Comparison of the patient-derived modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association scale and the European myelopathy score.

PURPOSE: To compare the patient-derived modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (P-mJOA) scale with the European myelopathy score (EMS) for the assessment of patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM). METHODS: In this register-based cohort study with prospectively collected data, included patients were surgically treated for DCM and had reported both P-mJOA and EMS scores at baseline, 1-year follow-up, and/or 2-year follow-up to the Swedish Spine Register. P-mJOA and EMS scores were defined as severe (P-mJOA 0-11 and EMS 5-8), moderate (P-mJOA 12-14 and EMS 9-12), or mild (P-mJOA 15-18 and EMS 13-18). P-mJOA and EMS mean scores were compared, and agreement was evaluated with Spearman's rank correlation coefficient (ρ), the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and kappa (κ) statistics. RESULTS: Included patients (n = 714, mean age 63.2 years, 42.2% female) completed 937 pairs of the P-mJOA and the EMS. The mean P-mJOA and EMS scores were 13.9 ± 3.0 and 14.5 ± 2.7, respectively (mean difference -0.61 [95% CI -0.72 to -0.51; p < 0.001]). Spearman's ρ was 0.84 (p < 0.001), and intra-rater agreement measured with ICC was 0.83 (p < 0.001). Agreement of severity level measured with unweighted and weighted κ was fair (κ = 0.22 [p < 0.001]; κ = 0.34 [p < 0.001], respectively). Severity levels were significantly higher using the P-mJOA (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The P-mJOA and the EMS had similar mean scores, and intra-rater agreement was high, whereas severity levels only demonstrated fair agreement. The EMS has a lower sensitivity for detecting severe myelopathy but shows an increasing agreement with the P-mJOA for milder disease severity. A larger interval to define severe myelopathy with the EMS is recommended.

MRI-based measurements of spondylolisthesis and kyphosis in degenerative cervical myelopathy.

BACKGROUND: To provide normative data and to determine accuracy and reliability of preoperative measurements of spondylolisthesis and kyphosis on supine static magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy. METHODS: T2-weighted midsagittal images of the cervical spine were in 100 cases reviewed twice by one junior observer, with an interval of 3 months, and once by a senior observer. The spondylolisthesis slip (SSlip, mm) and the modified K-line interval (mK-line INT, mm) were assessed for accuracy with the standard error of measurement (SEm) and the minimum detectable change (MDC). Intraobserver and interobserver reliability levels were determined using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS: The SEm was 0.5 mm (95% CI 0.4-0.6) for spondylolisthesis and 0.6 mm (95% CI 0.5-0.7) for kyphosis. The MDC, i.e., the smallest difference between two examinations that can be detected with statistical certainty, was 1.5 mm (95% CI 1.2-1.8) for spondylolisthesis and 1.6 mm (95% CI 1.3-1.8) for kyphosis. The highest reliability levels were seen between the second observation of the junior examiner and the senior observer (ICC = 0.80 [95% CI 0.70-0.87] and ICC = 0.96 [95% CI 0.94-0.98] for SSlip and mK-line INT, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides normative values of alignment measurements of spondylolisthesis and kyphosis in DCM patients. It further shows the importance of taking measurement errors into account when defining cut-off values for cervical deformity parameters and their potential clinical application in surgical decision-making.

