Literature DB >> 23591659

A prospective, randomized, controlled clinical investigation comparing PCM cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. 2-year results from the US FDA IDE clinical trial.

Frank M Phillips1, Joe Y B Lee, Fred H Geisler, Andrew Cappuccino, Christopher D Chaput, John G DeVine, Christopher Reah, Kye M Gilder, Kelli M Howell, Paul C McAfee.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Prospective, multicenter, randomized Food and Drug Administration approved investigational device exemption clinical trial.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the PCM Cervical Disc compared with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in the treatment of patients with degenerative spondylosis and neurological symptoms at 1 level between C3-C4 and C7-T1. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Cervical disc arthroplasty in the treatment of symptomatic cervical spondylosis has been studied in other series. The PCM Cervical Disc is a nonconstrained motion-sparing alternative to ACDF.
METHODS: Patients 18 to 65 years of age with single-level symptomatic cervical spondylosis with radiculopathy and/or myelopathy unresponsive to nonoperative treatment were enrolled, including patients with prior nonadjacent or adjacent single-level fusions. The per-protocol patient sample at 2 years included 342 patients (189 PCM, 153 ACDF). Longitudinal outcomes were comparatively evaluated.
RESULTS: At 2 years postoperatively, clinical measures-neck and arm pain visual analogue scale, Neck Disability Index (NDI), SF-36, and neurological status-were significantly improved from preoperative baselines in both groups. Mean NDI score at 2 years was significantly lower in PCM group (P = 0.029). There were no statistical differences between groups in rates of surgery-related serious adverse events (5.6% PCM, 7.4% ACDF) or secondary surgical procedures (5.2% PCM, 5.4% ACDF). Patients with PCM reported lower dysphagia scores (8.8/100 vs. 12.1/100; P = 0.045) and higher patient satisfaction (82.8/100 vs. 81.4/100). Overall success, a composite endpoint including minimum 20% NDI improvement, no major complications, no neurological worsening, no secondary surgical procedures, and meeting radiographical criteria of motion for PCM and fusion for ACDF, was significantly greater in the PCM group (75.1% vs. 64.9%; P = 0.020).
CONCLUSION: The treatment of symptomatic single-level cervical spondylosis with PCM achieves clinical outcomes that are at least equivalent to ACDF while maintaining motion. At 2 years, patients with PCM had lower NDI scores, statistically lower rate of prolonged dysphagia, greater patient satisfaction, and superior overall success.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23591659     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318296232f

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


  57 in total

1.  Triangular Titanium Implants for Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion: 2-Year Follow-Up from a Prospective Multicenter Trial.

Authors:  Bradley S Duhon; Fabien Bitan; Harry Lockstadt; Don Kovalsky; Daniel Cher; Travis Hillen
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2016-04-20

2.  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

Review 3.  Factors that may affect outcome in cervical artificial disc replacement: a systematic review.

Authors:  Jian Kang; Changgui Shi; Yifei Gu; Chengwei Yang; Rui Gao
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-07-09       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  The Norwegian Cervical Arthroplasty Trial (NORCAT): 2-year clinical outcome after single-level cervical arthroplasty versus fusion-a prospective, single-blinded, randomized, controlled multicenter study.

Authors:  Jarle Sundseth; Oddrun Anita Fredriksli; Frode Kolstad; Lars Gunnar Johnsen; Are Hugo Pripp; Hege Andresen; Erling Myrseth; Kay Müller; Øystein P Nygaard; John-Anker Zwart
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-12-23       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Editorial on "Long-term clinical outcomes of cervical disc arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial" by Sasso et al.

Authors:  Heeren S Makanji; Kenneth Nwosu; Christopher M Bono
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2016-12

Review 6.  Cervical disc replacement - emerging equivalency to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.

Authors:  Aaron J Buckland; Joseph F Baker; Ryan P Roach; Jeffrey M Spivak
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2016-04-08       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 7.  Does design matter? Cervical disc replacements under review.

Authors:  Michael D Staudt; Kaushik Das; Neil Duggal
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2016-07-27       Impact factor: 3.042

8.  Cervical Disc Arthroplasty with Prestige LP Disc Versus Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: Seven-Year Outcomes.

Authors:  Matthew F Gornet; J Kenneth Burkus; Mark E Shaffrey; Hui Nian; Frank E Harrell
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2016-06-22

9.  Comparative Analysis of Interbody Cages Versus Tricortical Graft with Anterior Plate Fixation for Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion in Degenerative Cervical Disc Disease.

Authors:  Pritish Singh; Ashok Kumar; Vishal Shekhawat
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2016-03-01

Review 10.  Comparison of artificial cervical arthroplasty versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for one-level cervical degenerative disc disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Jiaquan Luo; Sheng Huang; Min Gong; Xuejun Dai; Manman Gao; Ting Yu; Zhiyu Zhou; Xuenong Zou
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2014-07-18
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.