Anterior Cervical Interbody Fusion with or Without Plate and Screws System

Park, Chun Kun; Park, Choon Keun; Cho, Kyung Suk; Huh, Pil Woo; Lee, Il Woo; Kang, Joon Ki

Abstract

Although anterior cervical plates are thought to be good tools, their clinical results have not been compared with those of anterior cervical fusion without a plating system in the domestic scientific literature. As there are some advantages as well as shortcomings in these two surgical methods, it is imperative to know which one might be better in terms of the postoperative complications and management. Therefore, the authors reviewed 80patients undergoing anterior cervical fusion during the period of January 1992 to May 1994. Top plate placement was made in 25 and simple fusion without a plating system was applied in 55. The average follow-up period was 9.6 months. In the patients undergoing simple cervical fusion, thirty-two patients(58%) needed rigid braces such as halo braces and Minerva casts for 3 months postoperatively. Thirteen patients(24%) showed graft complications including graft extrusion, whereas patients undergoing plate placement needed only semi-rigid Philadelphia braces for 4 to 8 weeks pos toperatively. Two patients(8%) showed graft setting and screw breakage without any indication of reoperation. However there appeared no difference in the immediate postoperative course of clinical symptoms and the fusion rate(95 vs 96%) at the final follow-up day between the simple fusion and the plate placement patients. The authors conclude that a plating system in anterior cervical fusion may be safe in spite of more extensive operations, and is more likely to offer postoperative stability in the cervical spine and early ambulation and rehabiliation without rigid braces.