Literature DB >> 21688055

[The relevance of the sagittal profile in cervical artificial discs].

C Carstens1, M Carstens, F Copf.   

Abstract

We report on the results of 246 Bryan cervical discs, which were implanted between June 2002 and September 2010 in 146 patients. Of the patients 74 (128 prostheses) could be followed up for more than 1 year and the average follow-up period was 2.6 years. Of the patients 18 were operated on at one level (group 1), 77 prostheses were multilevel surgery (group 2) and with 33 patients arthroplasty was combined with fusion (hybrid, group 3). The global lordosis remained unchanged during follow-up and a recurrence of kyphosis was evident in group 3. The overall mobility improved in all 3 subgroups and 2 cases (group 3) fused. With 5 patients the prosthesis had to be removed and the segment had to be fused in the postoperative course. As a conclusion a meticulous preoperative planning as well as a subtle surgical technique is the main prerequisite for long-lasting mobility of the Bryan prosthesis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21688055     DOI: 10.1007/s00132-011-1801-y

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


  22 in total

1.  Biomechanical analysis of the range of motion after placement of a two-level cervical ProDisc-C versus hybrid construct.

Authors:  Bo Young Cho; Jesse Lim; Hong Bo Sim; Jon Park
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2010-09-01       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  Superiority of multilevel cervical arthroplasty outcomes versus single-level outcomes: 229 consecutive PCM prostheses.

Authors:  Luiz Pimenta; Paul C McAfee; Andy Cappuccino; Bryan W Cunningham; Roberto Diaz; Etevaldo Coutinho
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2007-05-20       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  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

4.  Effect of modified techniques in Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty.

Authors:  Jia-Xin Xu; Ying-Ze Zhang; Yong Shen; Wen-Yuan Ding
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2009-05-01       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Effect of two-level total disc replacement on cervical spine kinematics.

Authors:  Frank M Phillips; Michael N Tzermiadianos; Leonard I Voronov; Robert M Havey; Gerard Carandang; Andrew Dooris; Avinash G Patwardhan
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2009-10-15       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Sagittal alignment and the Bryan cervical artificial disc.

Authors:  J Patrick Johnson; Carl Lauryssen; Helen O Cambron; Robert Pashman; John J Regan; Neel Anand; Robert Bray
Journal:  Neurosurg Focus       Date:  2004-12-15       Impact factor: 4.047

7.  A clinical analysis of 4- and 6-year follow-up results after cervical disc replacement surgery using the Bryan Cervical Disc Prosthesis.

Authors:  Jan Goffin; Johan van Loon; Frank Van Calenbergh; Bailey Lipscomb
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2010-03

8.  Postoperative segmental malalignment after surgery with the Bryan cervical disc prosthesis: is it related to the mechanics and design of the prosthesis?

Authors:  Joris R R Walraevens; Baoge Liu; Jozef Vander Sloten; Philippe Demaerel; Jan Goffin
Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech       Date:  2010-08

9.  Segmental malalignment with the Bryan Cervical Disc prosthesis--does it occur?

Authors:  William R Sears; Lali H Sekhon; Neil Duggal; Owen D Williamson
Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech       Date:  2007-02

10.  Modified techniques to prevent sagittal imbalance after cervical arthroplasty.

Authors:  Seong Yi; Hyun Chul Shin; Keung Nyun Kim; Hyang Kwon Park; Il Tae Jang; Do Heum Yoon
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2007-08-15       Impact factor: 3.468

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.