Literature DB >> 19531999

Interdependence between disc space height, range of motion and clinical outcome in total lumbar disc replacement.

Christoph J Siepe1, Wolfgang Hitzl, Peter Meschede, Ajay K Sharma, Mohamed F Khattab, Michael H Mayer.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Clinical and radiologic assessment obtained from an ongoing prospective trial following total lumbar disc replacement (TDR) with ProDisc II.
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the interaction between the parameters of disc space height (DSH), range of motion (ROM) and clinical outcome scores following TDR. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The interdependence between DSH, ROM and the clinical symptomatology has been well documented for patients with degenerative disc disease, fusion candidates and healthy control subjects. In the case of TDR, previously published data show conflicting results.
METHODS: All TDRs were performed monosegmentally at L4/5 or L5-S1. The clinical outcome assessment included the patient's subjective outcome evaluation, Visual Analogue Scale, and Oswestry Disability Index scores (ODI). The radiologic evaluation included measurement of the mean, anterior and posterior DSH, as well as the ROM. The parameters were correlated pre- and postoperatively with each other.
RESULTS: Data from 62 patients with an average follow-up of 42.4 months (range: 24.2-77.6 months) were included in this study. Visual Analogue Scale and ODI scores showed a significant and maintained improvement in comparison to preoperative levels (P < 0.0001). The DSH increased from 5.7 mm (range: 2-11.3 mm) to 11.2 mm (range: 8-13.4 mm), whereas ROM decreased from 8.1 degrees (range: 0 degrees-23.1 degrees) to 5.1 degrees (range: 0 degrees-12.8 degrees). This loss in ROM was significant following TDR at L5-S1 (P < 0.01). Preoperative DSH and ROM were positively correlated with postoperative segmental ROM (r = 0.45, P < 0.002 and r = 0.35, P < 0.01). The highest satisfaction rates were observed in the group of patients with the smallest preoperative DSH of < 4.5 mm (P < 0.024).
CONCLUSION: A significant interdependence was observed between the parameters DSH, ROM and the clinical outcome following TDR. Whilst the DSH is restored, TDR leads to a significant decrease in postoperative ROM, particularly at the lumbosacral junction. Higher preoperative DSH and ROM revealed a beneficial effect on the postoperative segmental mobility. The subjective outcome evaluation indicates that TDR is a viable treatment option even in advanced stages of degenerative disc disease in the absence of other contraindications, in particular facet joint arthropathies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19531999     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31819966b0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  16 in total

1.  Predictors of outcome after surgery with disc prosthesis and rehabilitation in patients with chronic low back pain and degenerative disc: 2-year follow-up.

Authors:  Christian Hellum; Lars Gunnar Johnsen; Øyvind Gjertsen; Linda Berg; Gesche Neckelmann; Oliver Grundnes; Ivar Rossvoll; Jan Sture Skouen; Jens Ivar Brox; Kjersti Storheim
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-01-13       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Influence of lumbar intervertebral disc degeneration on the outcome of total lumbar disc replacement: a prospective clinical, histological, X-ray and MRI investigation.

Authors:  Christoph J Siepe; Franziska Heider; Elisabeth Haas; Wolfgang Hitzl; Ulrike Szeimies; Axel Stäbler; Christoph Weiler; Andreas G Nerlich; Michael H Mayer
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-05-29       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 3.  Do in vivo kinematic studies provide insight into adjacent segment degeneration? A qualitative systematic literature review.

Authors:  Masoud Malakoutian; David Volkheimer; John Street; Marcel F Dvorak; Hans-Joachim Wilke; Thomas R Oxland
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-06-09       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  High precision semiautomated computed tomography measurement of lumbar disk and vertebral heights.

Authors:  Sovira Tan; Jianhua Yao; Lawrence Yao; Michael M Ward
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Magnetic resonance morphometry of the adult normal lumbar intervertebral space.

Authors:  Apostolos H Fyllos; Dimitrios L Arvanitis; Apostolos H Karantanas; Sokratis E Varitimidis; Michael Hantes; Aristeidis H Zibis
Journal:  Surg Radiol Anat       Date:  2018-06-06       Impact factor: 1.246

6.  Comparison of Single-Level and Multiple-Level Outcomes of Total Disc Arthroplasty: 24-Month Results.

Authors:  Christoph Schätz; Karsten Ritter-Lang; Lutz Gössel; Nadine Dreßler
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2015-05-07

7.  [Keel-based lumbar total disk replacement: Prodisc-L and Prodisc-O].

Authors:  Michael Ogon; Alexander Tuschel
Journal:  Oper Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 1.154

8.  Optimizing success with lumbar disc arthroplasty.

Authors:  Matthew F Gornet; Francine Schranck; Nicholas D Wharton; Douglas P Beall; Elizabeth Jones; Mark E Myers; John A Hipp
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-04-26       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Parameters influencing the outcome after total disc replacement at the lumbosacral junction. Part 2: distraction and posterior translation lead to clinical failure after a mean follow-up of 5 years.

Authors:  Patrick Strube; Eike K Hoff; Marc Schürings; Hendrik Schmidt; Marcel Dreischarf; Antonius Rohlmann; Michael Putzier
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-08-23       Impact factor: 3.134

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

Authors:  Stephen Beatty
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2018-08-03
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.