Clinical and radiographic benefits of skipping C7 instrumentation in posterior cervicothoracic fusion: a retrospective analysis

If you need an accessible version of this item, please email your request to digschol@iu.edu so that they may create one and provide it to you.
Date
2022-09
Language
American English
Embargo Lift Date
Committee Members
Degree
Degree Year
Department
Grantor
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Found At
AME
Abstract

Background C7 instrumentation during posterior cervicothoracic fusion can be challenging because it requires additional work of either placing side connectors to a single rod or placing two rods. Our clinical observations suggested that skipping instrumentation at C7 in a multi-level posterior cervicothoracic fusion will result in minimal intraoperative complications and decreased blood-loss while still maintaining sagittal balance parameters of cervical fusion. The objective of this study is to determine the clinical and radiographic outcomes of skipping C7 instrumentation compared to instrumenting the C7 vertebra in posterior cervicothoracic fusion.

Methods This is a retrospective chart review of 314 consecutive patients who underwent multilevel posterior cervical fusion (PCF) at our institution. Out of 314 patients, 19 were instrumented at C7 serving as the control group, while the remaining 295 patients were not. Evaluation of efficacy was based on intraoperative complications, operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), significant long-term complications, and radiographic evidence of fusion.

Results Skipping the C7 level resulted in a significant reduction in EBL (488±576 vs. 822±1,137; P=0.007); however, operative time was similar between groups (174±95 vs. 184±86 minutes; P=0.844). Complications were minimal in both groups and not statistically significant. Radiographic analysis revealed C7 bridge patients had a significantly increased postoperative sagittal vertical axis (SVA) (29.3±13.1 vs. 20.2±3.1 mm; P=0.008); however, there was no significant difference between groups in SVA correction (−0.3±16.2 vs. −16.1±16.0 mm; P=0.867), T1 slope correction (3.4°±9.9° vs. 3.2°±5.5°; P=0.127), or cervical cobb angle correction (−5.7°±14.2° vs. −7.0°±12.2°; P=0.519). There were no significant long-term complications in either group.

Conclusions Skipping instrumentation at C7 in a multilevel posterior cervicothoracic fusion is associated with significantly reduced operative blood loss without loss of radiographic correction. This study demonstrates the clinical benefits of skipping C7 instrumentation in posterior cervicothoracic fusion with maintenance of radiographic correction parameters.

Description
item.page.description.tableofcontents
item.page.relation.haspart
Cite As
Patel, S., Sadeh, M., Tobin, M. K., Chaudhry, N. S., Gragnaniello, C., & Neckrysh, S. (2022). Clinical and radiographic benefits of skipping C7 instrumentation in posterior cervicothoracic fusion: A retrospective analysis. Journal of Spine Surgery, 8(3), 333–342. https://doi.org/10.21037/jss-21-85
ISSN
Publisher
Series/Report
Sponsorship
Major
Extent
Identifier
Relation
Journal
Journal of Spine Surgery
Source
Publisher
Alternative Title
Type
Article
Number
Volume
Conference Dates
Conference Host
Conference Location
Conference Name
Conference Panel
Conference Secretariat Location
Version
Final published version
Full Text Available at
This item is under embargo {{howLong}}