Tissue-Sparing Posterior Cervical Fusion With Interfacet Cages: A Systematic Review of the Literature
- PMID: 32206522
- PMCID: PMC7076592
- DOI: 10.1177/2192568219837145
Tissue-Sparing Posterior Cervical Fusion With Interfacet Cages: A Systematic Review of the Literature
Abstract
Study design: Literature review.
Objectives: Posterior cervical interfacet cages are an alternative to lateral mass fixation in patients undergoing cervical spine surgery. Recently, a percutaneous, tissue-sparing system for interfacet cage placement has been developed, however, there is limited clinical evidence supporting its widespread use. The aim was to review studies published on this system for patient reported outcomes, radiographic outcomes, intraoperative outcomes, and complications.
Methods: Four electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and MEDLINE) were queried for original published studies that evaluated the percutaneous, tissue-sparing technique for posterior cervical fusion with interfacet cage placement. All studies reporting on open techniques and purely biomechanical studies were excluded.
Results: The extensive literature search returned 7852 studies. After systematic review, a total of 7 studies met inclusion criteria. Studies were independently classified as retrospective or prospective cohort studies and each assessed by the GRADE criteria. Patient reported outcomes, radiographic outcomes, intraoperative outcomes, and complications were extracted from each study and presented.
Conclusions: Tissue-sparing, posterior cervical fusion with interfacet cages may be considered a safe and effective surgical intervention in patients failing conservative management for cervical spondylotic disease. However, the quality of evidence in the literature is lacking, and controlled, comparative studies are needed for definitive assessment.
Keywords: Cavux; DTRAX; cervical spacer; facet spacer; implant; interfacet cage; posterior cervical fusion.
© The Author(s) 2019.
Conflict of interest statement
Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. Dr Joseph Laratta reports personal fees for consultancy from Spineart, Evolution Spine, and Gerson Lehrman Group, royalties from Spineart and Evolution Spine, intellectual property with Combination Biologic and ICBG/BMAC system, grants from Medtronic, NuVasive, Orthopaedic Science Research Foundation, Orthopaedic Research and Education Foundation, personal fees for travel expenses/meeting accommodations from American Institute of Minimally Invasive Surgery (AIMIS), NuVasive, Stryker, K2M, and Fisher Owen Fund, and is on the editorial board for Spine, Global Spine Journal, and Journal of Spine Surgery. Dr William Smith reports personal fee for consultancy from NuVasive, Spineology, Pediguard, Providence, and Ortho Bio Design, grants from MDT, NuVasive, Providence, and Spineology, ownership interest in NuVasive, Pediguard, and SpineSmith, royalty from NuVasive and Spineology, and is on the speakers’ bureau for NuVasive and Pediguard.
Figures
References
-
- Goel A, Shah A. Facetal distraction as treatment for single and multilevel cervical spondylotic radiculopathy and myelopathy: a preliminary report. J Neurosurg Spine. 2011;14:689–696. - PubMed
-
- Tan LA, Straus DC, Taynelis VC. Cervical interfacet spacers and maintenance of cervical lordosis. J Neurosurg Spine. 2015;22:466–469. - PubMed
-
- Tan LA, Gerard CS, Anderson PA, Traynelis VC. Effect of machined interfacet allograft spacers on cervical foraminal height and area. J Neurosurge Spine. 2014;20:178–182. - PubMed
Publication types
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous
