Short-term comparison of cervical fusion with static and dynamic plating using computerized motion analysis

This study is a retrospective review of fusion rates for cervical plates, analyzed by means of computerized analysis. This study compares the fusion rates for two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion between patients with static versus dynamic plates. Anterior cervical plating has been show...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Spine (Philadelphia, Pa. 1976) Pa. 1976), 2007-06, Vol.32 (13), p.E371-E375
Hauptverfasser: Goldberg, Grigory, Albert, Todd J, Vaccaro, Alexander R, Hilibrand, Alan S, Anderson, D Greg, Wharton, Nicholas
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page E375
container_issue 13
container_start_page E371
container_title Spine (Philadelphia, Pa. 1976)
container_volume 32
creator Goldberg, Grigory
Albert, Todd J
Vaccaro, Alexander R
Hilibrand, Alan S
Anderson, D Greg
Wharton, Nicholas
description This study is a retrospective review of fusion rates for cervical plates, analyzed by means of computerized analysis. This study compares the fusion rates for two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion between patients with static versus dynamic plates. Anterior cervical plating has been shown to decrease the pseudarthrosis rate. However, static plates, which have been successful in reducing nonunion rates, may be "too rigid" in certain situations, leading to pseudarthrosis in some patients. Recently, some surgeons have begun using dynamic plate constructs to avoid this problem. A retrospective review was performed of patients having a two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion performed either with a static or dynamic plate. A computerized method for evaluating the presence of a solid fusion was used with a criterion of
doi_str_mv 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318060cca9
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_70562034</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>70562034</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c305t-96665037b334796e2c4d783d1ffa6703e7960a25efe4547af0a8c813ef66a2fb3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkEtLAzEUhYMotlb_gUhW7qbeTB4zs9TiCwqC1fWQySQ2Oi-TjFJ_vSktCG5yw-Gcb_EhdE5gTqDIrm6eV3OogFBNSQ4ClJLFAZoSnuYJIbw4RFOgIk1SRsUEnXj_DgCCkuIYTUjGGS8Apuhjte5dSIJ2LVZ9O0hnfd_h3mCl3ZdVssFm9DZG3zassQ8yWIVlV-N608k2_ocmRt0bjq34bhljpNkfXeO2D9ul7GSz8dafoiMjG6_P9neGXu9uXxYPyfLp_nFxvUwUBR6SQgjBgWYVpSwrhE4Vq7Oc1sQYKTKgOoYgU66NZpxl0oDMVR49GCFkaio6Q5c77uD6z1H7ULbWK900stP96MsMuEiBslhku6JyvfdOm3JwtpVuUxIot5LLKLn8LznOLvb8sWp1_TfaW6W_hZh7ew</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>70562034</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Short-term comparison of cervical fusion with static and dynamic plating using computerized motion analysis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><creator>Goldberg, Grigory ; Albert, Todd J ; Vaccaro, Alexander R ; Hilibrand, Alan S ; Anderson, D Greg ; Wharton, Nicholas</creator><creatorcontrib>Goldberg, Grigory ; Albert, Todd J ; Vaccaro, Alexander R ; Hilibrand, Alan S ; Anderson, D Greg ; Wharton, Nicholas</creatorcontrib><description>This study is a retrospective review of fusion rates for cervical plates, analyzed by means of computerized analysis. This study compares the fusion rates for two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion between patients with static versus dynamic plates. Anterior cervical plating has been shown to decrease the pseudarthrosis rate. However, static plates, which have been successful in reducing nonunion rates, may be "too rigid" in certain situations, leading to pseudarthrosis in some patients. Recently, some surgeons have begun using dynamic plate constructs to avoid this problem. A retrospective review was performed of patients having a two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion performed either with a static or dynamic plate. A computerized method for evaluating the presence of a solid fusion was used with a criterion of &lt;2 degrees of motion considered a solid fusion. The follow-up time period averaged 10 months (range, 5.8-13 months) for the static plate group and 9.5 months (range, 5.8-13 months) for the dynamic plate group. Based on a motion threshold of 2 degrees, the rate of fusion per level for patients in the static plate/autograft group was 87.8%, resulting in an overall fusion rate of 76.2%. The rate for fusion per level for patients treated with a dynamic plate and allograft was 89.8%, with an overall fusion rate of 81.8%. