Advertisement

Cervical alignment after single-level anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion using autologous bone graft without spinal instrumentation for cervical pyogenic spondylitis

  • Masashi MiyazakiEmail author
  • Tetsutaro Abe
  • Toshinobu Ishihara
  • Shozo Kanezaki
  • Naoki Notani
  • Masashi Kataoka
  • Hiroshi Tsumura
Original Article • SPINE - CERVICAL
  • 2 Downloads

Abstract

Background

Subsidence in anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) for cervical degenerative disease (CDD) are constantly observed during the postoperative course. Although kyphotic change of cervical alignment occurred frequently in cervical pyogenic spondylitis (CPS) postoperatively, studies on the postoperative change in segmental angle for CPS are limited. This study aimed to analyze cervical alignment after single-level ACCF using autologous bone graft without spinal instrumentation for CPS compared with that for CDD.

Methods

Six patients underwent single-level ACCF using autologous bone graft without spinal instrumentation for CPS. The control group included 18 age-matched patients who underwent single-level ACCF using autologous bone graft for CDD without spinal instrumentation for the same duration. Cervical and lateral plain radiographs and computed tomography scans were taken. The Frankel classification was used to assess the neurological status preoperatively, postoperatively, and at 2-year follow-up for CPS.

Results

At 2-year follow-up, the average segmental angle at the fusion level was − 12.2° ± 6.9° for CPS and − 5.2° ± 7.6° for CDD (p = 0.04). Changes in segmental angle at the fusion level were − 7.2 ± 9.0° for CPS and − 1.1° ± 7.1° for CDD (p = 0.02). At 2-year follow-up, the average anterior segmental fusion height was 23.4 ± 1.7 mm for CPS and 29.1 ± 5.1 mm for CDD (p < 0.001). At 2-year follow-up, bone fusion in the CPS group was classified as grade 5 (complete fusion) in 4 patients (66.7%) and grade 4 (probable fusion) in 2 (33.3%). In the CDD group, it was grade 5 in 13 patients (72.2%) and grade 4 in 5 patients (27.8%). Overall, both groups achieved 100% bone fusion rate. The Frankel classification in all CPS cases improved or leveled off.

Conclusion

Progression of segmental kyphosis angle and subsidence of graft bone were observed postoperatively on all CPS cases. However, the neurological recovery and bone union were satisfactory.

Keywords

Pyogenic spondylitis Cervical spine Segmental angle Kyphosis ACCF 

Notes

Funding

No funding was received for this research.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Each author certifies that he or she, or a member of their immediate family, has no commercial associations (e.g., consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article.

Ethical standard

The local institutional review board approved this study. All patients provided informed consent.

References

  1. 1.
    Shousha M, Boehm H (2012) Surgical treatment of cervical spondylodiscitis: a review of 30 consecutive patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 37:E30–E36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Korovessis P, Repantis T, Hadjipavlou AG (2012) Hematogenous pyogenic spinal infection: current perceptions. Orthopedics 35:885–892CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Heyde CE, Boehm H, El Saghir H, Tschoke SK, Kayser R (2006) Surgical treatment of spondylodiscitis in the cervical spine: a minimum 2-year follow-up. Eur Spine J 15:1380–1387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schimmer RC, Jeanneret C, Nunley PD, Jeanneret B (2002) Osteomyelitis of the cervical spine: a potentially dramatic disease. J Spinal Disord Tech 15:110–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Emery SE, Bohlman HH, Bolesta MJ, Jones PK (1998) Anterior cervical decompression and arthrodesis for the treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Two to seventeen-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am 80:941–951CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Malloy KM, Hilibrand AS (2002) Autograft versus allograft in degenerative cervical disease. Clin Orthop Relat Res 394:27–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wang JC, Hart RA, Emery SE, Bohlman HH (2003) Graft migration or displacement after multilevel cervical corpectomy and strut grafting. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 28:1016–1021Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brantigan JW, Steffee AD (1993) A carbon fiber implant to aid interbody lumbar fusion. Two-year clinical results in the first 26 patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 18:2106–2107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Karadimas EJ, Bunger C, Lindblad BE, Hansen ES, Hoy K, Helmig P, Kannerup AS, Niedermann B (2008) Spondylodiscitis. A retrospective study of 163 patients. Acta Orthop 79:650–659CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Stone JL, Cybulski GR, Rodriguez J, Gryfinski ME, Kant R (1989) Anterior cervical debridement and strut-grafting for osteomyelitis of the cervical spine. J Neurosurg 70:879–883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fang D, Cheung KM, Dos Remedios ID, Lee YK, Leong JC (1994) Pyogenic vertebral osteomyelitis: treatment by anterior spinal debridement and fusion. J Spinal Disord 7:173–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lu DC, Wang V, Chou D (2009) The use of allograft or autograft and expandable titanium cages for the treatment of vertebral osteomyelitis. Neurosurgery 64:122–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Przybylski GJ, Sharan AD (2001) Single-stage autogenous bone grafting and internal fixation in the surgical management of pyogenic discitis and vertebral osteomyelitis. J Neurosurg 94:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shad A, Shariff S, Fairbank J, Byren I, Teddy PJ, Cadoux-Hudson TA (2003) Internal fixation for osteomyelitis of cervical spine: the issue of persistence of culture positive infection around the implants. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 145:957–960CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Faldini C, Miscione MT, Acri F, Leonetti D, Nanni M, Chehrassan M, Giannini S (2012) Single level cervical fusion by an anterior approach using autologous bone graft influences the adjacent levels degenerative changes: clinical and radiographic results at 10-year minimum follow-up. Eur Spine J 21(Suppl 1):S90–S93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Galasso O, Mariconda M, Ianno B, De Gori M, Gasparini G (2013) Long-term follow-up results of the Cloward procedure for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Eur Spine J 22:128–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Katsuura A, Hukuda S, Saruhashi Y, Mori K (2001) Kyphotic malalignment after anterior cervical fusion is one of the factors promoting the degenerative process in adjacent intervertebral levels. Eur Spine J 10:320–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lee YS, Kim YB, Park SW (2014) Risk factors for postoperative subsidence of single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: the significance of the preoperative cervical alignment. Spine 39:1280–1287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wu WJ, Jiang LS, Liang Y, Dai LY (2012) Cage subsidence does not, but cervical lordosis improvement does affect the long-term results of anterior cervical fusion with stand-alone cage for degenerative cervical disc disease: a retrospective study. Eur Spine J 21:1374–1382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kowalski TJ, Layton KF, Berbari EF, Steckelberg JM, Huddleston PM, Wald JT, Osmon DR (2007) Follow-up MR imaging in patients with pyogenic spine infections: lack of correlation with clinical features. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 28:693–699PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Masashi Miyazaki
    • 1
    Email author
  • Tetsutaro Abe
    • 1
  • Toshinobu Ishihara
    • 1
  • Shozo Kanezaki
    • 1
  • Naoki Notani
    • 1
  • Masashi Kataoka
    • 2
  • Hiroshi Tsumura
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Faculty of MedicineOita UniversityOitaJapan
  2. 2.Physical Therapy Course of Study, Faculty of Welfare and Health SciencesOita UniversityOitaJapan

Personalised recommendations