STUDY DESIGN: An in vitro human cadaveric biomechanical study. OBJECTIVES: To quantify effects on operated and other levels, including adjacent levels, due to CHARITE disc implantations versus simulated fusions, using follower load and the new hybrid test method in flexion-extension and bilateral torsion. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Spinal fusion has been associated with long-term accelerated degeneration at adjacent levels. As opposed to the fusion, artificial discs are designed to preserve motion and diminish the adjacent-level effects. METHODS: Five fresh human cadaveric lumbar specimens (T12-S1) underwent multidirectional testing in flexion-extension and bilateral torsion with 400 N follower load. Intact specimen total ranges of motion were determined with +/-10 Nm unconstrained pure moments. The intact range of motion was used as input for the hybrid tests of 5 constructs: 1) CHARITE disc at L5-S1; 2) fusion at L5-S1; 3) CHARITE discs at L4-L5 and L5-S1; 4) CHARITE disc at L4-L5 and fusion at L5-S1; and 5) 2-level fusion at L4-L5-S1. Using repeated-measures single factor analysis of variance and Bonferroni statistical tests (P < 0.05), intervertebral motion redistribution of each construct was compared with the intact. RESULTS: In flexion-extension, 1-level CHARITE disc preserved motion at the operated and other levels, while 2-level CHARITE showed some amount of other-level effects. In contrast, 1- and 2-level fusions increased other-level motions (average, 21.0% and 61.9%, respectively). In torsion, both 1- and 2-level discs preserved motions at all levels. The 2-level simulated fusion increased motions at proximal levels (22.9%), while the 1-level fusion produced no significant changes. CONCLUSIONS: In general, CHARITE discs preserved operated- and other-level motions. Fusion simulations affected motion redistribution at other levels, including adjacent levels.
STUDY DESIGN: An in vitro human cadaveric biomechanical study. OBJECTIVES: To quantify effects on operated and other levels, including adjacent levels, due to CHARITE disc implantations versus simulated fusions, using follower load and the new hybrid test method in flexion-extension and bilateral torsion. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Spinal fusion has been associated with long-term accelerated degeneration at adjacent levels. As opposed to the fusion, artificial discs are designed to preserve motion and diminish the adjacent-level effects. METHODS: Five fresh human cadaveric lumbar specimens (T12-S1) underwent multidirectional testing in flexion-extension and bilateral torsion with 400 N follower load. Intact specimen total ranges of motion were determined with +/-10 Nm unconstrained pure moments. The intact range of motion was used as input for the hybrid tests of 5 constructs: 1) CHARITE disc at L5-S1; 2) fusion at L5-S1; 3) CHARITE discs at L4-L5 and L5-S1; 4) CHARITE disc at L4-L5 and fusion at L5-S1; and 5) 2-level fusion at L4-L5-S1. Using repeated-measures single factor analysis of variance and Bonferroni statistical tests (P < 0.05), intervertebral motion redistribution of each construct was compared with the intact. RESULTS: In flexion-extension, 1-level CHARITE disc preserved motion at the operated and other levels, while 2-level CHARITE showed some amount of other-level effects. In contrast, 1- and 2-level fusions increased other-level motions (average, 21.0% and 61.9%, respectively). In torsion, both 1- and 2-level discs preserved motions at all levels. The 2-level simulated fusion increased motions at proximal levels (22.9%), while the 1-level fusion produced no significant changes. CONCLUSIONS: In general, CHARITE discs preserved operated- and other-level motions. Fusion simulations affected motion redistribution at other levels, including adjacent levels.
Authors: Qingan Zhu; Eyal Itshayek; Claire F Jones; Timothy Schwab; Chadwick R Larson; Lawrence G Lenke; Peter A Cripton Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2012-04-25 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Balkan Cakir; Marcus Richter; Werner Schmoelz; René Schmidt; Heiko Reichel; Hans Joachim Wilke Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2009-10-31 Impact factor: 3.134