Iliac crest autograft versus alternative constructs for anterior cervical spine surgery: Pros, cons, and costs

Nancy E Epstein, Nancy E Epstein

Abstract

Background: Grafting choices available for performing anterior cervical diskectomy/fusion (ACDF) procedures have become a major concern for spinal surgeons, and their institutions. The "gold standard", iliac crest autograft, may still be the best and least expensive grafting option; it deserves to be reassessed along with the pros, cons, and costs for alternative grafts/spacers.

Methods: Although single or multilevel ACDF have utilized iliac crest autograft for decades, the implant industry now offers multiple alternative grafting and spacer devices; (allografts, cages, polyether-etherketone (PEEK) amongst others). While most studies have focused on fusion rates and clinical outcomes following ACDF, few have analyzed the "value-added" of these various constructs (e.g. safety/efficacy, risks/complications, costs).

Results: The majority of studies document 95%-100% fusion rates when iliac crest autograft is utilized to perform single level ACDF (X-ray or CT confirmed at 6-12 postoperative months). Although many allograft studies similarly quote 90%-100% fusion rates (X-ray alone confirmed at 6-12 postoperative months), a recent "post hoc analysis of data from a prospective multicenter trial" (Riew KD et. al., CSRS Abstract Dec. 2011; unpublished) revealed a much higher delayed fusion rate using allografts at one year 55.7%, 2 years 87%, and four years 92%.

Conclusion: Iliac crest autograft utilized for single or multilevel ACDF is associated with the highest fusion, lowest complication rates, and significantly lower costs compared with allograft, cages, PEEK, or other grafts. As spinal surgeons and institutions become more cost conscious, we will have to account for the "value added" of these increasingly expensive graft constructs.

Keywords: Allograft; anterior cervical spine surgery; cages; costs; efficacy; explantation; iliac crest autograft; polyether-etherketone; single-level diskectomy/fusion (1-level ACDF).

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Three months following a single-level anterior diskectomy and fusion, the lateral X-ray shows an iliac autograft (single arrow) within the anterior 2/3 of the interspace. Note the clear lack of lucency between the cephalad and caudad graft/vertebral end plate junctions, but the difficulty directly visualizing bony trabeculation that is better defined on CT. Additionally, the dynamic ABC plate (Aesculap, Tuttlingen, Germany) is adequately placed, while the screws have migrated (curved arrows), approximately 2-3 mm both cephalad and caudad, in the slotted design of the plates
Figure 2
Figure 2
In another lateral radiograph obtained 3.5 months following a single-level anterior diskectomy and fusion, the posterior margin of the iliac crest autograft within the disc space (single large arrow) is visualized and the lack of lucency of the cephalad graft/vertebral body interface is noted. Here, the screws within the plate have migrated 3-4 mm inferiorly, while superiorly there has been only 2 mm of migration
Figure 3
Figure 3
The coronal 2D-CT scan, obtained 3 months following a single-level anterior diskectomy and fusion without plating, confirmed fusion. Observe the bony bridging and trabeculation crossing the disc space (large arrow), accompanied by the total lack of lucency at the cephalad and caudad graft/vertebral junctions
Figure 4
Figure 4
The sagittal 2D-CT scan obtained 6 months following a single-level anterior diskectomy and fusion readily demonstrates adequate placement of the graft within the anterior 2/3 of the disc space (double tipped arrow), accompanied by cephalad and caudad fusion (absence of lucency and presence of bony trabeculation: single arrows) of the graft/vertebral body interfaces
Figure 5
Figure 5
This sagittal 2D-CT study documents adequate placement of the graft (double tipped arrow) and fusion 3 months following a single-level anterior diskectomy and fusion. The 2D-CT readily confirms the absence of lucency and presence of bony trabeculation at the cephalad and caudad graft/vertebral end plates
Figure 6
Figure 6
Intraoperative photograph showings the anterior exposure for a single-level anterior diskectomy and fusion. A dynamic ABC plate (Aesculap, Tuttlingen, Germany) is seen, with the four screws in place (large curved arrow). Note that when applying these plates, the width of the central plate is typically that of the graft itself
Figure 7
Figure 7
Typically following surgery for a single-level anterior diskectomy and fusion, a cervical thoracic orthosis is worn rather than a collar alone as this affords greater immobility. Here we show a Miami J CTO Orthosis (Ossur Americas Trauma and Spine, Paulsboro NJ, USA)

