Wesley M Durand, Rajan Khanna, Gabriel I Nazario-Ferrer, Sang H Lee, Richard L Skolasky, Amit Jain
{"title":"单层颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术后的翻修手术(带钢板与独立固定架对比),随访 2-5 年。","authors":"Wesley M Durand, Rajan Khanna, Gabriel I Nazario-Ferrer, Sang H Lee, Richard L Skolasky, Amit Jain","doi":"10.1177/21925682241279528","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>retrospective study.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate the incidence of all-cause revision surgery between plated vs stand-alone cage constructs for single level ACDF.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively analyzed a commercial insurance claims database. Patients 18-65 years-old were included if they underwent single-level inpatient ACDF (defined with CPT codes) from 2010 - 2018, with a minimum of 2-year continuous insurance enrollment. The primary independent variable was the use of anterior plating vs zero profile device or stand-alone cage. Synthetic (ie, metal, PEEK, etc.) vs allograft interbody was a secondary independent variable. The primary outcome variable was revision cervical arthrodesis after the index operation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 21092 patients undergoing single-level inpatient ACDF were included. 10.0% received a stand-alone cage during the index operation. Mean follow-up duration was 4.5 years. Revision arthrodesis occurred in 8.2% of patients overall, at a mean of 2.4 years after the index surgery. Patients with anterior plating had a lower rate of all-cause revision surgery in unadjusted (overall rate 8.1% vs 9.6%, <i>P</i> = 0.0185) and adjusted analysis (OR 0.78, <i>P</i> = 0.0016) vs stand-alone cages. Patients with stand-alone cages had higher rates of revision with a posterior approach than did patients with plated constructs. In sub-analysis, the combination of a stand-alone interbody device with an allograft had significantly higher odds of revision than other combinations of devices.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Among commercially insured patients ≤65 years-old undergoing single-level ACDF, anterior plating was associated with a reduced incidence of revision surgery compared to stand-alone cages within the follow up period of our study.</p>","PeriodicalId":12680,"journal":{"name":"Global Spine Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Revision Surgery after Single Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion With Plate vs Stand-Alone Cage over 2 to 5 Year Follow-Up.\",\"authors\":\"Wesley M Durand, Rajan Khanna, Gabriel I Nazario-Ferrer, Sang H Lee, Richard L Skolasky, Amit Jain\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/21925682241279528\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>retrospective study.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate the incidence of all-cause revision surgery between plated vs stand-alone cage constructs for single level ACDF.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively analyzed a commercial insurance claims database. Patients 18-65 years-old were included if they underwent single-level inpatient ACDF (defined with CPT codes) from 2010 - 2018, with a minimum of 2-year continuous insurance enrollment. The primary independent variable was the use of anterior plating vs zero profile device or stand-alone cage. Synthetic (ie, metal, PEEK, etc.) vs allograft interbody was a secondary independent variable. The primary outcome variable was revision cervical arthrodesis after the index operation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 21092 patients undergoing single-level inpatient ACDF were included. 10.0% received a stand-alone cage during the index operation. Mean follow-up duration was 4.5 years. Revision arthrodesis occurred in 8.2% of patients overall, at a mean of 2.4 years after the index surgery. Patients with anterior plating had a lower rate of all-cause revision surgery in unadjusted (overall rate 8.1% vs 9.6%, <i>P</i> = 0.0185) and adjusted analysis (OR 0.78, <i>P</i> = 0.0016) vs stand-alone cages. Patients with stand-alone cages had higher rates of revision with a posterior approach than did patients with plated constructs. In sub-analysis, the combination of a stand-alone interbody device with an allograft had significantly higher odds of revision than other combinations of devices.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Among commercially insured patients ≤65 years-old undergoing single-level ACDF, anterior plating was associated with a reduced incidence of revision surgery compared to stand-alone cages within the follow up period of our study.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12680,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Spine Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Spine Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682241279528\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Spine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682241279528","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Revision Surgery after Single Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion With Plate vs Stand-Alone Cage over 2 to 5 Year Follow-Up.
Study design: retrospective study.
Objective: To investigate the incidence of all-cause revision surgery between plated vs stand-alone cage constructs for single level ACDF.
Methods: We retrospectively analyzed a commercial insurance claims database. Patients 18-65 years-old were included if they underwent single-level inpatient ACDF (defined with CPT codes) from 2010 - 2018, with a minimum of 2-year continuous insurance enrollment. The primary independent variable was the use of anterior plating vs zero profile device or stand-alone cage. Synthetic (ie, metal, PEEK, etc.) vs allograft interbody was a secondary independent variable. The primary outcome variable was revision cervical arthrodesis after the index operation.
Results: In total, 21092 patients undergoing single-level inpatient ACDF were included. 10.0% received a stand-alone cage during the index operation. Mean follow-up duration was 4.5 years. Revision arthrodesis occurred in 8.2% of patients overall, at a mean of 2.4 years after the index surgery. Patients with anterior plating had a lower rate of all-cause revision surgery in unadjusted (overall rate 8.1% vs 9.6%, P = 0.0185) and adjusted analysis (OR 0.78, P = 0.0016) vs stand-alone cages. Patients with stand-alone cages had higher rates of revision with a posterior approach than did patients with plated constructs. In sub-analysis, the combination of a stand-alone interbody device with an allograft had significantly higher odds of revision than other combinations of devices.
Conclusion: Among commercially insured patients ≤65 years-old undergoing single-level ACDF, anterior plating was associated with a reduced incidence of revision surgery compared to stand-alone cages within the follow up period of our study.
期刊介绍:
Global Spine Journal (GSJ) is the official scientific publication of AOSpine. A peer-reviewed, open access journal, devoted to the study and treatment of spinal disorders, including diagnosis, operative and non-operative treatment options, surgical techniques, and emerging research and clinical developments.GSJ is indexed in PubMedCentral, SCOPUS, and Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI).