Comparison of anterior and posterior approaches in cervical spinal cord injuries

Abstract

This study reports the results of 52 patients with unstable cervical spine injuries and associated spinal cord injuries randomized to either anterior or posterior stabilization and fusion. All patients had achieved reduction and had unstable injuries that were thought to require surgical stabilization. Patients requiring a specific approach for either reduction or decompression were not included. Frankel grades and ASIA motor index scores were followed in each patient as well as fusion status, changes in alignment, and pain at final follow-up. Neurologic improvement was noted in each group with no significant differences. In the anterior group, 70% improved at least 1 Frankel grade and 57% improved 1 Frankel grade in the posterior group. There were two nonunions in the anterior group (90% fusion) and none in the posterior group (100% fusion), although this was not statistically different. Seven patients in each group complained of pain at the final follow-up. There were no significant differences in fusion rates, alignment, neurologic recovery, or long-term complaints of pain in patients treated with either anterior or posterior fusion and instrumentation.