Literature DB >> 22136141

Influence of preoperative nucleus pulposus status and radiculopathy on outcomes in mono-segmental lumbar total disc replacement: results from a nationwide registry.

Thomas Zweig1, Christoph Hemmeler, Emin Aghayev, Markus Melloh, Christian Etter, Christoph Röder.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Currently, herniated nucleus pulposus (HNP) with radiculopathy and other preconditions are regarded as relative or absolute contraindications for lumbar total disc replacement (TDR). In Switzerland it is left to the surgeon's discretion when to operate. The present study is based on the dataset of SWISSspine, a governmentally mandated health technology assessment registry. We hypothesized that preoperative nucleus pulposus status and presence or absence of radiculopathy has an influence on clinical outcomes in patients treated with mono-segmental lumbar TDR.
METHODS: Between March 2005 and April 2009, 416 patients underwent mono-segmental lumbar TDR, which was documented in a prospective observational multicenter mode. The data collection consisted of perioperative and follow-up data (physician based) and clinical outcomes (NASS, EQ-5D).Patients were divided into four groups according to their preoperative status: 1) group degenerative disc disease ("DDD"): 160 patients without HNP and no radiculopathy, classic precondition for TDR; 2) group "HNP-No radiculopathy": 68 patients with HNP but without radiculopathy; 3) group "Stenosis": 73 patients without HNP but with radiculopathy, and 4) group "HNP-Radiculopathy": 132 patients with HNP and radiculopathy. The groups were compared regarding preoperative patient characteristics and pre- and postoperative VAS and EQ-5D scores using general linear modeling.
RESULTS: Demographics in all four groups were comparable. Regarding the improvement of quality of life (EQ-5D) there were no differences across the four groups. For the two main groups DDD and HNP-Radiculopathy no differences were found in the adjusted postoperative back- and leg pain alleviation levels, in the stenosis group back- and leg pain relief were lower.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite higher preoperative leg pain levels, outcomes in lumbar TDR patients with HNP and radiculopathy were similar to outcomes in patients with the classic indication; this because patients with higher preoperative leg pain levels benefit from a relatively greater leg pain alleviation. The group with absence of HNP but presence of radiculopathy showed considerably less benefits from the operation, which is probably related to ongoing degenerative processes of the posterior segmental structures. This observational multicenter study suggests that the diagnoses HNP and radiculopathy, combined or alone, may not have to be considered as absolute or relative contraindications for mono-segmental lumbar TDR anymore, whereas patients without HNP but with radiculopathy seem to be suboptimal candidates for the procedure.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22136141      PMCID: PMC3250959          DOI: 10.1186/1471-2474-12-275

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord        ISSN: 1471-2474            Impact factor:   2.362


  54 in total

1.  United States' trends and regional variations in lumbar spine surgery: 1992-2003.

Authors:  James N Weinstein; Jon D Lurie; Patrick R Olson; Kristen K Bronner; Elliott S Fisher
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2006-11-01       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  Coverage with evidence development: an examination of conceptual and policy issues.

Authors:  John Hutton; Paul Trueman; Christopher Henshall
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 2.188

3.  [Findings in 67 patients with recurrent or persistent symptoms after implantation of a disc prosthesis for low back pain].

Authors:  A van Ooij; G W H Schurink; F C Oner; A J Verbout
Journal:  Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd       Date:  2007-07-14

4.  Incidence of contraindications to total disc arthroplasty: a retrospective review of 100 consecutive fusion patients with a specific analysis of facet arthrosis.

Authors:  David A Wong; Betsy Annesser; Tim Birney; Roderick Lamond; Anant Kumar; Stephen Johnson; Sanjay Jatana; Gary Ghiselli
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2007 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 4.166

5.  Clinical results of total lumbar disc replacement with ProDisc II: three-year results for different indications.

Authors:  Christoph J Siepe; H Michael Mayer; Karsten Wiechert; Andreas Korge
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2006-08-01       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Results of the prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of the ProDisc-L total disc replacement versus circumferential fusion for the treatment of 1-level degenerative disc disease.

Authors:  Jack Zigler; Rick Delamarter; Jeffrey M Spivak; Raymond J Linovitz; Guy O Danielson; Thomas T Haider; Frank Cammisa; Jim Zuchermann; Richard Balderston; Scott Kitchel; Kevin Foley; Robert Watkins; David Bradford; James Yue; Hansen Yuan; Harry Herkowitz; Doug Geiger; John Bendo; Timothy Peppers; Barton Sachs; Federico Girardi; Michael Kropf; Jeff Goldstein
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2007-05-15       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  Survival and clinical outcome of SB Charite III disc replacement for back pain.

Authors:  R Ross; A H Mirza; H E Norris; M Khatri
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2007-06

8.  Antidegenerative effects of partial disc replacement in an animal surgery model.

Authors:  Kazutaka So; Mitsuru Takemoto; Shunsuke Fujibayashi; Masashi Neo; Masayuki Kyomoto; Takashi Hayami; Suong-Hyu Hyon; Takashi Nakamura
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2007-07-01       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  Epidemiology of indications and contraindications to total disc replacement in an academic practice.

Authors:  Kingsley R Chin
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2007-02-12       Impact factor: 4.166

Review 10.  Intervertebral disc biology, degeneration and novel tissue engineering and regenerative medicine therapies.

Authors:  S M Richardson; A Mobasheri; A J Freemont; J A Hoyland
Journal:  Histol Histopathol       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 2.303

View more
  7 in total

1.  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

2.  Five-year results of lumbar disc prostheses in the SWISSspine registry.

Authors:  Emin Aghayev; Christian Etter; Christian Bärlocher; Friedrich Sgier; Philippe Otten; Paul Heini; Oliver Hausmann; Gianluca Maestretti; Martin Baur; François Porchet; Thomas M Markwalder; Stefan Schären; Michal Neukamp; Christoph Röder
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-06-20       Impact factor: 3.134

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

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

Review 4.  Evidence and practice in spine registries.

Authors:  Miranda L van Hooff; Wilco C H Jacobs; Paul C Willems; Michel W J M Wouters; Marinus de Kleuver; Wilco C Peul; Raymond W J G Ostelo; Peter Fritzell
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 3.717

5.  Cervical arthroplasty for moderate to severe disc degeneration: clinical and radiological assessments after a minimum follow-up of 18 months--Pfirrmann grade and cervical arthroplasty.

Authors:  Chang Hyun Oh; Do Yeon Kim; Gyu Yeul Ji; Yeo Ju Kim; Seung Hwan Yoon; Dongkeun Hyun; Eun Young Kim; Hyeonseon Park; Hyeong-Chun Park
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 2.759

6.  Total disc arthroplasty for treating lumbar degenerative disc disease.

Authors:  Keyvan Mostofi
Journal:  Asian Spine J       Date:  2015-02-13

7.  ISASS Policy Statement - Lumbar Artificial Disc.

Authors:  Jack Zigler; Rolando Garcia
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2015-03-12
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.