2008
DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-950x.2008.00400.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cervical Spinal Locking Plate in Combination with Cortical Ring Allograft for a One Level Fusion in Dogs with Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy

Abstract: For dogs with CSM at a single level, the use of a spinal locking plate in combination with a cortical ring allograft can be an effective surgical treatment. Costs of the implants as well as anatomic differences in dogs make this type of surgery less appealing.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
90
0
3

Year Published

2011
2011
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 51 publications
(94 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
0
90
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…[24][25][26][27][28] In contrast, distraction-stabilization-fusion techniques distract the vertebrae to stretch the hypertrophied tissue and relieve spinal cord compression; the vertebrae are then stabilized with appropriate implants, and fusion is promoted with autologous bone grafts (cancellous, cortical, or corticocancellous) 18 or cancellous bone allografts. 2,6,9,18,[28][29][30][31][32][33] Success rates of 70% to 90% have been reported 6,[8][9][10]18,32 for surgical treatment of disk-associated CSM in dogs by use of direct or indirect decompression methods. 2,6,9,18,[28][29][30][31][32][33] Success rates of 70% to 90% have been reported 6,[8][9][10]18,32 for surgical treatment of disk-associated CSM in dogs by use of direct or indirect decompression methods.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…[24][25][26][27][28] In contrast, distraction-stabilization-fusion techniques distract the vertebrae to stretch the hypertrophied tissue and relieve spinal cord compression; the vertebrae are then stabilized with appropriate implants, and fusion is promoted with autologous bone grafts (cancellous, cortical, or corticocancellous) 18 or cancellous bone allografts. 2,6,9,18,[28][29][30][31][32][33] Success rates of 70% to 90% have been reported 6,[8][9][10]18,32 for surgical treatment of disk-associated CSM in dogs by use of direct or indirect decompression methods. 2,6,9,18,[28][29][30][31][32][33] Success rates of 70% to 90% have been reported 6,[8][9][10]18,32 for surgical treatment of disk-associated CSM in dogs by use of direct or indirect decompression methods.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…9,18 Recurrence of paraparesis to tetraparesis develops in up to one-third of dogs after ventral decompression or metal implant insertion and bone cement fixation. 2,18,33 Cervical arthroplasty involves, after spinal cord decompression and diskectomy, placement in the intervertebral space of a device able to maintain distraction and preserve intervertebral mobility at the treated space. [8][9][10]27,30 Because of the high rates of surgical failure and long-term recurrence, new methods are continually investigated for the treatment of disk-associated CSM in dogs.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Para avaliar os cães com lesões da coluna cervical, utilizou-se a classificação proposta por Joaquim e Luna (31) , adaptada de Bergman et al (32) (Tabela 2). Os cães com lesões toracolombares foram classificados de acordo com o grau de lesão medular proposto por Joaquim et al…”
Section: Materiais E Métodosunclassified
“…Some authors advocate use of bone grafts in various shapes, orientations and types or allografts with or without the concomitant use of intervertebral fusion cages (Steffen et al, 2011;De Decker et al, 2011c). Objective of these techniques is to stabilize the affected intervertebral space through vertebral fusion without long term reliance on implants (Queen et al, 1998;Bergman et al, 2008). This is based on the fact that intervertebral spaces can fuse after ventral decompression, even without grafting (Trotter, 2009).…”
Section: Conservative (Non-surgical) Treatmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is clinical evidence (Trotter, 2009) that any violation of the end plates applied either from distractors (like modified Gelpi retractor) to the adjacent vertebras or from drilling holes for the accommodation of grafts and cement plugs, weakens significantly the end plates. Thus, use of a specially designed cervical distractor called Caspar and new designation plates used in human spinal surgery are proposed for their safety and ease of use (Matis, 2002;Bergman et al, 2008;Trotter, 2009). Their main disadvantages are the high cost and their questionable ability for distraction of more than one intervertebral disc spaces.…”
Section: Complicationsmentioning
confidence: 99%