Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Predictive factors for long-term outcome of anterior cervical decompression and fusion: a multivariate data analysis

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We conducted a prospective randomized study to investigate predictive factors for short- and long-term outcome of anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) as measured by current pain intensity on the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and by disability using the Neck Disability Index (NDI). Current understanding about how preoperative and short-term outcome data predict long-term outcome is sparse, and there are few studies involving analysis of short-term follow-up using multivariate approaches with quantification of the relative importance of each variable studied. A total of 95 patients were randomly allocated for ACDF with the cervical intervertebral fusion cage or the Cloward procedure. The mean follow-up time was 19 months (range 12–24) for short-term follow-up and 76 months (range 56–94 months) for long-term. Background factors, radiologically detected findings, physiological measurements, treatment type, pain, and disability were used as potential predictors. Multivariate statistical analysis by projection to latent structures was used to investigate predictors of importance for short- and long-term outcome of ACDF. A “preoperative” low disability and pain intensity, non-smoking status, male sex, good hand strength, and an active range of motion (AROM) in the neck were significant predictors for good short- and long-term outcomes. The short-term outcome data were better at predicting long-term outcome than were baseline data. Radiologically detected findings and surgical technique used were mainly insignificant as predictors. We suggest that the inclusion criteria for ACDF should be based on a bio-psycho-social model including NDI. NDI may also be regarded as an important outcome measurement in evaluation of ACDF.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. An HS, Silveri CP, Simpson JM, File P, Simmons C, Simeone FA, Balderston RA (1994) Comparison of smoking habits between patients with surgically confirmed herniated lumbar and cervical disc disease and controls. J Spinal Disord 7:369–373

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. An HS, Simpson JM, Glover JM, Stephany J (1995) Comparison between allograft plus demineralized bone matrix versus autograft in anterior cervical fusion. A prospective multicenter study. Spine 20:2211–2216

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Bertalanffy H, Eggert HR (1988) Clinical long-term results of anterior discectomy without fusion for treatment of cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy: a follow-up of 164 cases. Acta Neurochir 90:127–135

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Borghouts J, Koes N, Bouter L (1998) The clinical course and prognostic factors of non-specific neck pain, a systematic review. Pain 77:1–13

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Cloward RB (1958) The anterior approach for removal of ruptured cervical disks. J Neurosurg 15:602–614

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Deyo RA, Battie M, Beurskens AJHM, Bombardier C, Croft P, Koes B, Malmivaara A, Roland M, Von Korff M, Wadell G (1998) Outcome measures for low back pain research: a proposal for standardized use. Spine 23:2003–2013

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Eriksen EF, Buhl M, Fode K, Klærke A, Krøyer L, Lindeberg H, Madsen CB, Strange L, Wohlert L, Espersen JO (1984) Treatment of cervical disc disease using Cloward´s technique: the prognostic value of clinical preoperative data in 1,106 patients. Acta Neurochir 70:181–197

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Eriksson L, Johansson E, Kettaneh-Wold N, Trygg J, Wikström C, Wold S (2006) Introduction to multi- and megavariate data analysis using projection methods (PCA & PLS). Umetrics, Umeå, Sweden

    Google Scholar 

  9. Gore DR, Sepic SB (1984) Anterior cervical fusion for degenerated or protruded discs: a review of one hundred forty-six patients. Spine 9:667–671

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Hamburger C, Festenberg FV, Uhl E (2001) Ventral discectomy with PMMA interbody fusion for cervical disc disease: long-term results in 249 patients. Spine 26:249–255

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Hendriks E, Scholten-Peeters G, van der Windt D, Neeleman-van der Steen C, Oostendorp R, Verhagen A (2005) Prognostic factors for poor recovery in acute whiplash patients. Pain 114:408–416

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Jackson E (1991) A users guide to principal components. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  13. Javid D, Hedlund R, Vavruch L, Leszniewski W (2001) Is the efficacy of the Cloward procedure overestimated? Technique of evaluation affects the outcome. Eur Spine J 10:222–227

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Jones E, Hanly JG, Mooney R, Rand LL, Spurway PM, Eastwood BJ, Verrier Jones J (1991) Strength and function in the normal and rheumatoid hand. J Rheumatol 18:1313–1318

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Kilbom Å (1988) Isometric strength and occupational muscle disorders. Eur Appl Physiol 57:322–326

