A Comparative Study of Anterior Cervical Discectomy (ACD) with Anterior Cervical Discectomy with Fixation (ACDF)

Introduction: This study was conducted on 40 patients withsymptomatic cervical disc disease with one or two level discpathology. Clinical and radiological outcome was compared todetermine which technique was advantageous for treatment ofpatients with disc disease. Complications related to graft fusionfailures; subsidence, infection etc and donor site chronic painhave stimulated neurosurgeons to revert back to surgeries toavoid fusion.Methods: Patients were allocated to either ACD (n=21) orACDF (n=19) procedures. The standard Smith Robinsontechnique was performed in all patients in this study. Patientswere followed up clinically and radiologically according to thestudy protocol.Results: The clinical long term outcome was comparable inboth groups. Kyphosis and slow rate of fusion was noted withACD, but on long term follow up, patients were overallsatisfied. Donor site pain and graft related problems weremajor issues with ACDF. The issue of whether to fuse or not tofuse has not come to an end yet. This will require furtherrefinements in surgical technique, graft harvesting, and furtherstudies. Till then, both of these methods will be used forspecific indications.

Effect of an Ibuprofen Releasing Dressing (Biatain Ibu®) on Skin Graft Donor Site Wound Pain

PURPOSE: The purpose of management of split thickness skin graft (STSG) donor site is to promote healing process and minimize pain and infection. There are many dressing materials for managing donor site. The study aimed to compare the effect on management of donor site between Biatain Ibu® (polyurethane foam with incorporated ibuprofen) and Mepilex® (polyurethane foam coated with silicone). Especially, we focused on manage of donor site pain and treatment satisfaction. METHODS: This prospective study was conducted on 30 patients underwent STSG from January 2015 to June 2015. The grafts harvested with a same manner and the donor sites were managed with Biatain Ibu® or Mepilex®. Donor site pain, treatment satisfaction, days for re-epithelization and complication were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: All of 30 patients were well healed and there was no complications. Pain level of Biatain Ibu® (2.32±0.929) was lower than Mepilex® (4.77±1.224). Treatment satisfaction of Biatain Ibu® (8.40±0.632) was higher than Mepilex® (7.33±0.487). There is no statistically differences (P=0.455) in the days for re-eopithelization between Biatain Ibu® (14.73±0.789) and Mepilex® (14.53±0.639). CONCLUSION: The Biatain Ibu® dressing represents a valuable alternative in the management of STSG donor site by providing an appropriate wound healing, reduction of pain and improving treatment satisfaction.

Estudo prospectivo controlado randomizado: comparando duas formas de tratamento para o sitio doador de enxerto ósseo em cirurgia da coluna vertebral / Controlled randomized prospective study comparing two forms of treating the bone graft donor site in vertebral-spine surgery / Estudio prospectivo controlado randomizado: comparando dos tipos de tratamiento para el sitio donador del injerto óseo en cirurgía de columna vertebral

OBJETIVO: Comparar a colocação de geléia Gelfoan® versus a colocação apenas de dreno de sucção na área doadora, avaliando a dor pós-operatória, presença de complicações e seguimento dos pacientes. MÉTODOS: Foram randomizados por programa de computador 30 pacientes, sendo que em 14 pacientes foi utilizado Gelfoan® com anestésico e em 16 pacientes utilizamos dreno de sucção. Todos os pacientes foram avaliados em cinco períodos consecutivos, sendo avaliada a dor baseada na Escala Visual Analógica (VAS) e observado a incidência de complicações. Foram incluídos pacientes com abordagem anterior ou posterior, sendo considerado como fonte doadora única a crista ilíaca. Foram incluídos pacientes com 18 a 70 anos de idade de ambos os sexos. RESULTADOS: Foi observado que a dor pós-operatória foi menor com Gelfoan® nas primeiras avaliações, mas na média o resultado foi semelhante, não apresentando diferença estatística entre ambas as técnicas. Na média das avaliações, a escala visual analógica de dor foi de dois; não se observando complicações na área da retirada do enxerto. CONCLUSÃO: A abordagem com Gelfoan® com bupivacaina melhora a dor nas primeiras 48h pós-cirurgia, quando comparada com dreno de sucção a vácuo, mas na média ambas a técnicas são seguras, com presença de dor residual nas duas intervenções, mas com baixo índice de complicações. Não observamos complicações em nosso estudo.

OBJECTIVE: Compare the placement of absorbable jelly Gelfoan® versus the placement of a only a suction drain on the donor site, assessing post-operative pain, the presence of complications and the patient follow up. METHODS: Through a computer program, 30 patients were randomized, of which 14 patients using Gelfoan® with an anesthetic and 16 patients using a suction drain. All patients were assessed in five consecutive periods, the pain was assessed based on the visual analogue scale (VAS), and the incidence of complications was observed. Patients with an anterior or posterior approach were included and only the iliac bone was considered the donor site. Patients between 18 and 70 years of age from both genders were included. RESULTS: It was observed that the post-operative pain was less intense with the gelatin in the first assessments, but the mean results were similar and did not present statistical differences between both. In the average of the assessments, the visual analogue scale for pain was of two, not observing complications in the graft donor site. CONCLUSION: We have concluded that the approach with Gelfoan® with bupivacaine improves pain in the first 48 hours post-operatively when compared to the vacuum suction drain, but in average both techniques are safe, with the presence of residual pain in both interventions and a low complication rate, with none observed in our study.

OBJETIVO: Comparar la colocación de Gelfoan® con respecto a la colocación con solo el drenaje de succión en el área donante, evaluando el dolor posoperatorio, la presencia de complicaciones y el seguimiento de los pacientes. METODOLOGÍA: Fueron randomizados mediante programa computacional 30 pacientes, de los cuales en 14 pacientes se utilizó Gelfoan® con anestésico y en 16 drenaje de succión. Todos los pacientes fueron evaluados en 5 periodos consecutivos. Fue evaluado el dolor basado en la Escala Visual Analógica (VAS), y observada la incidencia de complicaciones. Fueron incluidos pacientes con enfoque anterior y posterior, se consideró como fuente donadora única la cresta ilíaca. Se incluyeron pacientes de 18 a 70 años de ambos sexos. RESULTADOS: se observó que el dolor posoperatorio disminuyó con gel en las primeras evaluaciones. Sin embargo, en media, el resultado fue similar, sin presencia de diferencia estadística entre ambas técnicas. Realizándose la media en las evaluaciones, la escala visual analógica de dolor fue de 2; no se observaron complicaciones en el área de extracción del injerto. CONCLUSIONES: El abordaje con Gelfoan® con bupivacaina mejora el dolor en las primeras 48 horas poscirurgía, comparándolo con el drenaje de succión al vacío. Sin embargo, en media, ambas técnicas son seguras, presentándose dolor residual en las dos intervenciones con bajo índice de complicaciones. No se observaron complicaciones en el estudio realizado.