Aims. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the type of cervical disc herniation influences the severity of symptoms at the time of presentation, and the outcome after surgical treatment. Methods. The type and extent of disc herniation at the time of presentation in 108 patients who underwent anterior discectomy for cervical radiculopathy were analyzed on MRI, using a four-point scale. These were dichotomized into disc bulge and disc herniation groups. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Neck Disability Index (NDI), 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36), and a visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain in the neck and arm at baseline and two years postoperatively. The perceived recovery was also assessed at this time. Results. At baseline, 46 patients had a disc bulge and 62 had a herniation. There was no significant difference in the mean NDI and SF-36 between the two groups at baseline. Those in the disc bulge group had a mean NDI of 44.6 (SD 15.2) compared with 43.8 (SD 16.0) in the herniation group (p = 0.799), and a mean SF-36 of 59.2 (SD 6.9) compared with 59.4 (SD 7.7) (p = 0.895). Likewise, there was no significant difference in the incidence of disabling arm pain in the disc bulge and herniation groups (84% vs 73%; p = 0.163), and no significant difference in the incidence of disabling neck pain in the two groups (70.5% (n = 31) vs 63% (n = 39); p = 0.491). At two years after surgery, no significant difference was found in any of the clinical parameters between the two groups. Conclusion. In patients with cervical radiculopathy, the type and extent of disc herniation measured on MRI prior to surgery correlated neither to the severity of the symptoms at presentation, nor to clinical outcomes at two years postoperatively. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(11):1242–1248

Aims. The purpose of this retrospective study was to investigate the clinical relevance of increased facet joint distraction as a result of anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) for trauma. Patients and Methods. A total of 155 patients (130 men, 25 women. Mean age 42.7 years; 16 to 87) who had undergone ACDF between 1 January 2001 and 1 January 2016 were included in the study. Outcome measures included the Neck Disability Index (NDI) and visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain. Lateral cervical spine radiographs taken in the immediate postoperative period were reviewed to compare the interfacet distance of the operated segment with those of the facet joints above and below. Results. There was a statistically significant relationship between greater facet distraction and increased NDI and VAS pain scores. This was further confirmed by Spearman correlation, which showed evidence of a moderate correlation between both NDI score and facet joint distraction (Spearman correlation coefficient 0.34; p < 0.001) and VAS score and facet distraction (Spearman correlation coefficient 0.52; p < 0.001). Furthermore, there was a discernible transition point between outcome scores. Significantly worse outcomes, in terms of both NDI scores (17.8 vs 8.2; p < 0.001) and VAS scores (4.5 vs 1.3; p < 0.001), were seen with facet distraction of 3 mm or more. Patients who went on to have a posterior fusion also had increased NDI and VAS scores, independent of facet distraction. Conclusion. After undergoing ACDF for the treatment of cervical spine injury, patients with facet joint distraction of 3 mm or more have worse NDI and VAS pain scores. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:1201–7

Aims

Chronic low back pain due to degenerative disc disease is sometimes treated with fusion. We compared the outcome of three different fusion techniques in the Swedish Spine Register: noninstrumented posterolateral fusion (PLF), instrumented posterolateral fusion (IPLF), and interbody fusion (IBF).

We evaluated the efficacy of anterior fusion alone compared with combined anterior and posterior fusion for the treatment of degenerative cervical kyphosis. Anterior fusion alone was undertaken in 15 patients (group A) and combined anterior and posterior fusion was carried out in a further 15 (group B). The degree and maintenance of the angle of correction, the incidence of graft subsidence, degeneration at adjacent levels and the rate of fusion were assessed radiologically and clinically and the rate of complications recorded. The mean angle of correction in group B was significantly higher than in group A (p = 0.0009). The mean visual analogue scale and the neck disability index in group B was better than in group A (p = 0.043, 0.0006). The mean operation time and the blood loss in B were greater than in group A (p < 0.0001, 0.037). Pseudarthrosis, subsidence of the cage, and problems related to the hardware were more prevalent in group A than in group B (p = 0.034, 0.025, 0.013).

Although the combined procedure resulted in a longer operating time and greater blood loss than with anterior fusion alone, our results suggest that for the treatment of degenerative cervical kyphosis the combined approach leads to better maintenance of sagittal alignment, a higher rate of fusion, a lower incidence of complications and a better clinical outcome.

We examined the reliability of radiological findings in predicting segmental instability in 112 patients (56 men, 56 women) with a mean age of 66.5 years (27 to 84) who had degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. They underwent intra-operative biomechanical evaluation using a new measurement system. Biomechanical instability was defined as a segment with a neutral zone > 2 mm/N. Risk factor analysis to predict instability was performed on radiographs (range of segmental movement, disc height), MRI (Thompson grade, Modic type), and on the axial CT appearance of the facet (type, opening, vacuum and the presence of osteophytes, subchondral erosion, cysts and sclerosis) using multivariate logistic regression analysis with a forward stepwise procedure. The facet type was classified as sagittally orientated, coronally orientated, anisotropic or wrapped.

Stepwise multivariate regression analysis revealed that facet opening was the strongest predictor for instability (odds ratio 5.022, p = 0.009) followed by spondylolisthesis, MRI grade and subchondral sclerosis. Forward stepwise multivariate logistic regression indicated that spondylolisthesis, MRI grade, facet opening and subchondral sclerosis of the facet were risk factors. Symptoms evaluated by the Short-Form 36 and visual analogue scale showed that patients with an unstable segment were in significantly more pain than those without. Furthermore, the surgical procedures determined using the intra-operative measurement system were effective, suggesting that segmental instability influences the symptoms of lumbar degenerative disease.

Thoracic back pain caused by osteoarthritis of a single costovertebral joint is a poorly recognised condition. We report a series of five patients who were successfully treated by resection arthroplasty of this joint.

Each had received a preliminary image-guided injection of local anaesthetic and steroid into the joint to confirm it as the source of pain. The surgical technique is described. There were no complications. The pain improved from a mean of 7.0 (6 to 8) on a visual analogue scale to 2.0 (0 to 4) post-operatively. The final post-operative Oswestry disability index was a mean of 19.4 (9 to 38).

Isolated osteoarthritis of a costovertebral joint is a rare but treatable cause of thoracic back pain. It is possible to obtain excellent short- and intermediate-term relief from pain with resection arthroplasty in appropriately selected patients.

We compared a group of 46 somatised patients with a control group of 41 non-somatised patients who had undergone elective surgery to the lumbar spine in an attempt to identify pre-operative factors which could predict the outcome. In a prospective single-centre study, the Distress and Risk Assessment method consisting of a modified somatic perception questionnaire and modified Zung depression index was used pre-operatively to identify somatised patients. The type and number of consultations were correlated with functional indicators of outcome, such as the Oswestry disability index and a visual analogue score for pain in the leg after follow-up for six and 12 months.

Similar improvements in the Oswestry disability index were found in the somatised and non-somatised groups. Somatised patients who had a good outcome on the Oswestry disability index had an increased number of orthopaedic consultations (50 of 83 patients (60%) vs 29 of 73 patients (39.7%); p = 0.16) and waited less time for their surgery (5.5 months) (sd 5.26) vs 10.1 months (sd 6.29); p = 0.026). No other identifiable factors were found. A shorter wait for surgery appeared to predict a good outcome. Early review by a spinal surgeon and a reduced waiting time to surgery appear to be of particular benefit to somatised patients.