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Kjellman G, Skargren E, Öberg B (2002) Prognostic factors for perceived pain and function at one-year follow-up in primary care patients with neck pain. Disabil Rehabil 24:364–370

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Lindahl OA, Nyström Å, Boström A (1994) Grip strength of the human hand- measurements on normal subjects with a new hand strength analysis system (Hastras). J Med Eng Technol 18:101–103

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Löfgren H (2000) Outcome, bone grafts in surgical treatment of cervical disc disease. Dissertation, Faculty of Health Sciences, Linköping University, Sweden, paper V

  19. Peolsson A, Hedlund R, Ertzgaard S, Öberg B (2000) Intra- and inter-tester reliability and range of motion of the neck. Physiother Canada 52:233–242

    Google Scholar 

  20. Peolsson A, Hedlund R, Öberg B (2001) Intra-and inter-tester reliability and reference values for hand strength. J Rehabil Med 33:36–41

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Peolsson A, Hedlund R, Öberg B (2001) Intra- and inter-tester reliability and reference values for isometric neck strength. Physther Res Int 6:15–26

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Peolsson A, Vavruch L, Öberg B (2002) Disability after anterior decompression and fusion for cervical disc disease. Adv Physther 4:111–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Peolsson A, Hedlund R, Vavruch L, Öberg B (2003) Predictive factors for the outcome of anterior cervical decompression and fusion. Eur Spine J 12:274–280

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Peolsson A, Hedlund R, Vavruch L (2004) Prediction of fusion and importance of radiological variables for the outcome of anterior cervical decompression and fusion. Eur Spine J 13:229–234

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Peolsson A, Vavruch L, Öberg B (2006) Predictive factors for arm pain, neck pain, neck specific disability and health after anterior cervical decompression and fusion. Acta Neurochir 148:167–173

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Peolsson A, Vavruch L, Hedlund R (2007) Long-term randomised comparison between a carbon fibre cage and the Cloward procedure in the cervical spine. Eur Spine J 16:173–178

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Peolsson A, Almkvist C, Dahlberg C, Lindqvist S, Pettersson S (2007) Age- and sex-specific reference values of a test of neck muscle endurance. J Manip Physiol Ther 30:171–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Persson LCG, Carlsson C-A, Carlsson JY (1997) Long-lasting cervical radicular pain managed with surgery, physiotherapy, or a cervical collar: a prospective, randomized study. Spine 7:751–758

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Scott J, Huskisson EC (1976) Graphic representation of pain. Pain 2:175–184

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Skargren EI, Öberg BE (1998) Predictive factors for 1-year outcome of low-back and neck pain in patients treated in primary care: comparison between the treatment strategies chiropractic and physiotherapy. Pain 77:201–207

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Udén A, Åström M, Bergenudd H (1988) Pain drawings in chronic back pain. Spine 13:389–392

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Vavruch L, Hedlund R, Javid D, Leszniewski W, Shalabi A (2002) A prospective randomised comparison between the Cloward Procedure and a carbon fibre cage in the cervical spine: a clinical and radiological study. Spine 27:1694–1701

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Vernon H, Mior S (1991) The neck disability index: a study of reliability and validity. J Manip Physiol Ther 14:409–415

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Wold S, Ruhe A, Wold H, Dunn WJ III (1984) The collinearity problem in linear regression. The partial least squares approach o generalized inverses. Siam J Sci Stat Comput 5:735–743

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Yue W-M, Brodner W, Highland TR (2005) Long-term results after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with allograft and plating: a 5- to 11-year radiologic and clinical follow-up study. Spine 30:2138–2144

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Zoëga B, Kärrholm J, Lind B (2000) Outcome scores in degenerative cervical disc surgery. Eur Spine J 9:137–143

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors especially thank secretary Inga-Lill Lindberg and MD Carl-Henrik Hybbinette for their support. The study has received financial support from the Faculty of Health Sciences at Linköping University and from the Research Council of Southeastern Sweden (FORSS).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, Linköping University, 58183, Linköping, Sweden

    Anneli Peolsson

  2. Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Division of Rehabilitation Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden

    Michael Peolsson

  3. School for Technology and Health, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden

    Michael Peolsson

Authors
  1. Anneli Peolsson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael Peolsson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anneli Peolsson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Peolsson, A., Peolsson, M. Predictive factors for long-term outcome of anterior cervical decompression and fusion: a multivariate data analysis. Eur Spine J 17, 406–414 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-007-0560-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-007-0560-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation