» Articles » PMID: 36650488

Is the Anterior Cervical Dynamic Plate Fixation Better Than the Anterior Static Plate Fixation: a Retrospective Review with over 5 Years Follow-up

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Specialties Orthopedics
Physiology
Date 2023 Jan 17
PMID 36650488
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: To compare the clinical and radiologic outcomes after anterior cervical dynamic or static plate fixation for short segment cervical degenerative disc diseases (DDD) for more than 5 years.

Methods: Sixty-four patients who underwent anterior cervical one level discectomy or corpectomy with an anterior cervical plate system were followed for an average of 6.8 years for clinical and radiographic outcomes. Among the sixty-four patients, thirty-eight patients were fixed with a static plate (ORION and CSLP plate system) and the other twenty-six patients were fixed with a dynamic plate (ABC plate). Radiographic data were collected included the global sagittal alignment of the cervical spine (C2-C7), the local height and angle of the operated level pre-operatively, postoperatively and at last follow-up. A clinical assessment was performed at pre-operatively, three months postoperatively and final follow-up using the Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) /Visual Analogue Score(VAS)/ Neck Disablility Index(NDI) scoring system.

Results: The mean follow-up time was 6.8 years. At final review, there were two cases of suspicious pseudarthrosis which were from ABC plate fixation group while the other cases all gained solid fusion. The height of fusion segment gained significantly improvement for both dynamic and static plate group post-operation, and all groups demonstrated a significant loss in height postoperatively. Generally, for the one level ACDF group, the height decrease was 0.5 mm for static plate and 1.6 mm for dynamic group which was significantly different(p < 0.05). And for one level ACCF group, this type of difference was not seen in which decreasing was 1.7 mm for static group and 1.8 mm for dynamic group. Segmental lordosis of the fusion segments was increased significantly both post-operation and final follow-up than before-operation for both one and two segments fusion. Global cervical lordosis from C2-C7 was increased in the early postoperative period in all groups, and at final follow-up the total lordosis was still getting better compared with early postoperative period, but this increase was not statistically significant. Clinical assessment of JOA/NDI showed that there was significantly improvement 3-month post-operation compared with pre-operation, and the score could get a slight further improvement at the final follow-up.

Conclusion: Our study demonstrated a statistically similar fusion rate between dynamic and static cervical plate fixation. However, the height gained with static plate fixation for single segment disease was maintained better than with dynamic plate fixation and there was no difference between JOA outcome scores between groups. Despite the reported improved biomechanics of dynamic plate fixation, further research needs to be done to show the clinical advantage of dynamic plate fixation.

Citing Articles

Comparison of the long-term efficacy of ROI-C and conventional cage-plate in treatment of spinal cord injury without fracture or dislocation: a retrospective study.

Lu H, Wang C, Li R, Fang M, Qian J, Qian B BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2024; 25(1):848.

PMID: 39448926 PMC: 11515413. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-024-07985-y.


Biomechanical comparison of static and dynamic cervical plates in terms of the bone fusion, tissue degeneration, and implant behavior.

Chung T, Hueng D, Lin S J Orthop Surg Res. 2024; 19(1):142.

PMID: 38360695 PMC: 10870659. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-024-04629-8.

References
1.
Bohler J, Gaudernak T . Anterior plate stabilization for fracture-dislocations of the lower cervical spine. J Trauma. 1980; 20(3):203-5. DOI: 10.1097/00005373-198003000-00002. View

2.
Wang J, McDonough P, Endow K, Delamarter R . Increased fusion rates with cervical plating for two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000; 25(1):41-5. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200001010-00009. View

3.
Tribus C, Corteen D, Zdeblick T . The efficacy of anterior cervical plating in the management of symptomatic pseudoarthrosis of the cervical spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1999; 24(9):860-4. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199905010-00005. View

4.
Dvorak M, Pitzen T, Zhu Q, Gordon J, Fisher C, Oxland T . Anterior cervical plate fixation: a biomechanical study to evaluate the effects of plate design, endplate preparation, and bone mineral density. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005; 30(3):294-301. DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000152154.57171.92. View

5.
Yonenobu K, Abumi K, Nagata K, Taketomi E, Ueyama K . Interobserver and intraobserver reliability of the japanese orthopaedic association scoring system for evaluation of cervical compression myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2001; 26(17):1890-4; discussion 1895. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200109010-00014. View