We have located links that may give you full text access.
Clinical Trial
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
A prospective randomized multicenter clinical evaluation of an anterior cervical fusion cage.
Spine 2000 October 16
STUDY DESIGN: A prospective, concurrently controlled, randomized, multicenter trial of an anterior Bagby and Kuslich cervical fusion cage (BAK/C; Sulzer Spine-Tech, Minneapolis, MN) for treatment of degenerative disc disease of the cervical spine.
OBJECTIVES: To report clinical results with maximum 24-month follow-up of fusions performed with the BAK/C fusion cage.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Threaded lumbar cages have been used during the past decade as a safe and effective surgical solution for chronic disabling low back pain. Threaded cages have now been developed for use in anterior cervical interbody fusions to obviate the need for allografts or autogenous bone grafting procedures while providing initial stability during the fusion process.
METHODS: Patients with symptomatic cervical discogenic radiculopathy were treated with either anterior cervical discectomy with uninstrumented bone-only fusion (ACDF) or BAK/C fusion cage(s). Independent radiographic assessment of fusion was made and patient-based outcome was assessed by visual analog pain scale and a Short Form (SF)-36 Health Status Questionnaire.
RESULTS: Data analysis included 344 patients at 1 year and 180 at 2 years. When the two cage groups (hydroxya, patite-coated or noncoated) were compared with the ACDF group, similar outcomes were noted for duration of surgery, hospital stay, improvements in neck pain and radicular pain in the affected limb, improvements in the SF-36 Physical Component subscale and Mental Component subscale, and the patients' perception of overall surgical outcome. Symptom improvements were maintained at 2 years. A greater percentage of patients with ACDF needed an iliac crest bone harvest than did BAK/C patients (67% vs.- 3%). Successful fusion for one-level procedures at 12 months was 97.9% for the BAK/C groups and 89.7% for the ACDF group (P < 0.05). The complication rate for the ACDF group was 20.4% compared with an overall complication rate of 11.8% with BAK/C. There was no difference in complications that necessitated a second operative procedure.
CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate that outcomes after a cervical fusion procedure with a threaded cage are the same as those of a conventional uninstrumented bone-only anterior discectomy and fusion with a low risk of complications and rare need for autogenous bone graft harvest.
OBJECTIVES: To report clinical results with maximum 24-month follow-up of fusions performed with the BAK/C fusion cage.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Threaded lumbar cages have been used during the past decade as a safe and effective surgical solution for chronic disabling low back pain. Threaded cages have now been developed for use in anterior cervical interbody fusions to obviate the need for allografts or autogenous bone grafting procedures while providing initial stability during the fusion process.
METHODS: Patients with symptomatic cervical discogenic radiculopathy were treated with either anterior cervical discectomy with uninstrumented bone-only fusion (ACDF) or BAK/C fusion cage(s). Independent radiographic assessment of fusion was made and patient-based outcome was assessed by visual analog pain scale and a Short Form (SF)-36 Health Status Questionnaire.
RESULTS: Data analysis included 344 patients at 1 year and 180 at 2 years. When the two cage groups (hydroxya, patite-coated or noncoated) were compared with the ACDF group, similar outcomes were noted for duration of surgery, hospital stay, improvements in neck pain and radicular pain in the affected limb, improvements in the SF-36 Physical Component subscale and Mental Component subscale, and the patients' perception of overall surgical outcome. Symptom improvements were maintained at 2 years. A greater percentage of patients with ACDF needed an iliac crest bone harvest than did BAK/C patients (67% vs.- 3%). Successful fusion for one-level procedures at 12 months was 97.9% for the BAK/C groups and 89.7% for the ACDF group (P < 0.05). The complication rate for the ACDF group was 20.4% compared with an overall complication rate of 11.8% with BAK/C. There was no difference in complications that necessitated a second operative procedure.
CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate that outcomes after a cervical fusion procedure with a threaded cage are the same as those of a conventional uninstrumented bone-only anterior discectomy and fusion with a low risk of complications and rare need for autogenous bone graft harvest.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Consensus Statement on Vitamin D Status Assessment and Supplementation: Whys, Whens, and Hows.Endocrine Reviews 2024 April 28
The Tricuspid Valve: A Review of Pathology, Imaging, and Current Treatment Options: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 26
Intravenous infusion of dexmedetomidine during the surgery to prevent postoperative delirium and postoperative cognitive dysfunction undergoing non-cardiac surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.European Journal of Medical Research 2024 April 19
Interstitial Lung Disease: A Review.JAMA 2024 April 23
Ventilator Waveforms May Give Clues to Expiratory Muscle Activity.American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 2024 April 25
Acute Kidney Injury and Electrolyte Imbalances Caused by Dapagliflozin Short-Term Use.Pharmaceuticals 2024 March 27
Systemic lupus erythematosus.Lancet 2024 April 18
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app