
pmid: 36174948
To determine if postoperative soft cervical orthosis use affects arthrodesis rates on a per-level or construct basis after 1-level and 2-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).Electronic medical records were queried for 1-level and 2-level primary ACDF between 2016 and 2019 at a single academic center. Surgeons prescribed either a soft cervical orthosis or no orthosis. Pseudarthrosis rates were evaluated by dynamic cervical spine radiographs with arthrodesis defined by <1 mm of interspinous motion. Continuous and categorical data were compared using analysis of variance or χ2 tests. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to examine independent predictors of pseudarthrosis.A total of 316 unique patients (504 instrumented levels) met the inclusion criteria. Eighty-four percent of patients were prescribed a soft cervical orthosis. Overall, arthrodesis occurred at 344 (80.9%) and 62 (78%) levels in patients with and without cervical orthosis, respectively. When evaluating patients placed in a cervical orthosis versus those who were not, there were no differences in pseudarthrosis or revision rates. Further, there were no differences in pseudarthrosis on a per-level basis. Further, cervical orthosis use was not an independent predictor of pseudarthrosis (odds ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.47-1.57; P =0.623) on multivariate analysis.Postoperative placement of soft cervical orthoses after 1-level or 2-level ACDF was not associated with improved arthrodesis or reduced rate of revision surgery.
Radiography, Pseudarthrosis, Orthotic Devices, Spinal Fusion, Treatment Outcome, Cervical Vertebrae, Humans, Diskectomy, Retrospective Studies
Radiography, Pseudarthrosis, Orthotic Devices, Spinal Fusion, Treatment Outcome, Cervical Vertebrae, Humans, Diskectomy, Retrospective Studies
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 4 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
