Upper-Level Instrumentation at C2 Versus C3 Does Not Influence Radiographic or Clinical Outcomes After Posterior Cervical Fusion.

Study Design: Retrospective cohort study.

Objective: To assess clinical and radiographic outcomes after posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCDF) with upper instrumented vertebra (UIV) at C2 versus C3.

Summary Of Background Data: PCDF is a common procedure for treatment of multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy. The evidence is sparse as to whether C2 versus C3 is the optimal UIV.

Methods: Adult patients undergoing PCDF for cervical myelopathy from 2014 to 2019 at a single center were identified. Patients with UIV at C2 or C3 and LIV at or above T2 were included. Exclusion criteria included pediatric patients, revision procedures, staged procedures, and intervention for infectious, oncologic, or traumatic indications. Patients with incomplete follow-up (eg, <2 y postoperatively) were excluded from the final analysis. Demographic data, surgical characteristics, clinical outcomes, and radiographic outcomes were compared.

Results: A total of 135 consecutive patients were included, of whom 47 (34.8%) had UIV at C2 and 88 (65.2%) had UIV at C3. There was no difference in 90-day readmission (14.9% vs. 20.5%, P=0.491) or 2-year reoperation between the groups (17.0% vs. 14.0%, P=0.628). The mean difference from baseline to final follow-up in cSVA, T1 slope, CL, TS-CL, and C0-C2 were similar between groups (P=0.753, 0.181, 0.797, 0.910, 0.959, respectively). Multivariate analysis did not reveal any correlation between UIV and radiographic outcomes (P>0.05).

Conclusions: There was no significant difference in clinical and radiographic outcomes in C2 versus C3 UIV groups. The added complexity of C2 instrumentation does not seem to be critical for successful radiographic and clinical outcomes after posterior cervical decompression and fusion for cervical myelopathy.

Level Of Evidence: Level III.