Tag: Adjacent segment

Posted on

Artificial intelligence in predicting early‑onset adjacent segment degeneration following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion

European Spine Journal (2022) 31:2104–2114

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is a common surgical treatment for degenerative disease in the cervical spine. However, resultant biomechanical alterations may predispose to early-onset adjacent segment degeneration (EO-ASD), which may become symptomatic and require reoperation. This study aimed to develop and validate a machine learning (ML) model to predict EO-ASD following ACDF.

Methods Retrospective review of prospectively collected data of patients undergoing ACDF at a quaternary referral medical center was performed. Patients > 18 years of age with > 6 months of follow-up and complete pre- and postoperative X-ray and MRI imaging were included. An ML-based algorithm was developed to predict EO-ASD based on preoperative demographic, clinical, and radiographic parameters, and model performance was evaluated according to discrimination and overall performance.

Results In total, 366 ACDF patients were included (50.8% male, mean age 51.4 ± 11.1 years). Over 18.7 ± 20.9 months of follow-up, 97 (26.5%) patients developed EO-ASD. The model demonstrated good discrimination and overall performance according to precision (EO-ASD: 0.70, non-ASD: 0.88), recall (EO-ASD: 0.73, non-ASD: 0.87), accuracy (0.82), F1-score (0.79), Brier score (0.203), and AUC (0.794), with C4/C5 posterior disc bulge, C4/C5 anterior disc bulge, C6 posterior superior osteophyte, presence of osteophytes, and C6/C7 anterior disc bulge identified as the most important predictive features.

Conclusions Through an ML approach, the model identified risk factors and predicted development of EO-ASD following ACDF with good discrimination and overall performance. By addressing the shortcomings of traditional statistics, ML techniques can support discovery, clinical decision-making, and precision-based spine care.

Posted on

Quality of Spinal Motion With Cervical Disk Arthroplasty. Computer-aided Radiographic Analysis

J Spinal Disord Tech 2010;23:89–95

Study Design: Kinematic study of a single site in an investigational device exemption trial.

Objective: Evaluate the center of rotation (COR) after Bryan cervical arthroplasty and compare adjacent segment motion after cervical disk arthroplasty and fusion using validated radiographic analysis.

Summary of Background Data: The goal of cervical arthroplasty is to reestablish spinal kinematics after anterior decompression. Excellent maintenance of range of motion has been reported for a variety of the prostheses; however, the manner the prostheses perform this task is different. A parameter that may be as important as range of motion is restoring the quality of motion. One of the important components is the COR that is easily studied biomechanically but has not been reported from in vivo studies. Furthermore, the effects on the quality of motion at adjacent levels have not been studied. The purpose of this study is to determine the quality of motion after Bryan cervical disk arthroplasty at the target level and the adjacent segments.

Methods: The first 48 patients diagnosed with single level cervical disk degenerative disease and associated myelopathy or radiculopathy from a single institution enrolled in the Bryan disk investigational device exemption trial were selected for inclusion. Twenty-two investigational patients and 26 anterior cervical discectomy and fusion controls were evaluated radiographically preoperatively and 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. These results were analyzed using Quantitative Motion Analysis software manufactured by Medical Metrics Inc. Kinematic parameters included translation, sagittal rotation, anterior/posterior disk height, and the calculation of the COR both in the sagittal and coronal planes.

Results: At the arthroplasty level, the COR shifted more posterior (0.3 mm, 1% end plate width) and cephalad (4.9 mm, 20% end plate width) compared with the preoperative position, however, this change was not statistically significant (P=0.06). The variability of the COR, however, was less after arthroplasty compared with preoperative values. There was no significant difference in the short term between the adjacent levels after fusion compared with the prosthesis. At later time points (12 and 24 mo), however, the COR was significantly posterior at the level above arthroplasty compared with fusion (P<0.01). COR X was not significantly (P>0.3) different below fusions compared with arthroplasty. Sagittal rotation significantly increased at the level above for both the fusion and prosthesis groups. A trend was noted for increased translation (2.5% end plate width) at the level above a fusion compared with the Bryan disk at 24 months postoperatively, but this did not reach statistical significance.

Conclusions: Sagittal rotation increases above the level of the arthroplasty and fusion. In the long term, the arthroplasty group had a more posterior COR at the level above, compared with the level above a fusion. Translation at the level above a fusion was slightly increased but not statistically compared with the level above the arthroplasty with similar amounts of sagittal rotation (flexion/extension). Although not reaching statistical significance, the COR seemed to shift more posterior and cephalad at the arthroplasty level with less variability compared with the preoperative position.

Posted on

Risk factors for adjacent segment disease after lumbar fusion

Eur Spine J (2009) 18:1637–1643 DOI 10.1007/s00586-009-1060-3

The incidence of adjacent segment problems after lumbar fusion has been found to vary, and risk factors for these problems have not been precisely verified, espe- cially based on structural changes determined by magnetic resonance imaging.

The purpose of this retrospective clinical study was to describe the incidence and clinical features of adjacent segment disease (ASD) after lumbar fusion and to determine its risk factors.

We assessed the incidence of ASD in patients who underwent lumbar or lumbosacral fusions for degenerative conditions between August 1995 and March 2006 with at least a 1-year follow- up. Patients less than 35 years of age at the index spinal fusion, patients with uninstrumented fusion, and patients who had not achieved successful union were excluded.

Of the 1069 patients who underwent fusions, 28 (2.62%) needed secondary operations because of ASD and were included in this study. In order to identify the risk factors, we matched a disease group and a control group. The disease group consisted of 26 of the 28 patients with ASD, excluding the 2 patients for whom we did not have initial MRI data. Each patient in the disease group was matched by age, sex, fusion level and follow-up period with a control patient. The assumed risk factors included disc and facet degeneration, instability, listhesis, rotational defor- mity, and disc wedging. The mean age of the 28 patients with ASD requiring surgical treatment was 58.4 years, which did not differ significantly from that of the population in which ASD did not develop (58.2years, p = 0.894). Of the 21 patients who underwent floating fusion, only 1 developed distal ASD. Facet degeneration was a significant risk factor (p<0.01) on logistic regression analysis. The incidence of distal ASD was much lower than that of proximal ASD. Pre-existing facet degeneration may be associated with a high risk of adjacent segment problems following lumbar fusion procedures.

Proudly powered by WordPress