M Däxle1, T Kocak, F Lattig, H Reichel, B Cakir. 1. Orthopädische Universitätsklinik Ulm am RKU, RKU - Universitäts- und Rehabilitationskliniken Ulm gGmbH, Oberer Eselsberg 45, 89081 Ulm, Deutschland. manuel-daexle@gmx.de
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Preservation of movement at the treated segment and possible reduction of adjacent segment effects is assumed to be an advantage of non-fusion technologies over fusion. The aim of this study was to compare the segmental range of motion (ROM) at the operative level, the cranial and caudal adjacent levels and the global lumbar spine ROM (L2-S1) after monosegmental fusion and total disc replacement (TDR). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Radiographic data was collected from 27 patients with level 1 degenerative disc disease operated at level L4/5. The ROM was assessed at the index level (L4/5), the cranial and caudal adjacent level and for the lumbar spine (L2-S1). RESULTS: In the TDR group no significant changes of lumbar spine ROM (L2-S1) and segmental ROM (index level, cranial and caudal adjacent level) were noticed. In the fusion group there was a significant reduction of lumbar ROM (L2-S1) and index level ROM. Additionally the relative ROM in the adjacent caudal segment significantly increased while no changes were seen in the cranial segment. CONCLUSION: The relative ROM was significantly increased in monosegmental fusion at level L4/5 compared to TDR. To what extent this fact may result in early adjacent segment degeneration in cases of fusion compared to TDR is still unknown.
BACKGROUND: Preservation of movement at the treated segment and possible reduction of adjacent segment effects is assumed to be an advantage of non-fusion technologies over fusion. The aim of this study was to compare the segmental range of motion (ROM) at the operative level, the cranial and caudal adjacent levels and the global lumbar spine ROM (L2-S1) after monosegmental fusion and total disc replacement (TDR). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Radiographic data was collected from 27 patients with level 1 degenerative disc disease operated at level L4/5. The ROM was assessed at the index level (L4/5), the cranial and caudal adjacent level and for the lumbar spine (L2-S1). RESULTS: In the TDR group no significant changes of lumbar spine ROM (L2-S1) and segmental ROM (index level, cranial and caudal adjacent level) were noticed. In the fusion group there was a significant reduction of lumbar ROM (L2-S1) and index level ROM. Additionally the relative ROM in the adjacent caudal segment significantly increased while no changes were seen in the cranial segment. CONCLUSION: The relative ROM was significantly increased in monosegmental fusion at level L4/5 compared to TDR. To what extent this fact may result in early adjacent segment degeneration in cases of fusion compared to TDR is still unknown.
Authors: Paul Park; Hugh J Garton; Vishal C Gala; Julian T Hoff; John E McGillicuddy Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2004-09-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Bryan W Cunningham; Paul C McAfee; Fred H Geisler; Gwen Holsapple; Karen Adams; Scott L Blumenthal; Richard D Guyer; Andrew Cappuccino; John J Regan; Ira L Fedder; P Justin Tortolani Journal: J Neurosurg Spine Date: 2008-01
Authors: Balkan Cakir; Charles Carazzo; René Schmidt; Thomas Mattes; Heiko Reichel; Wolfram Käfer Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2009-05-20 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Russel C Huang; Federico P Girardi; Frank P Cammisa; Moe R Lim; Patrick Tropiano; Thierry Marnay Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2005-06-15 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Scott Blumenthal; Paul C McAfee; Richard D Guyer; Stephen H Hochschuler; Fred H Geisler; Richard T Holt; Rolando Garcia; John J Regan; Donna D Ohnmeiss Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2005-07-15 Impact factor: 3.468