Literature DB >> 11795709

Influence of an artificial cervical joint compared with fusion on adjacent-level motion in the treatment of degenerative cervical disc disease.

Crispin Wigfield1, Steven Gill, Richard Nelson, Ilana Langdon, Newton Metcalf, James Robertson.   

Abstract

OBJECT: The authors report the preservation of motion at surgically treated and adjacent spinal segments after placing an artificial cervical joint (ACJ) and they describe the influence of interbody fusion on changes in angulation occurring in the sagittal plane at adjacent levels in the treatment of cervical spondylosis.
METHODS: The authors conducted a prospective nonrandomized study of patients in whom an ACJ was placed or autologous bone graft interbody fusion was performed. Angular measurements at levels adjacent to that surgically treated were calculated using plain flexion-extension radiographs obtained at 6-month intervals. Analyses of qualitative data, such as increase or decrease in adjacent-level motion, and the degree of disc degeneration were performed. Quantitative data were also analyzed. In the fusion group a significant increase in adjacent-level movement was demonstrated at the 12-month follow-up visit compared with the group of patients in whom ACJs were placed (p < 0.001). The increase in movement occurred predominantly at intervertebral discs that were preoperatively regarded as normal (p < 0.02). An overall reduction in adjacent-level movement was observed in patients who underwent joint replacement, although this was compensated for by the movement provided by the ACJ itself.
CONCLUSIONS: Fusion results in increased motion at adjacent levels. The increase in adjacent-level motion derives from those discs that appear radiologically normal prior to surgery. It remains unknown whether ACJs have a protective influence on adjacent intervertebral discs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11795709     DOI: 10.3171/spi.2002.96.1.0017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosurg        ISSN: 0022-3085            Impact factor:   5.115


  40 in total

1.  Three-dimensional kinematic analysis of the cervical spine after anterior cervical decompression and fusion at an adjacent level: a preliminary report.

Authors:  Sadayoshi Watanabe; Nozomu Inoue; Tomonori Yamaguchi; Yoshitaka Hirano; Alejandro A Espinoza Orías; Shintaro Nishida; Yuichi Hirose; Junichi Mizuno
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-11-29       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Fusion versus Bryan Cervical Disc in two-level cervical disc disease: a prospective, randomised study.

Authors:  Lei Cheng; Lin Nie; Li Zhang; Yong Hou
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2008-10-28       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 3.  Motion analysis of single-level cervical total disc arthroplasty: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jian Chen; Shun-wu Fan; Xin-wei Wang; Wen Yuan
Journal:  Orthop Surg       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 2.071

4.  Surgical outcome of cervical arthroplasty using bryan(r).

Authors:  Hong-Ki Kim; Myung-Hyun Kim; Do-Sang Cho; Sung-Hak Kim
Journal:  J Korean Neurosurg Soc       Date:  2009-12-31

5.  Local and global subaxial cervical spine biomechanics after single-level fusion or cervical arthroplasty.

Authors:  Michael A Finn; Darrel S Brodke; Michael Daubs; Alpesh Patel; Kent N Bachus
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-07-08       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Clinical and radiographic reports following cervical arthroplasty: a 24-month follow-up.

Authors:  Yan Cai Yang; Lin Nie; Lei Cheng; Yong Hou
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2008-05-22       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  Cervical disc prosthesis versus arthrodesis using one-level, hybrid and two-level constructs: an in vitro investigation.

Authors:  Cédric Barrey; Sophie Campana; Sylvain Persohn; Gilles Perrin; Wafa Skalli
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-08-11       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Assessment of adjacent-segment mobility after cervical disc replacement versus fusion: RCT with 1 year's results.

Authors:  A Nabhan; B Ishak; W I Steudel; S Ramadhan; O Steimer
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-01-08       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Clinical and radiological evaluation of cervical disc arthroplasty with 5-year follow-up: a prospective study of 384 patients.

Authors:  T Dufour; J Beaurain; J Huppert; P Dam-Hieu; P Bernard; J P Steib
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2019-07-30       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  Is cervical disc arthroplasty superior to fusion for treatment of symptomatic cervical disc disease? A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Si Yin; Xiao Yu; Shuangli Zhou; Zhanhai Yin; Yusheng Qiu
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-02-07       Impact factor: 4.176

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.