Literature DB >> 21598118

Parameters that effect spine biomechanics following cervical disc replacement.

Vijay K Goel1, Ahmad Faizan, Vivek Palepu, Sanghita Bhattacharya.   

Abstract

Total disc replacement (TDR) is expected to provide a more physiologic alternative to fusion. However, long-term clinical data proving the efficacy of the implants is lacking. Limited clinical data suggest somewhat of a disagreement between the in vitro biomechanical studies and in vivo assessments. This conceptual paper presents the potential biomechanical challenges affecting the TDR that should be addressed with a hope to improve the clinical outcomes and our understanding of the devices. Appropriate literature and our own research findings comparing the biomechanics of different disc designs are presented to highlight the need for additional investigations. The biomechanical effects of various surgical procedures are analyzed, reiterating the importance of parameters like preserving uncinate processes, disc placement and its orientation within the cervical spine. Moreover, the need for a 360° dynamic system for disc recipients who may experience whiplash injuries is explored. Probabilistic studies as performed already in the lumbar spine may explore high risk combinations of different parameters and explain the differences between "standard" biomechanical investigations and clinical studies. Development of a patient specific optimized finite element model that takes muscle forces into consideration may help resolve the discrepancies between biomechanics of TDR and the clinical studies. Factors affecting long-term performance such as bone remodeling, subsidence, and wear are elaborated. In vivo assessment of segmental spine motion has been, and continues to be, a challenge. In general, clinical studies while reporting the data have placed lesser emphasis on kinematics following intervertebral disc replacements. Evaluation of in vivo kinematics following TDR to analyze the quality and quantity of motion using stereoradiogrammetric technique may be needed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21598118      PMCID: PMC3377804          DOI: 10.1007/s00586-011-1816-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  74 in total

1.  Range of motion change after cervical arthroplasty with ProDisc-C and prestige artificial discs compared with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.

Authors:  Ung-Kyu Chang; Daniel H Kim; Max C Lee; Rafer Willenberg; Se-Hoon Kim; Jesse Lim
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2007-07

2.  Effects of a cervical disc prosthesis on maintaining sagittal alignment of the functional spinal unit and overall sagittal balance of the cervical spine.

Authors:  Seok Woo Kim; Jae Hyuk Shin; Jose Joefrey Arbatin; Moon Soo Park; Yung Khee Chung; Paul C McAfee
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2007-08-25       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Bryan cervical disc prosthesis: 12-month clinical outcome.

Authors:  A Amit; N Dorward
Journal:  Br J Neurosurg       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 1.596

4.  Telemeterized load measurement using instrumented spinal internal fixators in a patient with degenerative instability.

Authors:  A Rohlmann; G Bergmann; F Graichen; H M Mayer
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1995-12-15       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Functional radiographic diagnosis of the cervical spine: flexion/extension.

Authors:  J Dvorak; D Froehlich; L Penning; H Baumgartner; M M Panjabi
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1988-07       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  A method to evaluate the in vivo behaviour of lumbar spine implants.

Authors:  G Gunnarsson; P Axelsson; R Johnsson; B Strömqvist
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Kinematic analysis of the cervical spine following implantation of an artificial cervical disc.

Authors:  Gwynedd E Pickett; Jeffrey P Rouleau; Neil Duggal
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2005-09-01       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 8.  Autograft versus allograft in degenerative cervical disease.

Authors:  Kelly M Malloy; Alan S Hilibrand
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  Fusion around cervical disc prosthesis: case report.

Authors:  Ronald H M A Bartels; Roland Donk
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 4.654

10.  Normal range of motion of the cervical spine.

Authors:  B Lind; H Sihlbom; A Nordwall; H Malchau
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  1989-09       Impact factor: 3.966

View more
  7 in total

1.  Hybrid Solutions for the Surgical Treatment of Multilevel Degenerative Cervical Disk Disease.

Authors:  Stefan Alexander König; Sebastian Ranguis; Uwe Spetzger
Journal:  Surg J (N Y)       Date:  2015-11-19

2.  Intraoperative navigation for accurate midline placement of anterior lumbar interbody fusion and total disc replacement prosthesis.

Authors:  Kevin Phan; Joshua Xu; Monish M Maharaj; Ralph J Mobbs
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2017-06

3.  The Envelope of Physiological Motion of the First Carpometacarpal Joint.

Authors:  Joseph J Crisco; Tarpit Patel; Eni Halilaj; Douglas C Moore
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 2.097

4.  Effect of screw position on load transfer in lumbar pedicle screws: a non-idealized finite element analysis.

Authors:  Anna G U S Newcomb; Seungwon Baek; Brian P Kelly; Neil R Crawford
Journal:  Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin       Date:  2016-07-25       Impact factor: 1.763

5.  Subsidence of SB Charité total disc replacement and the role of undersizing.

Authors:  Ilona Punt; Marc van Rijsbergen; Bert van Rietbergen; Keita Ito; Lodewijk van Rhijn; André van Ooij; Paul Willems
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-06-15       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Does Resection of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament Affect the Stability of Cervical Disc Arthroplasty?

Authors:  Leonard I Voronov; Robert M Havey; Parmenion P Tsitsopoulos; Saeed Khayatzadeh; Jeremy Goodsitt; Gerard Carandang; Alexander J Ghanayem; Avinash G Patwardhan
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2018-08-03

7.  Biomechanical evaluation of cervical disc replacement with a novel prosthesis based on the physiological curvature of endplate.

Authors:  Jigang Lou; Yuanchao Li; Beiyu Wang; Yang Meng; Quan Gong; Hao Liu
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2018-02-27       Impact factor: 2.359

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.