Toward Shared Decision-Making in Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Health care decisions are a critical determinant in the evolution of chronic illness. In shared decision-making (SDM), patients and clinicians work collaboratively to reach evidence-based health decisions that align with individual circumstances, values, and preferences. This personalized approach to clinical care likely has substantial benefits in the oversight of degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM), a type of nontraumatic spinal cord injury. Its chronicity, heterogeneous clinical presentation, complex management, and variable disease course engenders an imperative for a patient-centric approach that accounts for each patient's unique needs and priorities. Inadequate patient knowledge about the condition and an incomplete understanding of the critical decision points that arise during the course of care currently hinder the fruitful participation of health care providers and patients in SDM. This study protocol presents the rationale for deploying SDM for DCM and delineates the groundwork required to achieve this. OBJECTIVE: The study's primary outcome is the development of a comprehensive checklist to be implemented upon diagnosis that provides patients with essential information necessary to support their informed decision-making. This is known as a core information set (CIS). The secondary outcome is the creation of a detailed process map that provides a diagrammatic representation of the global care workflows and cognitive processes involved in DCM care. Characterizing the critical decision points along a patient's journey will allow for an effective exploration of SDM tools for routine clinical practice to enhance patient-centered care and improve clinical outcomes. METHODS: Both CISs and process maps are coproduced iteratively through a collaborative process involving the input and consensus of key stakeholders. This will be facilitated by Myelopathy.org, a global DCM charity, through its Research Objectives and Common Data Elements for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy community. To develop the CIS, a 3-round, web-based Delphi process will be used, starting with a baseline list of information items derived from a recent scoping review of educational materials in DCM, patient interviews, and a qualitative survey of professionals. A priori criteria for achieving consensus are specified. The process map will be developed iteratively using semistructured interviews with patients and professionals and validated by key stakeholders. RESULTS: Recruitment for the Delphi consensus study began in April 2023. The pilot-testing of process map interview participants started simultaneously, with the formulation of an initial baseline map underway. CONCLUSIONS: This protocol marks the first attempt to provide a starting point for investigating SDM in DCM. The primary work centers on developing an educational tool for use in diagnosis to enable enhanced onward decision-making. The wider objective is to aid stakeholders in developing SDM tools by identifying critical decision junctures in DCM care. Through these approaches, we aim to provide an exhaustive launchpad for formulating SDM tools in the wider DCM community. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/46809.

[Spinal motion restriction in trauma care]. / Nya rekommendationer för spinal rörelsebegränsning vid trauma.

Nineteen Swedish professional organizations involved in trauma care have developed national recommendations for spinal motion restriction in trauma. The recommendations describe the best practice in spinal motion restriction for children, adults, and the elderly, both in prehospital care, in the emergency department and during transfer within and between hospitals. The background to the recommendations is presented, together with implications for the widespread educational system Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS).

Comparison of posterior muscle-preserving selective laminectomy and laminectomy with fusion for treating cervical spondylotic myelopathy: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) is the predominant cause of spinal cord dysfunction in the elderly. The patients are often frail and susceptible to complications. Posterior surgical techniques involving non-fusion are complicated by postlaminectomy kyphosis and instrumented fusion techniques by distal junction kyphosis, pseudarthrosis, or implant failure. The optimal surgical approach is still a matter of controversy. Since anterior and posterior fusion techniques have been compared without presenting any superiority, the objective of this study is to compare stand-alone laminectomy with laminectomy and fusion to determine which treatment has the lowest frequency of reoperations. METHODS: This is a multicenter randomized, controlled, parallel-group non-inferiority trial. A total of 300 adult patients are allocated in a ratio of 1:1. The primary endpoint is reoperation for any reason at 5 years of follow-up. Sample size and power calculation were performed by estimating the reoperation rate after laminectomy to 3.5% and after laminectomy with fusion to 7.4% based on the data from the Swedish spine registry (Swespine) on patients with CSM. Secondary outcomes are the patient-derived Japanese Orthopaedic Association (P-mJOA) score, Neck Disability Index (NDI), European Quality of Life Five Dimensions (EQ-5D), Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) for neck and arm pain, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), development of kyphosis measured as the cervical sagittal vertical axis (cSVA), and death. Clinical and radiological follow-up is performed at 3, 12, 24, and 60 months after surgery. The main inclusion criterium is 1-4 levels of CSM in the subaxial spine, C3-C7. The REDcap software will be used for safe data management. Data will be analyzed according to the modified intention to treat (mITT) population, defined as randomized patients who are still alive without having emigrated or left the study after 2 and 5 years. DISCUSSION: This will be the first randomized controlled trial comparing two of the most common surgical treatments for CSM: the posterior muscle-preserving selective laminectomy and posterior laminectomy with instrumented fusion. The results of the myelopathy randomized controlled (MyRanC) study will provide surgical treatment recommendations for CSM. This may result in improvements in surgical treatment and clinical practice regarding CSM. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04936074 . Registered on 23 June 2021.

