ayis S, Demetriades AK. Total disc replacement versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Bone Joint J 2018;100-B: 991-1001.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Hauk L. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. AORN J 2018;108:P11-3.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Moussa A, Tanzer M, Pasini D. Cervical fusion cage computationally optimized with porous architected titanium for minimized subsidence. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2018;85:134-51.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
Pointillart V, Cernier A, Vital JM, Senegas J. Anterior discectomy without interbody fusion for cervical disc herniation. Eur Spine J 1995;4:45-51.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Porchet F, Metcalf NH. Clinical outcomes with the prestige II cervical disc: Preliminary results from a prospective randomized clinical trial. Neurosurg Focus 2004;17:E6.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
Vital JM, Guérin P, Gille O, Pointillart V. Prothèses discales cervicales. Techniques Chirurgicales – Orthopédie-Traumatologie. Elsevier Masson SAS, Paris: EMC; 2011. p. 44-162.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
Finiels PJ. Intérêt des biocéramiques en Alumine Poreuse cellulaire en chirurgie rachidienne. Neurochirurgie 2004;50:630-8.  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.
Annaz B, Hing KA, Kayser M, Buckland T, Di Silvio L. Porosity variation in hydroxyapatite and osteoblast morphology: A scanning electron microscopy study. J Microsc 2004;215:100-10.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.
Cedran M, Chartier T, Delage C, Paez C. Nouvelles biocéramiques en orthopédie. Maîtrise Orthop 1999;89:10-6.  Back to cited text no. 25
    
26.
Ghobrial GM, Harrop JS, Sasso RC, Tannoury CA, Tannoury T, Smith ZA, et al. Anterior cervical infection: Presentation and incidence of an uncommon postoperative complication. Global Spine J 2017;7:12S-6S.  Back to cited text no. 26
    
27.
Christiano LD, Goldstein IM. Late prevertebral abscess after anterior cervical fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2011;36:E798-802.  Back to cited text no. 27
    
28.
Naderi S, Acar F, Mertol T. Is spinal instrumentation a risk factor for late-onset infection in cases of distant infection or surgery? Case report. Neurosurg Focus 2003;15:E15.  Back to cited text no. 28
    
29.
Pechlivanis I, Thuring T, Brenke C, Seiz M, Thome C, Barth M, et al. Non-fusion rates in anterior cervical discectomy and implantation of empty polyetheretherketone cages. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2011;36:15-20.  Back to cited text no. 29
    
30.
Fountas KN, Kapsalaki EZ, Smith BE, Nikolakakos LG, Richardson CH, Smisson HF, et al. Interobservational variation in determining fusion rates in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion procedures. Eur Spine J 2007;16:39-45.  Back to cited text no. 30
    
31.
An HS, Simpson JM, Glover JM, Stephany J. Comparison between allograft plus demineralized bone matrix versus autograft in anterior cervical fusion. A prospective multicenter study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1995;20:2211-6.  Back to cited text no. 31
    
32.
Bolesta MJ, Rechtine GR 2nd, Chrin AM. One- and two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: The effect of plate fixation. Spine J 2002;2:197-203.  Back to cited text no. 32
    
33.
Cauthen JC, Kinard RE, Vogler JB, Jackson DE, DePaz OB, Hunter OL, et al. Outcome analysis of noninstrumented anterior cervical discectomy and interbody fusion in 348 patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1998;23:188-92.  Back to cited text no. 33
    
34.
Gokaslan ZL, Cooper PR. Treatment of disc and ligamentous diseases of the cervical spine by the anterior approach. In: Youmans W, editor. Neurological Surgery. 4th ed. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders; 1996.  Back to cited text no. 34
    
35.
Samartzis D, Shen FH, Goldberg EJ, An HS. Is autograft the gold standard in achieving radiographic fusion in one-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with rigid anterior plate fixation? Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2005;30:1756-61.  Back to cited text no. 35
    
36.
Kapetanakis S, Thomaidis T, Charitoudis G, Pavlidis P, Theodosiadis P, Gkasdaris G, et al. Single anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) using self- locking stand-alone polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage: Evaluation of pain and health-related quality of life. J Spine Surg 2017;3:312-22.  Back to cited text no. 36
    
37.
Liu H, Yue L, Chen SL, Hu B, Li CD, Yi XD, et al. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion to treat cervical spondylosis with sympathetic symptoms. Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban 2018;50:347-51.  Back to cited text no. 37
    
38.
Hessler C, Boysen K, Westphal M, Regelsberger J. Functional and radiological outcome after ACDF in 67 cases. Z Orthop Unfall 2011;149:683-7.  Back to cited text no. 38
    
39.
Pazdernyik S, Sándor L, Elek P, Barzó P. Anterior cervical fusion on the lower cervical spine: Own clinical experience. Ideggyogy Sz 2010;63:25-37.  Back to cited text no. 39
    
40.
Nohra G, Abi Lahoud G, Jabbour P, Salloum C, Rizk T, Samaha E, et al. Discectomie cervicale antérieure avec ou sans greffe dans les conflits radiculaires, résultats à long terme. Neurochirurgie 2003;49:571-8.  Back to cited text no. 40
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3]



 

Top
  
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
    Abstract
   Introduction
    Materials and Me...
   Results
   Discussion
   Conclusion
    References
    Article Figures
    Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed890    
    Printed98    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded6    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal