Comparative characteristic of anterior and posterior stabilization of the cervical spine during surgical interventions
Objective. To analyze possibilities and limitations of various stabilization technologies in the surgical treatment of cervical spine pathology. Material and Methods. Study design: retrospective monocentric observational analysis. Level of evidence: 3b (UK Oxford, version 2009). Diagnostic and tr...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Ministry of Health of Russian Federation, Federal State Budgetary Institution "Novosibirsk Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopaedics n.a. Ya.L. Tsivyan"
2020-09-01
|
| Series: | Хирургия позвоночника |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.spinesurgery.ru/jour/article/view/1730/1711 |
| _version_ | 1797727514272989184 |
|---|---|
| author | Aleksandr V. Burtsev Alexandr V. Gubin Sergey O. Ryabykh Olga M. Sergeenko (Pavlova) Polina V. Ochirova |
| author_facet | Aleksandr V. Burtsev Alexandr V. Gubin Sergey O. Ryabykh Olga M. Sergeenko (Pavlova) Polina V. Ochirova |
| author_sort | Aleksandr V. Burtsev |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Objective. To analyze possibilities and limitations of various stabilization technologies in the surgical treatment of cervical spine pathology.
Material and Methods. Study design: retrospective monocentric observational analysis. Level of evidence: 3b (UK Oxford, version 2009).
Diagnostic and treatment data are presented for 433 patients operated on using stabilization systems: patients in Group 1 (n = 228) underwent anterior fixation, those in Group 2 (n = 175) – posterior fixation with polyaxial screw systems, and in Group 3 (n = 30) – combined (anterior and posterior) fixation.
Results. For anterior fixation, ACDF, ACCF and their combinations were used as stabilization technologies. In 18.0 % of patients, 49 complications were revealed which corresponded to the 1st and 2nd categories according to the recommendations of WHO, and to grades I–
IVA of Clavien – Dindo classification. For posterior fixation in Group 2, stabilization was performed using screw instrumentation systems.
In 13.7 % of patients, 25 complications of the 1st and 2nd categories according to WHO recommendations and grades I–V according to
Clavien-Dindo classification were revealed. Combined fixation involved the use of both anterior and posterior stabilizations. Analysis of
anterior and posterior fixation techniques, as well as their comparison, showed a wide range of posterior stabilization options for a surgeon:
any age, length, localization and nosology. Moreover, the realization of these advantages is carried out only through the indispensable use
of screw fixation. Posterior fixation has several limitations: the impossibility of anterior decompression, limited correction of segmental
lordosis, accessibility and greater trauma to soft tissues.
Conclusion. Comparative analysis of methods for the cervical spine stabilization showed that posterior fixation is an integral part of the
surgical treatment of the cervical spine pathology. The obtained results indicate the complementarity of the technologies for the cervical spine stabilization, without their interchangeability. These data can be useful when choosing stabilization techniques before planning
surgical treatment of cervical spine pathology, which will allow changing the existing paradigm. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-12T11:01:45Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-b75b3c9c68ff4e5695e0cbd150b417c6 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1810-8997 2313-1497 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-12T11:01:45Z |
| publishDate | 2020-09-01 |
| publisher | Ministry of Health of Russian Federation, Federal State Budgetary Institution "Novosibirsk Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopaedics n.a. Ya.L. Tsivyan" |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Хирургия позвоночника |
| spelling | doaj.art-b75b3c9c68ff4e5695e0cbd150b417c62023-09-02T05:43:12ZengMinistry of Health of Russian Federation, Federal State Budgetary Institution "Novosibirsk Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopaedics n.a. Ya.L. Tsivyan"Хирургия позвоночника1810-89972313-14972020-09-0117310811610.14531/ss2020.3.108-116Comparative characteristic of anterior and posterior stabilization of the cervical spine during surgical interventionsAleksandr V. Burtsev0https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8968-6528Alexandr V. Gubin1https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5097-7843Sergey O. Ryabykh2https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6565-7052Olga M. Sergeenko (Pavlova)3https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2905-0215Polina