Literature DB >> 16034627

[Degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine Total disc replacement as an alternative to lumbar fusion?].

H M Mayer1.   

Abstract

Spinal fusion is accepted worldwide as a therapeutic option for the treatment of degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine. Because there are only few evidence-based data available supporting the usefulness of lumbar spinal fusion, its questionable benefit as well as the potential for complications are the reasons for an ongoing discussion. In recent years, total disc replacement with implants has emerged as an alternative treatment. Although early results are promising, there is still a lack of evidence-based data as well as of long-term results for this technology. This article gives a critical update on the implant systems currently in use (SB Charité, Prodisc II L, Maverick, Flexicore, Mobidisc), which all have to be considered as "first-generation" implants. Morphological and clinical sequelae of the different biomechanical properties, designs, and materials have not yet been sufficiently investigated. There is no international consensus on the indication spectrum and on the preoperative diagnosis of discogenic low back pain. The same is true for the (minimally invasive) surgical access strategies. Complication rates seem to be somewhat lower compared to spinal fusion techniques. There are no standardized revision concepts in cases of implant failure. Lumbar disc replacement has opened a new era in spinal surgery with a still unproven benefit for the patient. It is strongly recommended that these techniques should only be applied by experienced and well-trained spine surgeons. Until evidence-based data are available, all patients should be treated under scientific study conditions with close postoperative follow-up.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16034627     DOI: 10.1007/s00132-005-0836-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Orthopade        ISSN: 0085-4530            Impact factor:   1.087


  79 in total

1.  Design of an intervertebral disc prosthesis.

Authors:  T P Hedman; J P Kostuik; G R Fernie; W G Hellier
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1991-06       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 2.  Circumferential fusion of the lumbar and lumbosacral spine.

Authors:  D Grob; H J Scheier; J Dvorak; H Siegrist; M Rubeli; R Joller
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 3.067

3.  Investigation of the relation between low back pain and occupation. IV. Physical requirements: bending, rotation, reaching and sudden maximal effort.

Authors:  A Magora
Journal:  Scand J Rehabil Med       Date:  1973

4.  The resistance to flexion of the lumbar intervertebral joint.

Authors:  M A Adams; W C Hutton; J R Stott
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1980 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 5.  Distribution of cobalt chromium wear and corrosion products and biologic reactions.

Authors:  K Merritt; S A Brown
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Discographic pain report. Influence of psychological factors.

Authors:  A R Block; H Vanharanta; D D Ohnmeiss; R D Guyer
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1996-02-01       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  Risk factors for adjacent-segment failure following lumbar fixation with rigid instrumentation for degenerative instability.

Authors:  S Etebar; D W Cahill
Journal:  J Neurosurg       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 5.115

8.  Periprosthetic bone loss in total hip arthroplasty. Polyethylene wear debris and the concept of the effective joint space.

Authors:  T P Schmalzried; M Jasty; W H Harris
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 5.284

9.  Correlation between sagittal plane changes and adjacent segment degeneration following lumbar spine fusion.

Authors:  M N Kumar; A Baklanov; D Chopin
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  Disc deterioration in low-back syndromes. A prospective, multi-center CT/discography study.

Authors:  H Vanharanta; R D Guyer; D D Ohnmeiss; W J Stith; B L Sachs; C Aprill; M Spivey; R F Rashbaum; S H Hochschuler; T Videman
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1988-12       Impact factor: 3.468

View more
  4 in total

1.  [Lumbar disc arthroplasty: indications, biomechanics, types, and radiological criteria].

Authors:  A Baur-Melnyk; C Birkenmaier; M F Reiser
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 0.635

2.  Letter to the Editor concerning "Charité total disc replacement: clinical and radiographical results after an average follow-up of 17 years" (M. Putzier et al.).

Authors:  Helmut D Link
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2006-03-04       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 3.  [Revision surgery after implantation of a vertebral disc prosthesis].

Authors:  C Hopf
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 1.087

4.  We Need to Talk about Lumbar Total Disc Replacement.

Authors:  Stephen Beatty
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2018-08-03
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.