References

    1. Balabhadra R, Kim DH, Zhang HY. Anterior cervical fusion using dense cancellous allografts and dynamic plating. Neurosurgery. 2004;54:1405–11.
    1. Bhadra AK, Raman AS, Casey AT, Crawford RJ. Single-level cervical radiculopathy: Clinical outcome and cost-effectiveness of four techniques of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion and disc arthroplasty. Eur Spine J. 2009;18:232–7.
    1. Buttermann GR. Prospective nonrandomized comparison of an allograft with bone morphogenetic protein versus an iliac-crest autograft in anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion. Spine J. 2008;8:426–35.
    1. Carragee EJ, Hurwitz EL, Weiner BK. A critical review of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 trials in spinal surgery: Emerging safety concerns and lessons learned. Spine J. 2011;11:471–91.
    1. Castro FP, Jr, Holt RT, Maid M, Whitecloud TS., 3rd A cost analysis of two anterior cervical fusion procedures. J Spinal Disord. 2000;13:511–4.
    1. Cavanagh RG, Butler JS, O’Byrne JM, Poynton AR. Operative techniques for cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy. Adv Orthop. 2012;2012:794087.
    1. Cunningham BW, Sefter JC, Hu N, McAfee PC. Autologous growth factors versus autogenous graft for anterior cervical interbody fusion: An in vivo caprine model. J Neurosurg Spine. 2010;13:216–23.
    1. Dimitriou R, Mataliotakis GI, Angoules AG, Kanakaris NK, Giannoundis PV. Complications following autologous bone graft harvesting from the iliac crest and using the RIA: A systematic review. Injury. 2011;42(Suppl 2):S3–15.
    1. Epstein NE. Complication avoidance in 116 dynamic-plated single level anterior corpectomy and fusion. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2007;20:347–51.
    1. Epstein NE, Schwall GS, Reilley T, Insinna T, Bahnken A, Hood DC. Surgeon choices, and the choice of surgeons, affect total hospital charges for single-level anterior cervical surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2011;36:905–9.
    1. Epstein NE, Schwall GS, Hood DC. The incidence and cost of devices explanated during single-level anterior diskectomy/fusions. Surg Neurol Int. 2011;2:23.
    1. Epstein NE. Pros, cons, and costs of INFUSE in spinal surgery. Surg Neurol Int. 2011;2:10.
    1. Epstein NE. Efficacy and outcomes of dynamic-plated single-level anterior diskectomy/fusion with additional analysis of comparative costs. Surg Neurol Int. 2011;2:9.
    1. Epstein NE, Schwall GS, Hood DC. Reducing the cost and frequency of explantations associated with single-level anterior diskectomy and fusion at a single institution through education. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2012;37:414–7.
    1. Fehlings MG, Smith JS, Kopjar B, Arnold PM, Yoon ST, Vaccaro AR, et al. Perioperative and delayed complications associated with the surgical treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy based on 302 patients from the AO Spine North American Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy Study. J Neurosurg Spine. 2012 [In press]
    1. Foo FJ, Beckingham IJ, Ahmed I. Intra-operative culture swabs in acute appendicitis: A waste of resources. Surgeon. 2008;6:278–81.
    1. Fraser JF, Hartl R. Anterior approaches to fusion of the cervical spine: A metaanalysis of fusion rates. J Neurosurg Spine. 2007;6:298–303.
    1. Heneghan HM, McCabe JP. Use of quality autologous bone graft in anterior cervical decompression: Morbidity and quality of life analysis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2009;10:158.
    1. Heuer M, Kaiser GM, Lendemans S, Vernadakis S, Treckmann JW, Paul A. Transplantation after blunt trauma to the liver: A valuable option or just a “waste of organs”? Eur Med J. 2010;15:169–73.
    1. Jacobs W, Willems PC, Kruyt M, van Limbeek J, Anderson PG, Pavlov P, et al. Systematic review of anterior interbody fusion techniques for single- and double level cervical degenerative disease. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2011;36:E950–60.
    1. Jacobs W, Willems PC, van Limbeek J, Bartels R, Pavlov P, Anderson PG, et al. Single or double-level anterior interbody fusion techniques for cervical degenerative disc disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011:CD004958.
    1. Kaestner R, Silber JH. Evidence on the efficacy of inpatient spending on Medicare patients. Milbank Q. 2001;88:560–94.
    1. Kaiser MG, Haid RW, Jr, Subach BR, Barnes B, Rodts GE., Jr Anterior cervical plating enhances arthrodesis after discectomy and fusion with cortical allograft. Neurosurgery. 2002;50:229–36.
    1. Kandziora F, Pflugmacher R, Scholz M, Schnake K, Putzier M, Khodadadyan-Klostermann C, et al. Treatment of traumatic cervical spine instability with interbody fusion cages: A prospective controlled study with 2-year follow-up. Injury. 2005;36(Suppl 2):B27–35.