V. Ochirova4https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5172-4429National Ilizarov Medical Research Center for Traumatology and Orthopedics, Kurgan, RussiaN.N. Priorov National Medical Research Center of Traumatology and Orthopaedics, Moscow, RussiaNational Ilizarov Medical Research Center for Traumatology and Orthopedics, Kurgan, RussiaNational Ilizarov Medical Research Center for Traumatology and Orthopedics, Kurgan, RussiaNational Ilizarov Medical Research Center for Traumatology and Orthopedics, Kurgan, RussiaObjective. To analyze possibilities and limitations of various stabilization technologies in the surgical treatment of cervical spine pathology. Material and Methods. Study design: retrospective monocentric observational analysis. Level of evidence: 3b (UK Oxford, version 2009). Diagnostic and treatment data are presented for 433 patients operated on using stabilization systems: patients in Group 1 (n = 228) underwent anterior fixation, those in Group 2 (n = 175) – posterior fixation with polyaxial screw systems, and in Group 3 (n = 30) – combined (anterior and posterior) fixation. Results. For anterior fixation, ACDF, ACCF and their combinations were used as stabilization technologies. In 18.0 % of patients, 49 complications were revealed which corresponded to the 1st and 2nd categories according to the recommendations of WHO, and to grades I– IVA of Clavien – Dindo classification. For posterior fixation in Group 2, stabilization was performed using screw instrumentation systems. In 13.7 % of patients, 25 complications of the 1st and 2nd categories according to WHO recommendations and grades I–V according to Clavien-Dindo classification were revealed. Combined fixation involved the use of both anterior and posterior stabilizations. Analysis of anterior and posterior fixation techniques, as well as their comparison, showed a wide range of posterior stabilization options for a surgeon: any age, length, localization and nosology. Moreover, the realization of these advantages is carried out only through the indispensable use of screw fixation. Posterior fixation has several limitations: the impossibility of anterior decompression, limited correction of segmental lordosis, accessibility and greater trauma to soft tissues. Conclusion. Comparative analysis of methods for the cervical spine stabilization showed that posterior fixation is an integral part of the surgical treatment of the cervical spine pathology. The obtained results indicate the complementarity of the technologies for the cervical spine stabilization, without their interchangeability. These data can be useful when choosing stabilization techniques before planning surgical treatment of cervical spine pathology, which will allow changing the existing paradigm.https://www.spinesurgery.ru/jour/article/view/1730/1711anterior and posterior stabilizationfixationcomplications |
| spellingShingle | Aleksandr V. Burtsev Alexandr V. Gubin Sergey O. Ryabykh Olga M. Sergeenko (Pavlova) Polina V. Ochirova Comparative characteristic of anterior and posterior stabilization of the cervical spine during surgical interventions Хирургия позвоночника anterior and posterior stabilization fixation complications |
| title | Comparative characteristic of anterior and posterior stabilization of the cervical spine during surgical interventions |
| title_full | Comparative characteristic of anterior and posterior stabilization of the cervical spine during surgical interventions |
| title_fullStr | Comparative characteristic of anterior and posterior stabilization of the cervical spine during surgical interventions |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparative characteristic of anterior and posterior stabilization of the cervical spine during surgical interventions |
| title_short | Comparative characteristic of anterior and posterior stabilization of the cervical spine during surgical interventions |
| title_sort | comparative characteristic of anterior and posterior stabilization of the cervical spine during surgical interventions |
| topic | anterior and posterior stabilization fixation complications |
| url | https://www.spinesurgery.ru/jour/article/view/1730/1711 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT aleksandrvburtsev comparativecharacteristicofanteriorandposteriorstabilizationofthecervicalspineduringsurgicalinterventions AT alexandrvgubin comparativecharacteristicofanteriorandposteriorstabilizationofthecervicalspineduringsurgicalinterventions AT sergeyoryabykh comparativecharacteristicofanteriorandposteriorstabilizationofthecervicalspineduringsurgicalinterventions AT olgamsergeenkopavlova comparativecharacteristicofanteriorandposteriorstabilizationofthecervicalspineduringsurgicalinterventions AT polinavochirova comparativecharacteristicofanteriorandposteriorstabilizationofthecervicalspineduringsurgicalinterventions |