The Outcomes of Patients With Neck Pain Following ACDF: A Comparison of Patients With Radiculopathy, Myelopathy, or Mixed Symptomatology.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The goal of the present study was to determine whether neck pain responds differently to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) between patients with cervical radiculopathy and/or cervical myelopathy. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Many patients who undergo ACDF because of radiculopathy/myelopathy also complain of neck pain. However, no studies have compared the response of significant neck pain to ACDF. METHODS: Patients undergoing one to three-level primary ACDF for radiculopathy and/or myelopathy with significant (Visual Analogue Scale [VAS] ≥ 3) neck pain and a minimum of 1-year follow-up were included. Based on preoperative symptoms patients were split into groups for analysis: radiculopathy (R group), myelopathy (M group), or both (MR group). Groups were compared for differences in Health Related Quality of Life outcomes: Physical Component Score-12, Mental Component Score (MCS)-12, Neck Disability Index, VAS neck, and VAS arm pain. RESULTS: Two hundred thirty-five patients met inclusion criteria. There were 117 patients in the R group, 53 in the M group, and 65 in the MR group. Preoperative VAS neck pain was found to be significantly higher in the R group versus M group (6.5 vs. 5.5; P = 0.046). Postoperatively, all cohorts experienced significant (P < 0.001) reduction in VAS neck pain, (ΔVAS neck; R group: -2.9, M: -2.5, MR: -2.5) with no significant differences between groups. However, myelopathic patients showed greater improvement in absolute MCS-12 scores (P = 0.011), RR (P = 0.006), and % minimum clinically important difference (P = 0.013) when compared with radiculopathy patients. This greater improvement remained following regression analysis (P = 0.025). CONCLUSION: Patients with substantial preoperative neck pain experienced significant reduction in their neck pain, disability, and physical function following ACDF, whether treated for radiculopathy or myelopathy. However, in this study, only myelopathy patients had significant improvements in their mental function as represented by MCS improvements. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Comparing Health-Related Quality of Life Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Either Primary or Revision Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective review of prospectively collected data. OBJECTIVE: Compare health-related quality of life (HRQOL) outcome metrics in patients undergoing primary and revision anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: ACDF is associated with significant improvements in HRQOL outcome metrics. However, 2.9% of patients per year will develop symptomatic adjacent segment disease and there is a paucity of literature on HRQOL outcomes after revision ACDF. METHODS: Patients were identified who underwent either a primary or revision ACDF, and who had both preoperative and a minimum of 1-year postoperative HRQOL outcome data. Pre- and postoperative Short Form 12 Physical Component Score (SF12 PCS), Short Form 12 Mental Component Score (SF12 MCS) Visual Analog Scale for neck pain (VAS-Neck), VAS-Arm, and Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores were compared. RESULTS: A total of 360 patients (299 primary, 61 revision) were identified. Significant improvement in SF12 PCS, NDI, VAS-Neck, and VAS-Arm was seen in both groups; however, only a significant improvement in SF12 MCS was seen in the primary group. When comparing the results of a primary versus a revision surgery, the SF12 PCS score was the only outcome with a significantly different net improvement in the primary group (7.23 ±â€Š9.72) compared to the revision group (2.9 ±â€Š11.07; P = 0.006) despite similar baseline SF12 PCS scores. The improvement in each of the other reported HRQOL outcomes did not significantly vary between surgical groups. CONCLUSION: A revision ACDF for cervical radiculopathy or myelopathy leads to a significant improvement in the HRQOL outcome, and with the exception of the SF12 PCS, these results are similar to those of patients undergoing a primary ACDF. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2.