    1. Kasliwal MK, Baskin DS, Traynelis VC. Failure of porous tantalum cervical interbody fusion devices: Two-year results from a prospective randomized, multicenter study. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2011 [In press]
    1. Kepler CK, Rawlins BA. Mesh cage reconstructuion with autologous cancellous graft in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2010;23:328–32.
    1. Konduru S, Findlay G. Anterior cervical diskectomy: To graft or not to graft? Br J Neurosurg. 2009;23:99–103.
    1. Lied B, Roenning PA, Sundseth J, Helseth E. Anterior cervical discectomy with fusion in patients with cervical disc degeneration: A prospective outcome study of 258 patients (181 fused with autologous bone graft and 77 fused with a PEEK cage) BMC Surg. 2010;10:10.
    1. Lind BI, Zoega B, Rosen H. Autograft versus interbody fusion cage without plate fixation in the cervical spine: A randomized clinical study using radiostereometry. Eur Spine J. 2007;16:1251–6.
    1. McGuire KJ, Harrast J, Herkowitz H, Weinstein JN. Geographic variation in the surgical treatment of degenerative cervical disc disease: American Board of Orthopedic Surgery Quality Improvement Initiative; Part II Candidates. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2012;37:57–66.
    1. Moreland DB, Asch HL, Clabeaux DE, Castiglia GJ, Czanka GA, Lewis PJ, et al. Anterior cervical disectomy and fusion with implantable titanium cage: Initial impressions, patient outcomes, and comparison to fusion with allograft. Spine J. 2004;4:184–91. discussion 191.
    1. Nabhan A, Pape D, Pitzen T, Steudel WI, Bachelier F, Jung J, et al. Radiographic analysis of fusion progression following one-level cervical fusion with or without plate fixation. Zentralbl Neurochir. 2007;68:133–8.
    1. Nandoe Tewarie RD, Bartels RH, Peul WC. Long-term outcome after anterior cervical discectomy without fusion. Eur Spine J. 2007;16:1411–6.
    1. Nunley PD, Jawahar A, Kerr EJ, 3rd, Cavanaugh DA, Howard C, Brandao SM. Choice of plate may affect outcomes for single versus multilevel ACDF: Results of a prospective randomized single-blind trial. Spine J. 2009;9:121–7.
    1. Reid JJ, Johnson JS, Wang JC. Challenges to bone formation in spinal fusion. J Biomech. 2011;44:213–20.
    1. Samartzis D, Shen FH, Goldberg EJ, An HS. Is autograft the gold standard in achieving radiographic fusion in one-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with rigid anterior plate fixation? Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2005;30:1756–61.
    1. Scholz M, Schleicher P, Eindorf T, Friedersdorff F, Gelinsky M, König U, et al. Cages augmented with mineralized collagen and platelet-rich plasma as an osteoconductive/inductive combination for interbody fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2010;35:740–6.
    1. Shaker H, Wijesinghe M, Faroog A, Artioukh DY. Cross-matched blood in colorectal surgery: A clinical waste? Colorectal Dis. 2012;14:115–8.
    1. Shimer AL, Oner FC, Vaccaro AR. Spinal reconstruction and bone morphogenetic proteins: Open questions. Injury. 2009;40(Suppl 3):S32–8.
    1. Sinclair SK, Konz GJ, Dawson JM, Epperson RT, Bloebaum RD. Host bone response to PEEK versus porous tantalum implants for cervical spinal fusion in a goat model. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2011 [In press]
    1. Song JS, Taghavi CE, Hsu DW, Song KJ, Song JH, Lee KB. Radiological changes in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with cage and plate construct: The significance of the anterior spur formation sign. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2012;37:272–9.
    1. Soroceanu A, Canacari E, Brown E, Robinson A, McGuire KJ. Intraoperative waste in spine surgery: Incidence, cost, and effectiveness of an educational program. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2011;36:E1270–3.
    1. Steffen F, Voss K, Morgan JP. Distraction-fusion for caudal cervical spondylomyelopathy using an intervertebral cage and locking plates in 14 dogs. Vet Surg. 2011;40:743–52.
    1. Vaidya R, Carp J, Sethi A, Bartol S, Craig J, Les CM. Complications of anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion using recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2. Eur Spine J. 2007;16:1257–65.
    1. Wang MC, Kreuter W, Wolfla CE, Maiman DJ, Deyo RA. Trends and variations in cervical spine surgery in the United States: Medicare Beneficiaries, 1992-2005. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009;34:955–61.
    1. Wright IP, Eisenstein SM. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion without instrumentation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2007;32:772–4.
    1. Xie JC, Hurlbert RJ. Discectomy versus discectomy with fusion versus discectomy with fusion and instrumentation: A prospective randomized study. Neurosurgery. 2007;61:107–16.

Source: PubMed

3
Abonnieren