Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Multilevel ACDF Versus Corpectomy

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy and Radiculopathy

  • 1386 Accesses

Abstract

Anterior approaches to the cervical spine are routinely used to treat degenerative cervical spondylosis, as well as traumatic, neoplastic, and infectious pathologies. Improved clinical outcomes following the two most common procedures, anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and cervical corpectomy, are well established in the literature. Both techniques can be effectively used to alleviate pain and improve function by decompressing the neural elements and restoring stability and alignment to the cervical spine. However, there are inherent advantages and disadvantages associated with each technique that may favor ACDF or corpectomy in a given case. In this chapter, we will discuss anterior approaches to multilevel cervical pathology, including indications, surgical strategy, and technique. The advantages and disadvantages of cervical corpectomy will be compared and contrasted with multilevel ACDF. Special attention will be paid to a growing body of evidence that supports the use of a hybrid approach in select clinical scenarios, which incorporates both ACDF and corpectomy in a single construct.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Mummaneni PV, Kaiser MG, Matz PG, et al. Cervical surgical techniques for the treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Neurosurg Spine. 2009;11(2):130–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Komotar RJ, Mocco J, Kaiser MG. Surgical management of cervical myelopathy: indications and techniques for laminectomy and fusion. Spine J. 2006;6(6 Suppl):252S–67S.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Kaiser MG. Multilevel cervical spondylosis. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2006;17(3):263–275, vi.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Lau D, Chou D, Mummaneni PV. Two-level corpectomy versus three-level discectomy for cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a comparison of perioperative, radiographic, and clinical outcomes. J Neurosurg Spine. 2015;23(3):280–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Masaki Y, Yamazaki M, Okawa A, et al. An analysis of factors causing poor surgical outcome in patients with cervical myelopathy due to ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament: anterior decompression with spinal fusion versus laminoplasty. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2007;20(1):7–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Matz PG, Holly LT, Groff MW, et al. Indications for anterior cervical decompression for the treatment of cervical degenerative radiculopathy. J Neurosurg Spine. 2009;11(2):174–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Matz PG, Holly LT, Mummaneni PV, et al. Anterior cervical surgery for the treatment of cervical degenerative myelopathy. J Neurosurg Spine. 2009;11(2):170–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Swank ML, Lowery GL, Bhat AL, McDonough RF. Anterior cervical allograft arthrodesis and instrumentation: multilevel interbody grafting or strut graft reconstruction. Eur Spine J. 1997;6(2):138–43.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Joaquim AF, Murar J, Savage JW, Patel AA. Dysphagia after anterior cervical spine surgery: a systematic review of potential preventative measures. Spine J. 2014;14(9):2246–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Ghogawala Z, Martin B, Benzel EC, et al. Comparative effectiveness of ventral vs dorsal surgery for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Neurosurgery. 2011;68(3):622–30. discussion 630-621.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Sasso RC, Ruggiero RA Jr, Reilly TM, Hall PV. Early reconstruction failures after multilevel cervical corpectomy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003;28(2):140–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Etame AB, Wang AC, Than KD, La Marca F, Park P. Outcomes after surgery for cervical spine deformity: review of the literature. Neurosurg Focus. 2010;28(3):E14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Grosso MJ, Hwang R, Mroz T, Benzel E, Steinmetz MP. Relationship between degree of focal kyphosis correction and neurological outcomes for patients undergoing cervical deformity correction surgery. J Neurosurg Spine. 2013;18(6):537–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Traynelis VC. Total subaxial reconstruction. J Neurosurg Spine. 2010;13(4):424–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hilibrand AS, Fye MA, Emery SE, Palumbo MA, Bohlman HH. Increased rate of arthrodesis with strut grafting after multilevel anterior cervical decompression. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002;27(2):146–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Pitzen TR, Chrobok J, Stulik J, et al. Implant complications, fusion, loss of lordosis, and outcome after anterior cervical plating with dynamic or rigid plates: two-year results of a multi-centric, randomized, controlled study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009;34(7):641–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Ghahreman A, Rao PJ, Ferch RD. Dynamic plates in anterior cervical fusion surgery: graft settling and cervical alignment. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009;34(15):1567–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kelly MP, Mok JM, Berven S. Dynamic constructs for spinal fusion: an evidence-based review. Orthop Clin North Am. 2010;41(2):203–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Fraser JF, Hartl R. Anterior approaches to fusion of the cervical spine: a metaanalysis of fusion rates. J Neurosurg Spine. 2007;6(4):298–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Heary RF, Schlenk RP, Sacchieri TA, Barone D, Brotea C. Persistent iliac crest donor site pain: independent outcome assessment. Neurosurgery. 2002;50(3):510–6. discussion 516-517.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Ryken TC, Heary RF, Matz PG, et al. Techniques for cervical interbody grafting. J Neurosurg Spine. 2009;11(2):203–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Singh K, Vaccaro AR, Kim J, Lorenz EP, Lim TH, An HS. Biomechanical comparison of cervical spine reconstructive techniques after a multilevel corpectomy of the cervical spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003;28(20):2352–8. discussion 2358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Singh K, Vaccaro AR, Kim J, Lorenz EP, Lim TH, An HS. Enhancement of stability following anterior cervical corpectomy: a biomechanical study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2004;29(8):845–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Porter RW, Crawford NR, Chamberlain RH, et al. Biomechanical analysis of multilevel cervical corpectomy and plate constructs. J Neurosurg. 2003;99(1 Suppl):98–103.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Ashkenazi E, Smorgick Y, Rand N, Millgram MA, Mirovsky Y, Floman Y. Anterior decompression combined with corpectomies and discectomies in the management of multilevel cervical myelopathy: a hybrid decompression and fixation technique. J Neurosurg Spine. 2005;3(3):205–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Liu JM, Peng HW, Liu ZL, Long XH, Yu YQ, Huang SH. Hybrid decompression technique versus anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion for treating multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: which one is better? World Neurosurg. 2015;84(6):2022–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Hussain M, Nassr A, Natarajan RN, An HS, Andersson GB. Corpectomy versus discectomy for the treatment of multilevel cervical spine pathology: a finite element model analysis. Spine J. 2012;12(5):401–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Wei-bing X, Wun-Jer S, Gang L, Yue Z, Ming-xi J, Lian-shun J. Reconstructive techniques study after anterior decompression of multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2009;22(7):511–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Kaminsky SB, Clark CR, Traynelis VC. Operative treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy and radiculopathy. A comparison of laminectomy and laminoplasty at five year average follow-up. Iowa Orthop J. 2004;24:95–105.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Apfelbaum RI, Kriskovich MD, Haller JR. On the incidence, cause, and prevention of recurrent laryngeal nerve palsies during anterior cervical spine surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000;25(22):2906–12.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. 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(2):229–36. discussion 236-228.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Shaffer WO, Baisden JL, Fernand R, Matz PG. North American Spine S. An evidence-based clinical guideline for antibiotic prophylaxis in spine surgery. Spine J. 2013;13(10):1387–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Kelleher MO, Tan G, Sarjeant R, Fehlings MG. Predictive value of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring during cervical spine surgery: a prospective analysis of 1055 consecutive patients. J Neurosurg Spine. 2008;8(3):215–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Heeneman H. Vocal cord paralysis following approaches to the anterior cervical spine. Laryngoscope. 1973;83(1):17–21.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Holly LT, Matz PG, Anderson PA, et al. Clinical prognostic indicators of surgical outcome in cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Neurosurg Spine. 2009;11(2):112–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Benzel EC. Complex Instrumentation Constructs and Force Application. In: Benzel EC, editor. Biomechanics of spine stabilization. Rolling Meadows: AANS Publications Committee; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Neurological Surgery,, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, USA

    Hani R. Malone & Michael G. Kaiser

Authors
  1. Hani R. Malone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael G. Kaiser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael G. Kaiser .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, USA

    Michael G. Kaiser

  2. Atlanta Brain and Spine Care, Atlanta, GA, USA

    Regis W. Haid

  3. Duke University Health System, Durham, NC, USA

    Christopher I. Shaffrey

  4. Toronto Western Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Michael G. Fehlings

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Malone, H.R., Kaiser, M.G. (2019). Multilevel ACDF Versus Corpectomy. In: Kaiser, M., Haid, R., Shaffrey, C., Fehlings, M. (eds) Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy and Radiculopathy . Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97952-6_24

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97952-6_24

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-97951-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-97952-6

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation