Literature DB >> 21587111

Factors affecting the incidence of symptomatic adjacent-level disease in cervical spine after total disc arthroplasty: 2- to 4-year follow-up of 3 prospective randomized trials.

Pierce D Nunley1, Ajay Jawahar, Eubulus J Kerr, Charles J Gordon, David A Cavanaugh, Elisa M Birdsong, Marolyn Stocks, Guy Danielson.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Prospective randomized clinical trials.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcome data with respect to clinical success rates and incidence of adjacent level disease (ALD) in patients after total disc arthroplasty (TDA) or anterior cervical fusion (ACDF) for 1- and 2-level cervical disc disease. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Previously published studies have provided evidence that ACDF procedure for cervical degenerative disc disease (DDD) may increase the stress on the nonoperated adjacent cervical segments, thus possibly increasing the risk of degeneration at these levels. The theoretical assumption that TDA may reduce the incidence of future ALD by preserving motion at the affected segments has, however, never been validated by clinical evidence.
METHODS: One hundred seventy patients with established symptomatic cervical disc disease at 1 or 2 levels participated in 3 prospective randomized clinical trials at 2 institutions. Participating subjects were randomized to receive TDA (treatment; n = 113) or ACDF (control; n = 57) by 6 independent investigating surgeons. Visual analogue pain scores (0-100), Neck Disability Index, neurological examination, and cervical spine radiographs were collected at enrollment and then 6 weeks and 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, and 48 months after surgery. Patients with persistent symptoms during the follow-up period were investigated for adjacent segment disease (ASD) with computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging of the cervical spine, neurophysiology, and subsequent active interventions.
RESULTS: At the median follow-up of 42 months (range: 28-54 months), 9 (14.3%) ACDF and 19 (16.8%) TDA patients developed and were actively treated for ASD. Osteopenia dust energy x-ray absorptiometry T scores of -1.5 to -2.4) (P = 0.04; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.007-0.223) and concurrent lumbar degenerative disease (P = 0.02; 95% CI: 0.003-0.196) significantly increased the risk of ASD.
CONCLUSION: The risk of developing adjacent segment degeneration was equivalent at median 38 months after both ACDF and TDA procedures in cervical DDD. Osteopenia and concurrent lumbar DDD significantly increase the risk of ALD.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 21587111     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31822174b3

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


  49 in total

1.  Dynamic cervical stabilization: a multicenter study.

Authors:  Guy Matgé; Peter Buddenberg; Marcus Eif; Holger Schenke; Joerg Herdmann
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-09-02       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 2.  Adjacent segment disease perspective and review of the literature.

Authors:  Fanor M Saavedra-Pozo; Renato A M Deusdara; Edward C Benzel
Journal:  Ochsner J       Date:  2014

3.  Long Term Societal Costs of Anterior Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) versus Cervical Disc Arthroplasty (CDA) for Treatment of Cervical Radiculopathy.

Authors:  Ahmer Ghori; Joseph F Konopka; Heeren Makanji; Thomas D Cha; Christopher M Bono
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2016-01-07

4.  Prospective, Randomized Comparison of One-level Mobi-C Cervical Total Disc Replacement vs. Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: Results at 5-year Follow-up.

Authors:  Michael S Hisey; Jack E Zigler; Robert Jackson; Pierce D Nunley; Hyun W Bae; Kee D Kim; Donna D Ohnmeiss
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2016-02-26

5.  Differential segmental motion contribution of single- and two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.

Authors:  Andy Chien; Dar-Ming Lai; Shwu-Fen Wang; Chih-Hsiu Cheng; Wei-Li Hsu; Jaw-Lin Wang
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-04-10       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 6.  WITHDRAWN: Arthroplasty versus fusion in single-level cervical degenerative disc disease.

Authors:  Toon F M Boselie; Paul C Willems; Henk van Mameren; Rob de Bie; Edward C Benzel; Henk van Santbrink
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-05-21

Review 7.  Adjacent level disease-background and update based on disc replacement data.

Authors:  I David Kaye; Alan S Hilibrand
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2017-06

8.  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

9.  Five-year results of cervical disc prostheses in the SWISSspine registry.

Authors:  Emin Aghayev; Christian Bärlocher; Friedrich Sgier; Mustafa Hasdemir; Klaus F Steinsiepe; Frank Wernli; François Porchet; Oliver Hausmann; Aymen Ramadan; Gianluca Maestretti; Uwe Ebeling; Michal Neukamp; Christoph Röder
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-04-13       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  What are the associative factors of adjacent segment degeneration after anterior cervical spine surgery? Comparative study between anterior cervical fusion and arthroplasty with 5-year follow-up MRI and CT.

Authors:  Jeong Yoon Park; Kyung Hyun Kim; Sung Uk Kuh; Dong Kyu Chin; Keun Su Kim; Yong Eun Cho
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-12-15       Impact factor: 3.134

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.