Improvement rates, adverse events and predictors of clinical outcome following surgery for degenerative cervical myelopathy.

PURPOSE: To investigate improvement rates, adverse events and predictors of clinical outcome after laminectomy alone (LAM) or laminectomy with instrumented fusion (LAM + F) for degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM). METHODS: This is a post hoc analysis of a previously published DCM cohort. Improvement rates for European myelopathy score (EMS) and Neck Disability Index (NDI) at 2- and 5-year follow-ups and adverse events are presented descriptively for available cases. Predictor endpoints were EMS and NDI scores at follow-ups, surgeon- and patient-reported complications, and reoperation-free interval. For predictors, univariate and multivariable models were fitted to imputed data. RESULTS: Mean age of patients (LAM n = 412; LAM + F n = 305) was 68 years, and 37.4% were women. LAM + F patients had more severe spondylolisthesis and less severe kyphosis at baseline, more surgeon-reported complications, more patient-reported complications, and more reoperations (p ≤ 0.05). After imputation, the overall EMS improvement rate was 43.8% at 2 years and 36.3% at 5 years. At follow-ups, worse EMS scores were independent predictors of worse EMS outcomes and older age and worse NDI scores were independent predictors of worse NDI outcomes. LAM + F was associated with more surgeon-reported complications (ratio 1.81; 95% CI 1.17-2.80; p = 0.008). More operated levels were associated with more patient-reported complications (ratio 1.12; 95% CI 1.02-1.22; p = 0.012) and a shorter reoperation-free interval (hazard ratio 1.30; 95% CI 1.08-1.58; p = 0.046). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that surgical intervention at an earlier myelopathy stage might be beneficial and that less invasive procedures are preferable in this patient population.

Evaluating a paradigm shift from anterior decompression and fusion to muscle-preserving selective laminectomy: a single-center study of degenerative cervical myelopathy.

OBJECTIVE: Muscle-preserving selective laminectomy (SL) is an alternative to conventional decompression surgery in patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM). It is less invasive, preserves the extensor musculature, and maintains the range of motion of the cervical spine. Therefore, the preferred treatment for DCM at the authors' institution has changed from anterior decompression and fusion (ADF), including anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF), toward SL. The aim of this study was to evaluate surgical outcomes before and after this paradigm shift with patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), complications, reoperations, and cost-effectiveness. METHODS: This study was a retrospective register-based cohort study. All patients with DCM who underwent ADF or SL at the authors' institution from 2008 to 2019 were reviewed. Using ANCOVA, changes in PROMs from baseline to the 2-year follow-up were compared between the two groups, adjusting for clinicodemographic parameters, baseline PROMs, number of decompressed levels, and MRI measurements (C2-7 Cobb angle, C2-7 sagittal vertical axis [SVA], and modified K-line interval [mK-line INT]). The PROMs, including the European Myelopathy Score (EMS), the Neck Disability Index (NDI), and the EQ-5D, were collected from the national Swedish Spine Register. Complications, reoperations, and in-hospital treatment costs were also compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Ninety patients (mean age 60.7 years, 51 men [57%]) were included in the ADF group and 63 patients (mean age 68.8 years, 41 men [65%]) in the SL group. The ADF and SL groups had similar PROMs at baseline. The preoperative MR images showed similar C2-7 Cobb angles (10.7° [ADF] vs 14.1° [SL], p = 0.12) and mK-line INTs (4.08 vs 4.88 mm, p = 0.07), but different C2-7 SVA values (16.2 vs 19.3 mm, p = 0.04). The comparison of ANCOVA-adjusted mean changes in PROMs from baseline to the 2-year follow-up presented no significant differences between the groups (EMS, p = 0.901; NDI, p = 0.639; EQ-5D, p = 0.378; and EQ-5D health, p = 0.418). The overall complication rate was twice as high in the ADF group (22.2% vs 9.5%, p = 0.049), while the reoperation rate was comparable (16.7% vs 7.9%, p = 0.146). The average in-hospital treatment cost per patient was $6617 (USD) for SL, $7046 for ACDF, and $12,000 for ACCF. CONCLUSIONS: SL provides similar PROMs after 2 years, a significantly lower complication rate, and better cost-effectiveness compared with ADF.

Artificial disc replacement and adjacent-segment pathology: 10-year outcomes of a randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: Artificial disc replacement (ADR) is designed to preserve motion and thus protect against adjacent-segment pathology (ASP) and act as an alternative treatment to fusion surgery. The question remains, how well do ADR devices perform after 10 years of follow-up compared with fusion surgery in terms of patient satisfaction, sustainability, and protection against ASP? METHODS: This was the 10-year follow-up study of 153 participants who underwent ADR or fusion surgery after anterior decompression due to cervical degenerative radiculopathy (ISRCTN registration no. 44347115). Scores on the Neck Disability Index (NDI), EQ-5D, and visual analog scale for neck and arm pain were obtained from the Swedish Spine Registry and analyzed using ANCOVA. Information about secondary surgical procedures was collected from medical records and presented as Kaplan-Meier curves. MRI and flexion-extension radiography were performed, and ASP was graded according to the Miyazaki classification system. RESULTS: Ten participants were lost to follow-up, which left 143 participants (80 underwent ADR and 65 underwent anterior cervical discectomy and fusion). There were no differences between groups in terms of patient-reported outcome measures (10-year difference in NDI scores 1.7 points, 95% CI -5.1 to 8.5, p = 0.61). Nineteen (24%) participants in the ADR group compared with 9 (14%) in the fusion group underwent secondary surgical procedures. The higher reoperation rate of the ADR group was mainly due to 11 female participants with device loosening. The rates of reoperation due to ASP were similar between groups, which was confirmed with MRI assessment of ASP that also showed no differences between the groups (p = 0.21). CONCLUSIONS: This was the first 10-year follow-up study to compare ADR with fusion surgery and to provide MRI information for the assessment of ASP. The authors found no benefit of ADR over fusion surgery after anterior decompression for cervical degenerative radiculopathy.

Laminectomy alone versus laminectomy with fusion for degenerative cervical myelopathy: a long-term study of a national cohort.

PURPOSE: To compare patient-reported 5-year clinical outcomes between laminectomy alone versus laminectomy with instrumented fusion in patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy in a population-based cohort. METHODS: All patients in the national Swedish Spine Register (Swespine) from January 2006 until March 2019, with degenerative cervical myelopathy, were assessed. Multiple imputation and propensity score matching based on clinicodemographic and radiographic parameters were used to compare patients treated with laminectomy alone with patients treated with laminectomy plus posterior-lateral instrumented fusion. The primary outcome measure was the European Myelopathy Score, a validated patient-reported outcome measure. The scale ranges from 5 to 18, with lower scores reflecting more severe myelopathy. RESULTS: Among 967 eligible patients, 717 (74%) patients were included. Laminectomy alone was performed on 412 patients (mean age 68 years; 149 women [36%]), whereas instrumented fusion was added for 305 patients (mean age 68 years; 119 women [39%]). After imputation, the propensity for smoking, worse myelopathy scores, spondylolisthesis, and kyphosis was slightly higher in the fusion group. After imputation and propensity score matching, there were on average 212 pairs patients with a 5-year follow-up in each group. There were no important differences in patient-reported clinical outcomes between the methods after 5 years. Due to longer hospitalization times and implant-related costs, the mean cost increase per instrumented patient was approximately $4700 US. CONCLUSIONS: Instrumented fusions generated higher costs and were not associated with superior long-term clinical outcomes. These findings are based on a national cohort and can thus be regarded as generalizable.

Surgical treatment outcome on a national cohort of 176 patients with cervical manifestation of rheumatoid arthritis.

