Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 7, 2025
A Postoperative Evaluation Guideline for Computer-Assisted Reconstruction of the Mandible
Published on: January 28, 2020
Clinical Outcomes of Cervical Hybrid Reconstructions: A Prospective Study
Matthew Scott-Young1,2, Laurence McEntee1,2, Evelyne Rathbone2
1Gold Coast Spine, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia.
Background:
The study design was a prospective clinical cohort study. The aim of this study was to assess the patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), patient satisfaction, as well as complication and reoperation rate of cervical hybrid procedures for symptomatic cervical multilevel degenerative disc disease (MLDDD). Cervical total disc replacement (CTDR) has been shown to be safe and effective for the treatment of degenerative pathologies. However, there is minimal PROMs data on the outcomes of combined CTDR and anterior cervical decompression and fusion procedures, commonly referred to as cervical hybrid surgery.
Methods:
Prospectively collected PROMs were analyzed from patients receiving cervical hybrid surgery for symptomatic cervical MLDDD. Between 2004 and 2016, data were collected preoperatively and postoperatively at 3, 6, and 12 months, then yearly thereafter. Patient reported outcome measures included patient satisfaction, visual analog score for neck and arm, and Neck Disability Index. Complication and reoperation rates were also assessed.
Results:
A total of 151 patients (80 males, 71 females) who had a minimum of 12 months follow up were included. The mean age was 53 years (range = 24-81), and median follow up was 2 years (range = 1-10). The median number of levels treated was 3, with 29.8%, 49.0%, and 21.2% of patients having 2, 3, and 4 levels treated, respectively. The most common indication for surgery was multilevel cervical spondylotic radiculopathy (52.8%), followed by combined cervical spondylotic radiculomyelopathy (16.7%), axial neck pain (16%), and cervical spondylotic myelopathy (13.9%). Improvement in pain and disability scores were both clinically and statistically significant (P < .001), and these improvements were sustained throughout the course of follow up. There was a 16% incidence of minor adverse events, and 3 (1.9%) reoperations.
Conclusions:
Cervical hybrid surgery for cervical MLDDD demonstrates favorable and sustained clinical outcomes at short-term to midterm follow up.
Level Of Evidence:
4.
Clinical Relevance:
Statistically and substantial clinical benefits can be achieved by cervical hybrid surgery, in the treatment of cervical pathologies including radiculopathy and myelopathy. The key principles is to follow strict indications, and to match technology with the pathology.
