nach oben

International Orthopaedics

Erschienen in:

08.04.2016 | Review Article

Cervical disc replacement — emerging equivalency to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion

verfasst von: Aaron J. Buckland, Joseph F. Baker, Ryan P. Roach, Jeffrey M. Spivak

Erschienen in: International Orthopaedics | Ausgabe 6/2016

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

Cervical disc replacement has become an acceptable alternative to anterior cervical fusion for the surgical treatment of cervical spine spondylosis resulting in radiculopathy or myelopathy following anterior discectomy and decompression. This concise overview considers the current state of knowledge regarding the continued debate of the role of cervical disc replacement with an update in light of the latest clinical trial results.

Methods

A literature review was performed identifying clinical trials pertaining to the use of cervical disc replacement compared to cervical discectomy and fusion. Single level disease and two level disease were considered. Outcome data from the major clinical trials was reviewed and salient points identified.

Results

With lengthier follow-up data becoming available, the equivalence of CDR in appropriately selected cases is becoming clear. This is chiefly manifested by reduced re-operation rates and reduced incidence of adjacent level disease in those treated with arthroplasty.

Conclusion

Cervical disc replacement shows emerging equivalence in outcomes compared to the gold standard anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Further longer term results are anticipated to confirm this trend.

Fernstrom U (1966) Arthroplasty with intercorporal endoprothesis in herniated disc and in painful disc. Acta Chir Scand Suppl 357:154–159PubMed

Cavanaugh DA, Nunley PD, Kerr EJ 3rd, Werner DJ, Jawahar A (2009) Delayed hyper-reactivity to metal ions after cervical disc arthroplasty: a case report and literature review. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34:E262–E265CrossRef

Anderson PA, Rouleau JP, Toth JM, Riew KD (2004) A comparison of simulator-tested and -retrieved cervical disc prostheses. Invited submission from the joint section meeting on disorders of the spine and peripheral nerves, March 2004. J Neurosurg Spine 1:202–210CrossRefPubMed

Kurtz SM, Toth JM, Siskey R et al (2012) The latest lessons learned from retrieval analyses of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene, metal-on-metal, and alternative bearing total disc replacements. Semin Spine Surg 24:57–70CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Lebl DR, Cammisa FP Jr, Girardi FP, Wright T, Abjornson C (2012) The mechanical performance of cervical total disc replacements in vivo: prospective retrieval analysis of prodisc-C devices. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 37:2151–2160CrossRef

Veruva SY, Steinbeck MJ, Toth J, Alexander DD, Kurtz SM (2014) Which design and biomaterial factors affect clinical wear performance of total disc replacements? A systematic review. Clin Orthop Relat Res 472:3759–3769CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Burkus JK, Traynelis VC, Haid RW Jr, Mummaneni PV (2014) Clinical and radiographic analysis of an artificial cervical disc: 7-year follow-up from the prestige prospective randomized controlled clinical trial: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 21:516–528CrossRefPubMed

Hisey MS, Bae HW, Davis RJ et al (2015) Prospective, randomized comparison of cervical total disk replacement versus anterior cervical fusion: results at 48 months follow-up. J Spinal Disord Tech 28:E237–E243CrossRefPubMed

Janssen ME, Zigler JE, Spivak JM et al (2015) ProDisc-C total disc replacement versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for single-level symptomatic cervical disc disease: seven-year follow-up of the prospective randomized U.S Food and Drug Administration Investigational Device Exemption Study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 97:1738–1747CrossRefPubMed

10.

Phillips FM, Geisler FH, Gilder KM et al (2015) Long-term outcomes of the US FDA IDE prospective randomized controlled clinical trial comparing PCM cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 40:674–683CrossRef

11.

Sasso RC, Anderson PA, Riew KD, Heller JG (2011) Results of cervical arthroplasty compared with anterior discectomy and fusion: four-year clinical outcomes in a prospective, randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am 93:1684–1692CrossRefPubMed

12.

Burkus JK, Haid RW, Traynelis VC, Mummaneni PV (2010) Long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes of cervical disc replacement with the prestige disc: results from a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial. J Neurosurg Spine 13:308–318CrossRefPubMed

13.

Phillips FM, Lee JY, Geisler FH et al (2013) A prospective, randomized, controlled clinical investigation comparing PCM cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. 2-year results from the US FDA IDE clinical trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 38:E907–E918CrossRef

14.