PURPOSE: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) affecting the cervical spine results in instability and deformity that can be divided into the subtypes C1-C2 horizontal (atlantoaxial instability), C0-C2 vertical (basilar invagination), subaxial, and combined instabilities. The aim of this study was to compare the surgical treatments and outcomes of RA-related deformity and instability in a population-based setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients with RA in the national Swespine register from January 1, 2006, to March 20, 2019, were assessed. Baseline characteristics, surgical treatments, European Myelopathy Scale (EMS), Neck Disability Index, the Visual Analog Scale for neck and arm pain as well as pre- and postoperative imaging were analyzed. The follow-up time points were at 1-, 2-, and 5 years after surgery. RESULTS: A total of 176 patients were included. There were 62 (35%) patients with C1-C2 horizontal instability, 48 (27%) with C0-C2 vertical instability, 19 (11%) patients with subaxial instability, 43 (24%) patients with combined instability, and 4 patients without instability served as controls. The EMS improved in the C1-C2 horizontal instability group after fusion surgery (Δ =2.6 p) but remained within baseline confidence intervals in the other groups. All patients regardless of instability improved in pain. The subaxial instability had the highest risk of death within 5 years after surgery (11/19, 58%). The most dangerous complications due to implant failure were seen in patients instrumented with laminar hooks. CONCLUSION: The neurological outcome after fusion surgery is poor and the death rate is high in patients with cervical RA-related instability and deformity.

Operative treatment of cervical radiculopathy: anterior cervical decompression and fusion compared with posterior foraminotomy: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Cervical radiculopathy is the most common disease in the cervical spine, affecting patients around 50-55 year of age. An operative treatment is common clinical praxis when non-operative treatment fails. The controversy is in the choice of operative treatment, conducting either anterior cervical decompression and fusion or posterior foraminotomy. The study objective is to evaluate short- and long-term outcome of anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) and posterior foraminotomy (PF) METHODS: A multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial with 1:1 randomization, ACDF vs. PF including 110 patients. The primary aim is to evaluate if PF is non-inferior to ACDF using a non-inferiority design with ACDF as "active control." The neck disability index (NDI) is the primary outcome measure, and duration of follow-up is 2 years. DISCUSSION: Due to absence of high level of evidence, the authors believe that a RCT will improve the evidence for using the different surgical treatments for cervical radiculopathy and strengthen current surgical treatment recommendation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04177849. Registered on November 26, 2019.

Unintended fusion in cervical artificial disk replacement: a prospective study on heterotopic ossification, progression, and clinical outcome, with 5-year follow-up.

PURPOSE: Heterotopic ossification (HO) may cause unintended fusion in artificial disk replacement (ADR), failing to preserve motion. The reported incidence of HO varies hugely. This study aimed to determine prevalence of HO, progression, predisposing factors to occurrence and to progression, and potential effect on clinical outcomes. METHODS: Eighty-three patients treated with ADRs for cervical radiculopathy at one or two segments were extracted from a previously published RCT. Of the 83 patients, 59 had remaining ADR (79 implants) and sufficiently high-quality X-rays at 5 years of follow-up to allow analysis. HO was graded on plain films according to Mehren/Suchomel. Prevalence, progression, predisposing factors and effect on clinical outcome (Neck Disability Index-NDI) were analyzed. RESULTS: At 2 years, HO was seen in 46/55 ADR implants (84%), severe enough to affect mobility in 27/55 (49%). At 5 years, HO was seen in 92% of 79 implants, severe in 71%. Male sex was a predisposing factor to HO. No predisposing factors to progression were identified. NDI was not affected by the severity of HO. CONCLUSION: Almost all ADR implants in our study have HO at 5 years of follow-up. Male sex is a risk factor. Severe HO did not affect clinical outcome. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Study registered at ISRCTN (registration number: 44347115).

Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: A 7-Letter Coding System That Supports Decision-Making for the Surgical Approach.

