J Korean Neurosurg Soc.  2012 Nov;52(5):452-458. 10.3340/jkns.2012.52.5.452.

Hybrid Surgery of Multilevel Cervical Degenerative Disc Disease : Review of Literature and Clinical Results

• Lee SB
• Cho KS
• Kim JY
• Yoo DS
• Lee TG
• Huh PW

• KMID: 2018251
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.3340/jkns.2012.52.5.452

Abstract

OBJECTIVE
In the present study, we evaluated the effect, safety and radiological outcomes of cervical hybrid surgery (cervical disc prosthesis replacement at one level, and interbody fusion at the other level) on the multilevel cervical degenerative disc disease (DDD).
METHODS
Fifty-one patients (mean age 46.7 years) with symptomatic multilevel cervical spondylosis were treated using hybrid surgery (HS). Clinical [neck disability index (NDI) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score] and radiologic outcomes [range of motion (ROM) for cervical spine, adjacent segment and arthroplasty level] were evaluated at routine postoperative intervals of 1, 6, 12, 24 months. Review of other similar studies that examined the HS in multilevel cervical DDD was performed.
RESULTS
Out of 51 patients, 41 patients received 2 level hybrid surgery and 10 patients received 3 level hybrid surgery. The NDI and VAS score were significantly decreased during the follow up periods (p<0.05). The cervical ROM was recovered at 6 and 12 month postoperatively and the mean ROM of inferior adjacent segment was significantly larger than that of superior adjacent segments after surgery. The ROM of the arthoplasty level was preserved well during the follow up periods. No surgical and device related complications were observed.
CONCLUSION
Hybrid surgery is a safe and effective alternative to fusion for the management of multilevel cervical spondylosis.

Keyword

Multilevel cervical spondylosis; Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion; Total disc replacement; Hybrid

MeSH Terms

Arthroplasty
Chimera
Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Prostheses and Implants
Spine
Spondylosis
Total Disc Replacement
Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 A : Tourniquet was inflated to extend the patient's neck to maintain the lordosis during the anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Patient's neck shows extension on C-arm image. B : Tourniquet was deflated to place the patient's neck in a neutral position during the total disc replacement. Patients' neck shows neutral alignment on C-arm image.

• 

  Fig. 2 Radiographs illustrating how to measure the range of motion (ROM). The ROM of the whole cervical spine is defined as the difference in the Cobb's angle of C2-C7 between the flexion and extension view (A°). The ROM of upper adjacent segment (B°) and lower adjacent segment (C°) is defined as the difference in the Cobb's angle of adjacent level in the treated unit between the flexion and extension view. The ROM of arthroplasty level is calculated in the dynamic lateral simple radiographs (D°).

• 

  Fig. 3 The mean NDI scores decreased significantly in 2-level and 3-level HS. There is no difference between both groups. NDI : neck disability index, HS : hybrid surgery.

• 

  Fig. 4 The mean VAS scores decrease significantly in 2-level and 3-level HS. There is no difference between both groups. VAS : Visual Analogue Scale, HS : hybrid surgery.

• 

  Fig. 5 The ROM of cervical spine was recovered at 6 and 12 month after HS. There is no difference between both groups. ROM : range of motion, HS : hybrid surgery.

• 

  Fig. 6 The ROM of inferior adjacent segments is significantly larger than that of superior adjacent segments after HS. ROM : range of motion, HS : hybrid surgery.

• 

  Fig. 7 The mean range of ROM at arthroplasty level was from 3.8 degree to 12.4 degree. There are no significant changes of ROM at TDR level during the follow up periods. ROM : range of motion, TDR : total disc replacement, HS : hybrid surgery.

Reference

1. Baba H, Furusawa N, Imura S, Kawahara N, Tsuchiya H, Tomita K. Late radiographic findings after anterior cervical fusion for spondylotic myeloradiculopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1993; 18:2167–2173. PMID: 8278827.

2. Barbagallo GM, Assietti R, Corbino L, Olindo G, Foti PV, Russo V, et al. Early results and review of the literature of a novel hybrid surgical technique combining cervical arthrodesis and disc arthroplasty for treating multilevel degenerative disc disease: opposite or complementary techniques? Eur Spine J. 2009; 18(Suppl 1):29–39. PMID: 19415346.

3. Bertagnoli R, Yue JJ, Pfeiffer F, Fenk-Mayer A, Lawrence JP, Kershaw T, et al. Early results after ProDisc-C cervical disc replacement. J Neurosurg Spine. 2005; 2:403–410. PMID: 15871478.

4. Bryan VE Jr. Cervical motion segment replacement. Eur Spine J. 2002; 11(Suppl 2):S92–S97. PMID: 12384728.

5. Cardoso MJ, Rosner MK. Multilevel cervical arthroplasty with artificial disc replacement. Neurosurg Focus. 2010; 28:E19. PMID: 20568935.

6. Cherry C. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for cervical disc disease. AORN J. 2002; 76:998–1004. 1007–1008. quiz 1009-1012. PMID: 12528488.

7. Cherubino P, Benazzo F, Borromeo U, Perle S. Degenerative arthritis of the adjacent spinal joints following anterior cervical spinal fusion : clinicoradiologic and statistical correlations. Ital J Orthop Traumatol. 1990; 16:533–543. PMID: 2099935.

8. Fowler SB, Anthony-Phillips P, Mehta D, Liebman K. Health-related quality of life in patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy fusion. J Neurosci Nurs. 2005; 37:97–100. PMID: 15902952.

9. Goffin J, Casey A, Kehr P, Liebig K, Lind B, Logroscino C, et al. Preliminary clinical experience with the Bryan Cervical Disc Prosthesis. Neurosurgery. 2002; 51:840–845. discussion 845-847. PMID: 12188968.

10. Hilibrand AS, Carlson GD, Palumbo MA, Jones PK, Bohlman HH. Radiculopathy and myelopathy at segments adjacent to the site of a previous anterior cervical arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1999; 81:519–528. PMID: 10225797.

11. Hilibrand AS, Robbins M. Adjacent segment degeneration and adjacent segment disease : the consequences of spinal fusion? Spine J. 2004; 4:190S–194S. PMID: 15541666.

12. Jacobs WC, Anderson PG, Limbeek J, Willems PC, Pavlov P. Single or double-level anterior interbody fusion techniques for cervical degenerative disc disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004; CD004958. PMID: 15495130.

13. Matsunaga S, Kabayama S, Yamamoto T, Yone K, Sakou T, Nakanishi K. Strain on intervertebral discs after anterior cervical decompression and fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1999; 24:670–675. PMID: 10209796.

14. Park DH, Ramakrishnan P, Cho TH, Lorenz E, Eck JC, Humphreys SC, et al. Effect of lower two-level anterior cervical fusion on the superior adjacent level. J Neurosurg Spine. 2007; 7:336–340. PMID: 17877270.

15. Peng CW, Quirno M, Bendo JA, Spivak JM, Goldstein JA. Effect of intervertebral disc height on postoperative motion and clinical outcomes after Prodisc-C cervical disc replacement. Spine J. 2009; 9:551–555. PMID: 19447077.

16. Pickett GE, Mitsis DK, Sekhon LH, Sears WR, Duggal N. Effects of a cervical disc prosthesis on segmental and cervical spine alignment. Neurosurg Focus. 2004; 17:E5. PMID: 15636561.

17. Pimenta L, McAfee PC, Cappuccino A, Cunningham BW, Diaz R, Coutinho E. Superiority of multilevel cervical arthroplasty outcomes versus single-level outcomes : 229 consecutive PCM prostheses. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007; 32:1337–1344. PMID: 17515823.

18. Robertson JT, Papadopoulos SM, Traynelis VC. Assessment of adjacent-segment disease in patients treated with cervical fusion or arthroplasty : a prospective 2-year study. J Neurosurg Spine. 2005; 3:417–423. PMID: 16381202.

19. Sasso RC, Smucker JD, Hacker RJ, Heller JG. Artificial disc versus fusion : a prospective, randomized study with 2-year follow-up on 99 patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007; 32:2933–2940. discussion 2941-2942. PMID: 18091483.

20. Schwab JS, Diangelo DJ, Foley KT. Motion compensation associated with single-level cervical fusion : where does the lost motion go? Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006; 31:2439–2448. PMID: 17023853.

21. Shin DA, Yi S, Yoon do H, Kim KN, Shin HC. Artificial disc replacement combined with fusion versus two-level fusion in cervical two-level disc disease. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009; 34:1153–1159. discussion 1160-1161. PMID: 19444062.

22. Suchomel P, Barsa P, Buchvald P, Svobodnik A, Vanickova E. Autologous versus allogenic bone grafts in instrumented anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a prospective study with respect to bone union pattern. Eur Spine J. 2004; 13:510–515. PMID: 15042453.

23. Vicario C, Lopez-Oliva F, Sánchez-Lorente T, Zimmermann M, Asenjo-Siguero JJ, Ladero F, et al. [Anterior cervical fusion with tantalum interbody implants. Clinical and radiological results in a prospective study]. Neurocirugia (Astur). 2006; 17:132–139. discussion 139. PMID: 16721480.

24. White AA, Panjabi MM. Clinical Biomechanics of the Spine. 1990. ed 2. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

25. Wigfield CC, Gill SS, Nelson RJ, Metcalf NH, Robertson JT. The new Frenchay artificial cervical joint : results from a two-year pilot study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002; 27:2446–2452. PMID: 12435973.