» Articles » PMID: 37511938

Two-Level Corpectomy and Fusion Vs. Three-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Without Plating: Long-Term Clinical and Radiological Outcomes in a Multicentric Retrospective Analysis

Abstract

Background: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) represent effective alternatives in the management of multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). A consensus on which of these techniques should be used is still missing.

Methods: The databases of three centers were reviewed (January 2011-December 2018) for patients with three-level CSM, who underwent three-level ACDF without plating or two-level ACCF with expandable cage (VBRC) or mesh (VBRM). Demographic data, surgical strategy, complications, and implant failure were analyzed. The Neck Disability Index (NDI), the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and the cervical lordosis were compared between the two techniques at 3 and 12 months. Logistic regression analyses investigated independent factors influencing clinical and radiological outcomes.

Results: Twenty-one and twenty-two patients were included in the ACDF and ACCF groups, respectively. The median follow-up was 18 months. ACDFs were associated with better clinical outcomes at 12 months (NDI: 8.3% vs. 19.3%, < 0.001; VAS: 1.3 vs. 2.6, = 0.004), but with an increased risk of loss of lordosis correction ≥ 1° (OR = 4.5; = 0.05). A higher complication rate in the ACDF group (33.3% vs. 9.1%; = 0.05) was recorded, but it negatively influenced only short-term clinical outcomes. ACCFs with VBRC were associated with a higher risk of major complications but ensured better 12-month lordosis correction ( = 0.002). No significant differences in intraoperative blood loss were noted.

Conclusions: Three-level ACDF without plating was associated with better clinical outcomes than two-level ACCF despite worse losses in lordosis correction, which is ideal for fragile patients without retrovertebral compressions. In multilevel CSM, the relationship between the degree of lordosis correction and clinical outcome advantages still needs to be investigated.

Citing Articles

A Meta-Analysis of Surgical Outcomes in 25727 Patients Undergoing Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion or Anterior Cervical Corpectomy and Fusion for Cervical Deformity.

Barot K, Ruiz-Cardozo M, Singh S, Trevino G, Kann M, Brehm S Global Spine J. 2024; 15(2):1390-1404.

PMID: 39091072 PMC: 11571742. DOI: 10.1177/21925682241270100.


Comparison of head positioning using the Mayfield skull clamp versus padded headrest in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion surgery.

Lucia K, Setzer M, Jussen D, Prinz V, Kilinc F, Seifert V J Spine Surg. 2024; 10(1):80-88.

PMID: 38567005 PMC: 10982923. DOI: 10.21037/jss-23-117.

References
1.
Shi S, Liu Z, Li X, Qian L, Zhong G, Chen F . Comparison of plate-cage construct and stand-alone anchored spacer in the surgical treatment of three-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a preliminary clinical study. Spine J. 2015; 15(9):1973-80. DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.04.024. View

2.
Ricciardi L, Scerrati A, Olivi A, Sturiale C, De Bonis P, Montano N . The role of cervical collar in functional restoration and fusion after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion without plating on single or double levels: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Spine J. 2020; 29(5):955-960. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-019-06270-0. View

3.
Swank M, Lowery G, Bhat A, McDonough R . Anterior cervical allograft arthrodesis and instrumentation: multilevel interbody grafting or strut graft reconstruction. Eur Spine J. 1997; 6(2):138-43. PMC: 3454584. DOI: 10.1007/BF01358747. View

4.
Liu Y, Hou Y, Yang L, Chen H, Wang X, Wu X . Comparison of 3 reconstructive techniques in the surgical management of multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012; 37(23):E1450-8. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31826c72b4. View

5.
Lin Q, Zhou X, Wang X, Cao P, Tsai N, Yuan W . A comparison of anterior cervical discectomy and corpectomy in patients with multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Eur Spine J. 2011; 21(3):474-81. PMC: 3296841. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-011-1961-9. View