OBJECTIVE: To validate with a prospective study a decision-supporting coding system for the surgical approach for multilevel degenerative cervical myelopathy. METHODS: Ten cases were presented on an internet platform, including clinical and imaging data. A single-approach (G1), a choice between 2 (G2), or 3 approaches (G3) were options. Senior and junior spine surgeons analyzed 7 parameters: location and extension of the compression of the spinal cord, C-spine alignment and instability, general morbidity and bone diseases, and K-line and multilevel corpectomy. For each parameter, an anterior, posterior, or combined approach was suggested. The most frequent letter or the last letter (if C) of the resulting 7-letter code (7LC) suggested the surgical approach. Each surgeon performed 2 reads per case within 8 weeks. RESULTS: G1: Interrater reliability between junior surgeons improved from the first read (κ = 0.40) to the second (κ = 0.76, p < 0.001) but did not change between senior surgeons (κ = 0.85). The intrarater reliability was similar for junior (κ = 0.78) and senior (κ = 0.71) surgeons. G2: Junior/senior surgeons agreed completely (58%/62%), partially (24%/23%), or did not agree (18%/15%) with the 7LC choice. G3: junior/senior surgeons agreed completely (50%/50%) or partially (50%/50%) with the 7LC choice. CONCLUSION: The 7LC showed good overall reliability. Junior surgeons went through a learning curve and converged to senior surgeons in the second read. The 7LC helps less experienced surgeons to analyze, in a structured manner, the relevant clinical and imaging parameters influencing the choice of the surgical approach, rather than simply pointing out the only correct one.

Accuracy and Reliability of X-ray Measurements in the Cervical Spine.

STUDY DESIGN: This study is a post hoc analysis of a multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial which compared artificial disc replacement and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. PURPOSE: Useful radiographic parameters for assessing cervical alignment include the Cobb angles, T1 slope (T1S), occipitocervical inclination (OCI), K-line tilt (KLT), and cervical sagittal vertical axis (cSVA). This study aimed to determine measurement accuracy and reliability for these parameters. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Various authors have assessed repeatability by comparing different methods of measurement, but knowledge of measurement error and minimal detectable change is scarce. METHODS: We evaluated 758 lateral cervical radiographs. One medical student and one spine surgeon (i.e., measured ×2 within 4 weeks) independently measured the parameters obtaining 5,850 values. Standard error of measurement (SEm) and minimum detectable change (MDC) were calculated for each parameter. The accuracy and reliability of the Cobb angle measurements were calculated for the different types of angles: cervical lordosis, prosthesis angle, segmental angle with two bone surfaces (SABB), and segmental angle with one bone and one metal surface. Reliability was determined with intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS: SEm was 1.8° and MDC was 5.0° for the Cobb angle, with an intraobserver/interobserver ICC of 0.958/0.886. All the different subtypes of Cobb angles had an ICC higher than 0.950, except SABB (intraobserver/interobserver ICC of 0.922/0.716). The most accurate and reliable measurement was for KLT. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides normative data on SEm and MDC for Cobb angles, T1S, KLT, OCI, and cSVA in cervical lateral radiographs. Reliability was excellent for all parameters except SABB (e.g., good).

Posterior foraminotomy versus anterior decompression and fusion in patients with cervical degenerative disc disease with radiculopathy: up to 5 years of outcome from the national Swedish Spine Register.

OBJECTIVE: The long-term efficacy of posterior foraminotomy compared with anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) for the treatment of degenerative disc disease with radiculopathy has not been previously investigated in a population-based cohort. METHODS: All patients in the national Swedish Spine Register (Swespine) from January 1, 2006, until November 15, 2017, with cervical degenerative disc disease and radiculopathy were assessed. Using propensity score matching, patients treated with posterior foraminotomy were compared with those undergoing ACDF. The primary outcome measure was the Neck Disability Index (NDI), a patient-reported outcome score ranging from 0% to 100%, with higher scores indicating greater disability. A minimal clinically important difference was defined as > 15%. Secondary outcomes were assessed with additional patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). RESULTS: A total of 4368 patients (2136/2232 women/men) met the inclusion criteria. Posterior foraminotomy was performed in 647 patients, and 3721 patients underwent ACDF. After meticulous propensity score matching, 570 patients with a mean age of 54 years remained in each group. Both groups had substantial decreases in their NDI scores; however, after 5 years, the difference was not significant (2.3%, 95% CI -4.1% to 8.4%; p = 0.48) between the groups. There were no significant differences between the groups in EQ-5D or visual analog scale (VAS) for neck and arm scores. The secondary surgeries on the index level due to restenosis were more frequent in the foraminotomy group (6/100 patients vs 1/100), but on the adjacent segments there was no difference between groups (2/100). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with cervical degenerative disc disease and radiculopathy, both groups demonstrated clinical improvements at the 5-year follow-up that were comparable and did not achieve a clinically important difference from one another, even though the reoperation rate favored the ACDF group. This study design obtains population-based results, which are generalizable.