Sasso RC, Smucker JD, Hacker RJ, Heller JG (2007) Clinical outcomes of BRYAN cervical disc arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter trial with 24-month follow-up. J Spinal Disord Tech 20:481–491CrossRefPubMed

15.

Zigler JE, Delamarter R, Murrey D, Spivak J, Janssen M (2013) ProDisc-C and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion as surgical treatment for single-level cervical symptomatic degenerative disc disease: five-year results of a Food and Drug Administration study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 38:203–209CrossRef

16.

Carreon LY, Glassman SD, Campbell MJ, Anderson PA (2010) Neck disability index, short form-36 physical component summary, and pain scales for neck and arm pain: the minimum clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit after cervical spine fusion. Spine J 10:469–474CrossRefPubMed

17.

Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA et al (2007) Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 7:10CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Tashani OA, El-Tumi H, Aneiba K (2015) Quality of systematic reviews: an example of studies comparing artificial disc replacement with fusion in the cervical spine. Libyan J Med 10:28857CrossRefPubMed

19.

Boselie TF, Willems PC, van Mameren H et al (2012) Arthroplasty versus fusion in single-level cervical degenerative disc disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 9:CD009173PubMed

20.

Boselie TF, Willems PC, van Mameren H et al (2015) WITHDRAWN: arthroplasty versus fusion in single-level cervical degenerative disc disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 5:CD009173PubMed

21.

Fallah A, Akl EA, Ebrahim S et al (2012) Anterior cervical discectomy with arthroplasty versus arthrodesis for single-level cervical spondylosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 7:e43407CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Wu AM, Xu H, Mullinix KP et al (2015) Minimum 4-year outcomes of cervical total disc arthroplasty versus fusion: a meta-analysis based on prospective randomized controlled trials. Medicine (Baltimore) 94:e665CrossRef

23.

Davis RJ, Nunley PD, Kim KD et al (2015) Two-level total disc replacement with Mobi-C cervical artificial disc versus anterior discectomy and fusion: a prospective, randomized, controlled multicenter clinical trial with 4-year follow-up results. J Neurosurg Spine 22:15–25CrossRefPubMed

24.

Jia Z, Mo Z, Ding F et al (2014) Hybrid surgery for multilevel cervical degenerative disc diseases: a systematic review of biomechanical and clinical evidence. Eur Spine J 23:1619–1632CrossRefPubMed

25.

Mummaneni PV, Burkus JK, Haid RW, Traynelis VC, Zdeblick TA (2007) Clinical and radiographic analysis of cervical disc arthroplasty compared with allograft fusion: a randomized controlled clinical trial. J Neurosurg Spine 6:198–209CrossRefPubMed

26.

Sasso RC, Best NM, Metcalf NH, Anderson PA (2008) Motion analysis of bryan cervical disc arthroplasty versus anterior discectomy and fusion: results from a prospective, randomized, multicenter, clinical trial. J Spinal Disord Tech 21:393–399CrossRefPubMed

27.

Tian W, Wang H, Yan K, Han X, Jin P (2014) Analysis of the factors that could predict segmental range of motion after cervical artificial disc replacement: a 7-years follow-up study. J Spinal Disord Tech

28.

Rong X, Gong Q, Liu H et al (2014) The effect of deviated center of rotation on flexion-extension range of motion after single-level cervical arthroplasty: an in vivo study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 39:B12–B18CrossRef

29.

Gandhi AA, Kode S, DeVries NA et al (2015) Biomechanical analysis of cervical disc replacement and fusion using single level, two level and hybrid constructs. Spine (Phila Pa 1976)

30.

Chang UK, Kim DH, Lee MC et al (2007) Changes in adjacent-level disc pressure and facet joint force after cervical arthroplasty compared with cervical discectomy and fusion. J Neurosurg Spine 7:33–39CrossRefPubMed

31.

DiAngelo DJ, Foley KT, Morrow BR et al (2004) In vitro biomechanics of cervical disc arthroplasty with the ProDisc-C total disc implant. Neurosurg Focus 17:E7PubMed

32.

Dmitriev AE, Cunningham BW, Hu N et al (2005) Adjacent level intradiscal pressure and segmental kinematics following a cervical total disc arthroplasty: an in vitro human cadaveric model. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30:1165–1172CrossRef

33.

Eck JC, Humphreys SC, Lim TH et al (2002) Biomechanical study on the effect of cervical spine fusion on adjacent-level intradiscal pressure and segmental motion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 27:2431–2434CrossRef

34.

Luo J, Gong M, Huang S, Yu T, Zou X (2015) Incidence of adjacent segment degeneration in cervical disc arthroplasty versus anterior cervical decompression and fusion meta-analysis of prospective studies. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 135:155–160CrossRefPubMed

35.

Nunley PD, Jawahar A, Cavanaugh DA et al (2013) Symptomatic adjacent segment disease after cervical total disc replacement: re-examining the clinical and radiological evidence with established criteria. Spine J 13:5–12CrossRefPubMed

36.

Verma K, Gandhi SD, Maltenfort M et al (2013) Rate of adjacent segment disease in cervical disc arthroplasty versus single-level fusion: meta-analysis of prospective studies. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 38:2253–2257CrossRef

37.

Yang B, Li H, Zhang T, He X, Xu S (2012) The incidence of adjacent segment degeneration after cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA): a meta analysis of randomized controlled trials. PLoS One 7:e35032CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

38.

Aragones M, Hevia E, Barrios C (2015) Polyurethane on titanium unconstrained disc arthroplasty versus anterior discectomy and fusion for the treatment of cervical disc disease: a review of level I-II randomized clinical trials including clinical outcomes. Eur Spine J 24:2735–2745CrossRefPubMed

39.

Shriver MF, Lubelski D, Sharma AM et al (2015) Adjacent segment degeneration and disease following cervical arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Spine J 16:168–181CrossRefPubMed

40.

Delamarter RB, Zigler J (2013) Five-year reoperation rates, cervical total disc replacement versus fusion, results of a prospective randomized clinical trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 38:711–717CrossRef

41.

Menzin J, Zhang B, Neumann P et al (2010) A health-economic assessment of cervical disc arthroplasty compared with allograft fusion. Tech Orthop 25:133–137CrossRef

42.

Qureshi SA, McAnany S, Goz V, Koehler SM, Hecht AC (2013) Cost-effectiveness analysis: comparing single-level cervical disc replacement and single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 19:546–554CrossRefPubMed

43.

Radcliff K, Zigler J (2015) Costs of cervical disc replacement versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for treatment of single-level cervical disc disease: an analysis of the Blue Health Intelligence database for acute and long-term costs and complications. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 40:521–529CrossRef

Titel: Cervical disc replacement — emerging equivalency to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion
verfasst von: Aaron J. Buckland
Joseph F. Baker
Ryan P. Roach
Jeffrey M. Spivak
Publikationsdatum: 08.04.2016
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: International Orthopaedics / Ausgabe 6/2016
Print ISSN: 0341-2695
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-5195
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-016-3181-8

Arthropedia

Grundlagenwissen der Arthroskopie und Gelenkchirurgie. Erweitert durch Fallbeispiele, Videos und Abbildungen.
» Jetzt entdecken

Neu im Fachgebiet Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

25.04.2024 | Hypertonie | Nachrichten

Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

Cervical disc replacement — emerging equivalency to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Arthropedia

Neu im Fachgebiet Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Therapiestart mit Blutdrucksenkern erhöht Frakturrisiko

Ärztliche Empathie hilft gegen Rückenschmerzen

Stereotaktische Radiatio schlägt konventionelle Bestrahlung

Vorsicht mit hohen NSAR-Dosen bei ankylosierender Spondylitis!

Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 6/2016

Pyogenic lumbar spondylodiscitis treated with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: safety and outcomes

Bone morphogenetic protein use in spine surgery—complications and outcomes: a systematic review

Interspinous dynamic stabilization adjacent to fusion versus double-segment fusion for treatment of lumbar degenerative disease with a minimum follow-up of three years

Interspinous spacers versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spinal diseases: a meta-analysis of prospective studies

Tracheostomy following anterior cervical spine fusion in trauma patients

Effect of the percutaneous pedicle screw fixation at the fractured vertebra on the treatment of thoracolumbar fractures

Arthropedia

Neu im Fachgebiet Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Therapiestart mit Blutdrucksenkern erhöht Frakturrisiko

Ärztliche Empathie hilft gegen Rückenschmerzen

Stereotaktische Radiatio schlägt konventionelle Bestrahlung

Vorsicht mit hohen NSAR-Dosen bei ankylosierender Spondylitis!

Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie