-
- R Greiner-Perth, Y Allam, H El-Saghir, F Röhl, J Franke, and H Böhm.
- Orthopedic and Neurosurgical Clinic, Hof, Germany.
- Cent Eur Neurosurg. 2009 Feb 1;70(1):3-8.
UnlabelledSurgery on the degenerative cervical spine disorders aims at decompression of the neural structures and restoring the physiological profile of the cervical spine. The aims of internal fixation are to gain primary stability, introduce a bony fusion and to correct the shape of the spine. The present study will give answers to the following questions: 1. What is the overall revision rate following an operative treatment of degenerative cervical disorders using common operative techniques? 2. Is there any influence of the fusion length to the overall revision rate and especially to the decompensation ratio of adjacent segments? 3. What is the rate of revisions due to instrumentation failures? 4. Are there any differences concerning the revision rate between posterior and anterior instrumentation?MaterialWe reviewed 900 patients, who underwent a cervical spine surgery with an internal fixation between January 1994 and December 2000.MethodsFive different operative techniques were used: type I (mono-and bisegmental intersomatic decompression and fusion using anterior instrumentation), type II (multisegmental intersomatic decompression and fusion using anterior instrumentation), type III (multisegmental anterior intersomatic decompression and fusion with posterior instrumentation), type IV (one-level corpectomy with vertebral body replacement and anterior instrumentation) and type V (multi-level corpectomy with vertebral body replacement and posterior instrumentation). The minimum follow up period was 2.2 years (mean 4.2 years).ResultsIn total, 121 revisions (13.4%) were recorded. The main indication for revision was implant failure in 5.4%. Operations type I showed the lowest revision rate (11%), while type V operations showed the highest revision rate (32%).ConclusionsThe influence of the fusion length on the revision rate was unexpectedly high. Adjacent level decompensation was neither influenced by the length of the fusion nor the performed procedure. Compared to anterior instrumentation, posterior instrumentation showed a tendency for a lower revision rate without statistical significance. However, the posterior procedures showed a high revision rate regarding to wound healing problems.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:

- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.