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.469). The fusion rate increased during the follow-up period: In the 6- to 9-month interval, the static plate/autograft group had a 62.5% fusion rate, versus 75% for the dynamic plate/allograft group. In the 10- to 13-month interval, the fusion rate had increased to 84.7% for the static plate/autograft group and 90% for the dynamic plate/allograft group. Computerized evaluation of digitized films can improve the accuracy and reproducibility of the analysis of anterior cervical fusion. An angular threshold of 2 degrees was selected for this purpose. This study showed that the rate of fusion with a dynamic plate was similar to that of the static plate despite the use of allograft bone with the dynamic plate. In addition, this study found that successful fusions continued to evolve throughout the first year following surgery.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0362-2436</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1528-1159</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318060cca9</identifier><identifier>PMID: 17545900</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States</publisher><subject>Bone Plates ; Bone Transplantation ; Cervical Vertebrae - diagnostic imaging ; Cervical Vertebrae - physiology ; Cervical Vertebrae - surgery ; Diskectomy ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Intervertebral Disc Displacement - surgery ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Movement ; Postoperative Complications - etiology ; Postoperative Complications - prevention &amp; control ; Pseudarthrosis - etiology ; Pseudarthrosis - prevention &amp; control ; Radiography ; Retrospective Studies ; Spinal Fusion - adverse effects ; Spinal Fusion - instrumentation ; Spinal Fusion - methods</subject><ispartof>Spine (Philadelphia, Pa. 1976), 2007-06, Vol.32 (13), p.E371-E375</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c305t-96665037b334796e2c4d783d1ffa6703e7960a25efe4547af0a8c813ef66a2fb3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c305t-96665037b334796e2c4d783d1ffa6703e7960a25efe4547af0a8c813ef66a2fb3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17545900$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Goldberg, Grigory</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Albert, Todd J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vaccaro, Alexander R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hilibrand, Alan S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anderson, D Greg</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wharton, Nicholas</creatorcontrib><title>Short-term comparison of cervical fusion with static and dynamic plating using computerized motion analysis</title><title>Spine (Philadelphia, Pa. 1976)</title><addtitle>Spine (Phila Pa 1976)</addtitle><description>This study is a retrospective review of fusion rates for cervical plates, analyzed by means of computerized analysis. This study compares the fusion rates for two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion between patients with static versus dynamic plates. Anterior cervical plating has been shown to decrease the pseudarthrosis rate. However, static plates, which have been successful in reducing nonunion rates, may be "too rigid" in certain situations, leading to pseudarthrosis in some patients. Recently, some surgeons have begun using dynamic plate constructs to avoid this problem. A retrospective review was performed of patients having a two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion performed either with a static or dynamic plate. A computerized method for evaluating the presence of a solid fusion was used with a criterion of &lt;2 degrees of motion considered a solid fusion. The follow-up time period averaged 10 months (range, 5.8-13 months) for the static plate group and 9.5 months (range, 5.8-13 months) for the dynamic plate group. Based on a motion threshold of 2 degrees, the rate of fusion per level for patients in the static plate/autograft group was 87.8%, resulting in an overall fusion rate of 76.2%. The rate for fusion per level for patients treated with a dynamic plate and allograft was 89.8%, with an overall fusion rate of 81.8%. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.469). The fusion rate increased during the follow-up period: In the 6- to 9-month interval, the static plate/autograft group had a 62.5% fusion rate, versus 75% for the dynamic plate/allograft group. In the 10- to 13-month interval, the fusion rate had increased to 84.7% for the static plate/autograft group and 90% for the dynamic plate/allograft group. Computerized evaluation of digitized films can improve the accuracy and reproducibility of the analysis of anterior cervical fusion. An angular threshold of 2 degrees was selected for this purpose. This study showed that the rate of fusion with a dynamic plate was similar to that of the static plate despite the use of allograft bone with the dynamic plate. In addition, this study found that successful fusions continued to evolve throughout the first year following surgery.</description><subject>Bone Plates</subject><subject>Bone Transplantation</subject><subject>Cervical Vertebrae - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Cervical Vertebrae - physiology</subject><subject>Cervical Vertebrae - surgery</subject><subject>Diskectomy</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Follow-Up Studies</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Intervertebral Disc Displacement - surgery</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Movement</subject><subject>Postoperative Complications - etiology</subject><subject>Postoperative Complications - prevention &amp; control</subject><subject>Pseudarthrosis - etiology</subject><subject>Pseudarthrosis - prevention &amp; control</subject><subject>Radiography</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Spinal Fusion - adverse effects</subject><subject>Spinal Fusion - instrumentation</subject><subject>Spinal Fusion - methods</subject><issn>0362-2436</issn><issn>1528-1159</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2007</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkEtLAzEUhYMotlb_gUhW7qbeTB4zs9TiCwqC1fWQySQ2Oi-TjFJ_vSktCG5yw-Gcb_EhdE5gTqDIrm6eV3OogFBNSQ4ClJLFAZoSnuYJIbw4RFOgIk1SRsUEnXj_DgCCkuIYTUjGGS8Apuhjte5dSIJ2LVZ9O0hnfd_h3mCl3ZdVssFm9DZG3zassQ8yWIVlV-N608k2_ocmRt0bjq34bhljpNkfXeO2D9ul7GSz8dafoiMjG6_P9neGXu9uXxYPyfLp_nFxvUwUBR6SQgjBgWYVpSwrhE4Vq7Oc1sQYKTKgOoYgU66NZpxl0oDMVR49GCFkaio6Q5c77uD6z1H7ULbWK900stP96MsMuEiBslhku6JyvfdOm3JwtpVuUxIot5LLKLn8LznOLvb8sWp1_TfaW6W_hZh7ew</recordid><startdate>20070601</startdate><enddate>20070601</enddate><creator>Goldberg, Grigory</creator><creator>Albert, Todd J</creator><creator>Vaccaro, Alexander R</creator><creator>Hilibrand, Alan S</creator><creator>Anderson, D Greg</creator><creator>Wharton, Nicholas</creator><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20070601</creationdate><title>Short-term comparison of cervical fusion with static and dynamic plating using computerized motion analysis</title><author>Goldberg, Grigory ; Albert, Todd J ; Vaccaro, Alexander R ; Hilibrand, Alan S ; Anderson, D Greg ; Wharton, Nicholas</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c305t-96665037b334796e2c4d783d1ffa6703e7960a25efe4547af0a8c813ef66a2fb3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2007</creationdate><topic>Bone Plates</topic><topic>Bone Transplantation</topic><topic>Cervical Vertebrae - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Cervical Vertebrae - physiology</topic><topic>Cervical Vertebrae - surgery</topic><topic>Diskectomy</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Follow-Up Studies</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Intervertebral Disc Displacement - surgery</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Movement</topic><topic>Postoperative Complications - etiology</topic><topic>Postoperative Complications - prevention &amp; control</topic><topic>Pseudarthrosis - etiology</topic><topic>Pseudarthrosis - prevention &amp; control</topic><topic>Radiography</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Spinal Fusion - adverse effects</topic><topic>Spinal Fusion - instrumentation</topic><topic>Spinal Fusion - methods</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Goldberg, Grigory</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Albert, Todd J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vaccaro, Alexander R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hilibrand, Alan S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anderson, D Greg</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wharton, Nicholas</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Spine (Philadelphia, Pa. 1976)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Goldberg, Grigory</au><au>Albert, Todd J</au><au>Vaccaro, Alexander R</au><au>Hilibrand, Alan S</au><au>Anderson, D Greg</au><au>Wharton, Nicholas</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Short-term comparison of cervical fusion with static and dynamic plating using computerized motion analysis</atitle><jtitle>Spine (Philadelphia, Pa. 1976)</jtitle><addtitle>Spine (Phila Pa 1976)</addtitle><date>2007-06-01</date><risdate>2007</risdate><volume>32</volume><issue>13</issue><spage>E371</spage><epage>E375</epage><pages>E371-E375</pages><issn>0362-2436</issn><eissn>1528-1159</eissn><abstract>This study is a retrospective review of fusion rates for cervical plates, analyzed by means of computerized analysis. This study compares the fusion rates for two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion between patients with static versus dynamic plates. Anterior cervical plating has been shown to decrease the pseudarthrosis rate. However, static plates, which have been successful in reducing nonunion rates, may be "too rigid" in certain situations, leading to pseudarthrosis in some patients. Recently, some surgeons have begun using dynamic plate constructs to avoid this problem. A retrospective review was performed of patients having a two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion performed either with a static or dynamic plate. A computerized method for evaluating the presence of a solid fusion was used with a criterion of &lt;2 degrees of motion considered a solid fusion. The follow-up time period averaged 10 months (range, 5.8-13 months) for the static plate group and 9.5 months (range, 5.8-13 months) for the dynamic plate group. Based on a motion threshold of 2 degrees, the rate of fusion per level for patients in the static plate/autograft group was 87.8%, resulting in an overall fusion rate of 76.2%. The rate for fusion per level for patients treated with a dynamic plate and allograft was 89.8%, with an overall fusion rate of 81.8%. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.469). The fusion rate increased during the follow-up period: In the 6- to 9-month interval, the static plate/autograft group had a 62.5% fusion rate, versus 75% for the dynamic plate/allograft group. In the 10- to 13-month interval, the fusion rate had increased to 84.7% for the static plate/autograft group and 90% for the dynamic plate/allograft group. Computerized evaluation of digitized films can improve the accuracy and reproducibility of the analysis of anterior cervical fusion. An angular threshold of 2 degrees was selected for this purpose. This study showed that the rate of fusion with a dynamic plate was similar to that of the static plate despite the use of allograft bone with the dynamic plate. In addition, this study found that successful fusions continued to evolve throughout the first year following surgery.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pmid>17545900</pmid><doi>10.1097/BRS.0b013e318060cca9</doi></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0362-2436
ispartof Spine (Philadelphia, Pa. 1976), 2007-06, Vol.32 (13), p.E371-E375
issn 0362-2436
1528-1159
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_70562034
source MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Complete
subjects Bone Plates
Bone Transplantation
Cervical Vertebrae - diagnostic imaging
Cervical Vertebrae - physiology
Cervical Vertebrae - surgery
Diskectomy
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Intervertebral Disc Displacement - surgery
Male
Middle Aged
Movement
Postoperative Complications - etiology
Postoperative Complications - prevention & control
Pseudarthrosis - etiology
Pseudarthrosis - prevention & control
Radiography
Retrospective Studies
Spinal Fusion - adverse effects
Spinal Fusion - instrumentation
Spinal Fusion - methods
title Short-term comparison of cervical fusion with static and dynamic plating using computerized motion analysis
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T23%3A06%3A08IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Short-term%20comparison%20of%20cervical%20fusion%20with%20static%20and%20dynamic%20plating%20using%20computerized%20motion%20analysis&rft.jtitle=Spine%20(Philadelphia,%20Pa.%201976)&rft.au=Goldberg,%20Grigory&rft.date=2007-06-01&rft.volume=32&rft.issue=13&rft.spage=E371&rft.epage=E375&rft.pages=E371-E375&rft.issn=0362-2436&rft.eissn=1528-1159&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/BRS.0b013e318060cca9&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E70562034%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=70562034&rft_id=info:pmid/17545900&rfr_iscdi=true