Does the Predominant Pain Location Influence Functional Outcomes, Satisfaction and Return to Work After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion for Cervical Radiculopathy?

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of prospectively-collected registry data. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine how different combinations of preoperative neck pain (NP) and arm pain (AP) influence functional outcomes, patient satisfaction, and return-to-work in patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for degenerative cervical radiculopathy (DCR). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Surgeons often base decisions on the traditional belief that the predominance of radicular upper extremity symptoms is a stronger indication for cervical spine surgery than axial pain. However, there is a paucity of literature supporting this notion. METHODS: A prospectively maintained registry was reviewed for all patients who underwent primary ACDF for DCR. Patients were categorized into three groups depending on predominant pain location: AP predominant ([APP]; AP > NP), NP predominant ([NPP]; NP > AP), and equal pain predominance ([EPP]; NP = AP). Patients were prospectively followed for at least 2 years. RESULTS: In total, 303 patients were included: 27.4% APP, 38.9% NPP, and 33.7% EPP cases. The APP group was significantly older (P = 0.030), although there were no other preoperative differences among the three groups. After adjusting for baseline differences, the SF-36 Physical Component Summary was significantly better in the APP group at 6 months (P = 0.048) and 2 years (P = 0.039). In addition, they showed a trend towards better 6-month Neck Disability Index (P = 0.077) and 2-year SF-36 Mental Component Summary (P = 0.059). However, an equal proportion of patients in each group achieved the Minimal Clinically Important Difference for each outcome, were satisfied, and returned to work 2 years after surgery. CONCLUSION: Although patients with NPP had slightly poorer function and quality of life, all patients experienced a clinically meaningful improvement in patient-reported outcomes, regardless of the predominant pain location. High rates of satisfaction and return-to-work were also achieved. In the context of proper indications, these findings suggest that ACDF can be equally effective for DCR patients with varying combinations of NP or AP.Level of Evidence: 3.