Skip to main content
main-content

29.10.2019 | Original Article Open Access

Long-term clinical outcome of two revision strategies for failed total disc replacements

Zeitschrift:
European Spine Journal
Autoren:
J. Kitzen, T. F. G. Vercoulen, S. M. J. van Kuijk, M. G. M. Schotanus, N. P. Kort, L. W. van Rhijn, P. C. P. H. Willems
Wichtige Hinweise

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s00586-019-06184-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the long-term clinical results and complications of two revision strategies for patients with failed total disc replacements (TDRs).

Methods

In 19 patients, the TDR was removed and the intervertebral defect was filled with a femoral head bone strut graft. In addition, instrumented posterolateral fusion was performed (removal group). In 36 patients, only a posterolateral instrumented fusion was performed (fusion group). Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were completed pre- and post-revision surgery. Intra- and post-operative complications of both revision strategies were assessed.

Results

The median follow-up was 12.3 years (range 5.3–24.3). In both the removal and fusion groups, a similar (p = 0.515 and p = 0419, respectively) but significant decrease in VAS (p = 0.001 and p = 0.001, respectively) and ODI score (p = 0.033 and p = 0.013, respectively) at post-revision surgery compared to pre-revision surgery was seen. A clinically relevant improvement in VAS and ODI score was found in 62.5% and 43.8% in the removal group and in 43.5% and 39.1% in the fusion group (p = 0.242 and p = 0.773, respectively). Removal of the TDR was associated with substantial intra-operative complications such as major vessel bleeding and ureter lesion. The percentage of late re-operations for complications such as pseudarthrosis were comparable for both revision strategies.

Conclusions

Revision of a failed TDR is clinically beneficial in about half of the patients. No clear benefits for additional TDR removal as compared to posterolateral instrumented fusion alone could be identified. In particular, when considering the substantial risks and complications, great caution is warranted with removal of the TDR.

Graphic abstract

These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Unsere Produktempfehlungen

e.Med Interdisziplinär

Kombi-Abonnement

Mit e.Med Interdisziplinär erhalten Sie Zugang zu allen CME-Fortbildungen und Fachzeitschriften auf SpringerMedizin.de. Zusätzlich können Sie eine Zeitschrift Ihrer Wahl in gedruckter Form beziehen – ohne Aufpreis.

e.Med Orthopädie & Unfallchirurgie

Kombi-Abonnement

Mit e.Med Orthopädie & Unfallchirurgie erhalten Sie Zugang zu CME-Fortbildungen der Fachgebiete, den Premium-Inhalten der dazugehörigen Fachzeitschriften, inklusive einer gedruckten Zeitschrift Ihrer Wahl.

Zusatzmaterial
Supplementary material 1 (PPTX 226 kb)
586_2019_6184_MOESM1_ESM.pptx
Literatur
Über diesen Artikel

Neu im Fachgebiet Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Mail Icon II Newsletter

Bestellen Sie unseren kostenlosen Newsletter Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.

Bildnachweise