COMPARISON OF BONY FUSION BETWEEN THE HOLLOW CAGE GROUP AND THE CAGE WITH BONE SUBSTITUTES GROUP IN ONE-LEVEL CERVICAL SPINAL DISORDER

초록

Background and Aims The aim of this study was to assess the clinical outcome and the bone fusion rates through cage, after insertion of hollow cage or cage with bone substitutes in patients holding disc protrusion in the cervical spine. Methods A retrospective review of 93 patients who had undergone cervical spine anterior fusion with cage was performed. The patients were classified into the hollow cage group (N=52) and the cage with bone substitutes group (N=41). Initial and follow up visit radiologic data were analyzed with Vavruch bone fusion criteria. Results Between two groups, clinical outcome including preoperative and postoperative pain and functional score were not significantly different. And, in the aspect of bone fusion, the difference of over-all fusion rate between two groups (the hollow cage group, 84.6%; the cage with bone substitutes group, 87.8%) was not significant at the 24 months follow-up. By the way, at the 18 month follow-up, the cage with bone substitutes group showed different fusion rate than that of the hollow cage group. Among the bone substitutes, the cases using DBM had higher fusion outcome than the case using other bone materials in the 18 month follow-up. Conclusions We may suggest that the cage with bone substitutes group achieves earlier fusion than the hollow cage group in the cervical spine anterior fusion operation, even though both group show similar results in the final fusion rate. References 1. BISHOP RC, MOORE KA, HADLEY MN. (1996) J Neurosurg 85:206–210 2. HACKER RJ. (2000) J Neurosurg (Spine) 93 : 222-226 3. KAO FC, NIU CC, CHEN LH, LAI PL, CHEN WJ (2005) Clin Orthop Relat Res 430:108–116