Surgical treatment of the severely damaged atlantoaxial joint with C1-C2 facet spacers: Three case reports.

RATIONALE: Atlantoaxial subluxation (AAS), caused by congenital factors, inflammation such as rheumatoid arthritis, infection, neoplasia, or trauma, is rare and severely erodes and subluxates atlantoaxial (AA) joints. For these patients, surgical reduction, and stabilization are difficult. Surgery, including anterior transoral decompression and posterior fixation, anterior endonasal decompression and fixation, and posterior decompression with AA or occipitocervical fixation, is often the only treatment available. However, there have only been 2 reports of C1-C2 facet spacer use in treating AAS. Here, we report the case histories of 3 patients with severely damaged and subluxated AA joints and symptomatic basilar invagination (BI), malalignment, or C2 root compression. PATIENT CONCERNS: The cases included 2 women with rheumatoid arthritis and 1 man with spondyloarthropathy secondary to ulcerative colitis. DIAGNOSIS: Radiographic imaging revealed severely damaged and subluxated AA joints. Their symptoms included worsening pain in the neck or occiput with or without myelopathy and neuralgia. INTERVENTIONS: After realignment with C1-C2 spacers and posterior C1-C2 screw fixation, the patient symptoms were resolved. OUTCOMES: Of note, 2 of the 3 patients were healed without complications. One patient who underwent secondary revision surgery because of rod breakage and obvious nonunion at C0-C2 was determined to be healed at 1-year follow-up after the revision surgery. LESSONS: We confirmed that C1-C2 facet spacers both reduced BI and occipitocervical coronal malalignment as well as releasing C2 root compression. Therefore, surgical restoration and fixation should be a required treatment in this very rare group of patients.

Artificial disc replacement versus fusion in patients with cervical degenerative disc disease and radiculopathy: a randomized controlled trial with 5-year outcomes.

In BriefIn this study the authors compare cervical arthroplasty with fusion surgery in a randomized controlled trial using patient-reported outcome measures and MRI after 5 years of follow-up. Because the main purpose of arthroplasties is to prevent adjacent-segment pathology, it is important to investigate if that is actually realized in practice.

Artificial disc replacement versus fusion in patients with cervical degenerative disc disease with radiculopathy: 5-year outcomes from the National Swedish Spine Register.

OBJECTIVE: The long-term efficacy of artificial disc replacement (ADR) surgery compared with fusion after decompression for the treatment of cervical degenerative disc disease and radiculopathy has not previously been investigated in a population-based setting. METHODS: All patients with cervical degenerative disc disease and radiculopathy who were in the national Swedish Spine Registry (Swespine) beginning in January 1, 2006, were eligible for the study. Follow-up information was obtained up to November 15, 2017. The authors compared, using propensity score matching, patients treated with anterior decompression and insertion of an ADR with patients who underwent anterior decompression combined with fusion surgery. The primary outcome was the Neck Disability Index (NDI), a patient-reported function score ranging from 0% to 100%, with higher scores indicating greater disability and a minimum clinically important difference of > 15%. RESULTS: A total of 3998 patients (2018:1980 women/men) met the inclusion criteria, of whom 204 had undergone arthroplasty and 3794 had undergone fusion. After propensity score matching, 185 patients with a mean age of 49.7 years remained in each group. Scores on the NDI were approximately halved in both groups after 5 years, but without a significant mean difference in NDI (3.0%; 95% CI -8.4 to 2.4; p = 0.28) between the groups. There were no differences between the groups in EuroQol-5 Dimensions or in pain scores for the neck and arm. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with cervical degenerative disc disease and radiculopathy, decompression plus ADR surgery did not result in a clinically important difference in outcomes after 5 years, compared with decompression and fusion surgery.