Adjacent segment mobility after ACDF considering fusion status at the implant insertion site.

PURPOSE: This paper sets out to analyse mobility changes in segments adjacent to the operated segment. Additionally, it investigates the relationship between the degree of fusion in the operated disc space and mobility changes in the adjacent segments. METHODS: In total, 170 disc spaces were operated on in 104 consecutive patients qualified for one- or two-level surgery. The degree of mobility of segments directly above and below the implant insertion site was calculated. Measurements were performed the day before the surgery and 12 months post-surgery. Functional (flexion and extension) radiographs of the cervical spine and CT scans obtained 12 months post-surgery were used to evaluate the fusion status. The results were subjected to statistical analysis. RESULTS: Statistically significant increase in mobility was recorded for the segments situated immediately below the operative site, with a mean change in mobility of 1.7 mm. Complete fusion was demonstrated in 101 cases (71.1%), and partial fusion in 43 cases (29.9%). In the complete fusion subgroup, the ranges of both flexion and extension in the segments directly below the operative site were significantly greater than those in the partial fusion (pseudoarthrosis) subgroup. CONCLUSION: The mobility of the adjacent segment below the implant insertion site was significantly increased at 12 months post-ACDF surgery. The range of this compensatory hypermobility was significantly greater in patients with complete fusion at the ACDF site than in cases of pseudoarthrosis. Implant subsidence was not associated with mobility changes in the segments directly above or directly below the site of ACDF surgery.

Reliability and Utility of Various Methods for Evaluation of Bone Union after Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.

Most surgical procedures performed on account of degenerative disease of the cervical spine involve a discectomy and interbody fixation. Bone fusion at the implant placement site is evaluated post-operatively. It is agreed that computed tomography is the best modality for assessing bone union. We evaluated the results obtained with various methods based solely on conventional radiographs in the same group of patients and compared them with results obtained using a method that is a combination of CT and conventional radiography, which we considered the most precise and a reference method. We operated on a total of 170 disc spaces in a group of 104 patients. Fusion was evaluated at 12 months after surgery with five different and popular classifications based on conventional radiographs and then compared with the reference method. Statistical analyses of test accuracy produced the following classification of fusion assessment methods with regard to the degree of consistency with the reference method, in descending order: (1) bone bridging is visible on the anterior and/or posterior edge of the operated disc space on a lateral radiograph; (2) change in the value of Cobb's angle for a motion segment on flexion vs. extension radiographs (threshold for fusion vs. pseudoarthrosis is 2°); (3) change in the interspinous distance between process tips on flexion vs. extension radiographs (threshold of 2 mm); (4) change in the value of Cobb's angle of a motion segment (threshold of 4°); (5) change in the interspinous distance between process bases on flexion vs. extension radiographs (threshold of 2 mm). When bone union is evaluated on the basis on radiographs, without CT evidence, we suggest using the "bone bridging" criterion as the most reliable commonly used approach to assessing bone union.