Literature DB >> 23877109

Cervical arthroplasty with Discover prosthesis: clinical outcomes and analysis of factors that may influence postoperative range of motion.

Jun Li1, Lei Liang, Xiao-fei Ye, Min Qi, Hua-jiang Chen, Wen Yuan.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this current study was to analyze the clinical outcomes after Discover cervical disc replacement and its effects on maintaining cervical lordosis and range of motion (ROM). The possible factors influencing postoperative ROM were analyzed.
METHOD: 27 men and 28 women with a mean age of 46.4 ± 8.7 years were prospectively followed up for 2 years. Clinical outcomes were assessed using Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA), Neck Disability Index (NDI), visual analog scale (VAS) and Odom's criteria. Radiographic information including segment and overall alignment, functional spinal unit (FSU) and overall ROM, and disc heights were prospectively collected during the follow-up. The correlations between the postoperative FSU ROM at last follow-up and influencing factors were analyzed.
RESULTS: Mean NDI, JOA and VAS scores showed statistical improvements at last follow-up. Anterior migration of the prosthesis was detected in six cases. Heterotopic ossification was observed in ten patients. Mean FSU angle, endplate angle of the treated level and mean overall cervical alignment were all improved significantly at last follow-up (P < 0.001). However, mean FSU ROM of the treated segment significantly decreased postoperatively (P = 0.008), while mean overall ROM showed no significant differences. A significant correlation was found between preoperative FSU ROM and postoperative FSU ROM by the Pearson correlation coefficient (r = 0.325, P = 0.034). Multiple linear regression analysis confirmed that preoperative FSU ROM contributed independently to a model with a coefficient of determination of 0.37 (P = 0.034).
CONCLUSIONS: In the 2 years follow-up, the Discover cervical disc arthroplasty has provided satisfactory clinical outcomes. It was able to substantially restore segment and overall cervical alignment while partially maintaining segment and overall cervical ROM. Additionally, we found that postoperative FSU ROM positively correlated with preoperative FSU ROM.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23877109      PMCID: PMC3804692          DOI: 10.1007/s00586-013-2897-z

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


  25 in total

1.  Effects of a cervical disc prosthesis on segmental and cervical spine alignment.

Authors:  Gwynedd E Pickett; Demytra K Mitsis; Lali H Sekhon; William R Sears; Neil Duggal
Journal:  Neurosurg Focus       Date:  2004-09-15       Impact factor: 4.047

2.  Disc replacement using Pro-Disc C versus fusion: a prospective randomised and controlled radiographic and clinical study.

Authors:  A Nabhan; F Ahlhelm; T Pitzen; W I Steudel; J Jung; K Shariat; O Steimer; F Bachelier; D Pape
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2006-11-14       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Artificial disc versus fusion: a prospective, randomized study with 2-year follow-up on 99 patients.

Authors:  Rick C Sasso; Joseph D Smucker; Robert J Hacker; John G Heller
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2007-12-15       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  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

5.  Sagittal alignment and kinematics at instrumented and adjacent levels after total disc replacement in the cervical spine.

Authors:  Cédric Barrey; Sabina Champain; Sophie Campana; Aymen Ramadan; Gilles Perrin; Wafa Skalli
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-02-14       Impact factor: 3.134

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.  Design limitations of Bryan disc arthroplasty.

Authors:  Shee Yan Fong; Stephan J DuPlessis; Steven Casha; R John Hurlbert
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2006 May-Jun       Impact factor: 4.166

8.  Intervertebral disc replacement for cervical degenerative disease--clinical results and functional outcome at two years in patients implanted with the Bryan cervical disc prosthesis.

Authors:  V Heidecke; W Burkert; M Brucke; N G Rainov
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  2008-04-20       Impact factor: 2.216

9.  The ProDisc-C prosthesis: clinical and radiological experience 1 year after surgery.

Authors:  Abdullah Nabhan; Frank Ahlhelm; Kaveh Shariat; Tobias Pitzen; Oliver Steimer; Wolf-Ingo Steudel; Dietrich Pape
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2007-08-15       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  Classification of heterotopic ossification (HO) in artificial disk replacement.

Authors:  Paul C McAfee; Bryan W Cunningham; John Devine; Eric Williams; Janet Yu-Yahiro
Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech       Date:  2003-08
View more
  8 in total

Review 1.  Artificial disc replacement in spine surgery.

Authors:  Yahya A Othman; Ravi Verma; Sheeraz A Qureshi
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2019-09

2.  Parathyroid hormone enhances gap healing and osseointegration in orthopedic porous coated titanium implants: a correlative micro-computed tomographic, histomorphometric and biomechanical analysis.

Authors:  Xinlin Gao; Yang Meng; Dingjun Hao; Hao Liu
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2022-01-03       Impact factor: 2.362

3.  Cervical arthroplasty with ROTAIO® cervical disc prosthesis: first clinical and radiographic outcome analysis in a multicenter prospective trial.

Authors:  J Obernauer; J Landscheidt; S Hartmann; G A Schubert; C Thomé; C Lumenta
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2016-01-12       Impact factor: 2.362

4.  Preoperative T1 Slope as a Predictor of Change in Cervical Alignment and Range of Motion After Cervical Disc Arthroplasty.

Authors:  Jianhui Zhao; Rui Jiang; Yuhui Yang; Rui Gu; Zhongli Gao; Jianlin Xiao; Shangjun Chen; Modi Yang
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2017-12-09

5.  The Changes in Cervical Biomechanics After CTDR and Its Association With Heterotopic Ossification: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Nicholas Hui; Kevin Phan; Mei-Yi Lee; Jack Kerferd; Telvinderjit Singh; Ralph J Mobbs
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2020-06-03

6.  Comparison of 2 Zero-Profile Implants in the Treatment of Single-Level Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: A Preliminary Clinical Study of Cervical Disc Arthroplasty versus Fusion.

Authors:  Sheng Shi; Shuang Zheng; Xin-Feng Li; Li-Li Yang; Zu-De Liu; Wen Yuan
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-07-21       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 7.  The prevalence of heterotopic ossification among patients after cervical artificial disc replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Lingde Kong; Qinghua Ma; Fei Meng; Junming Cao; Kunlun Yu; Yong Shen
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 1.817

8.  Normal intervertebral segment rotation of the subaxial cervical spine: An in vivo study of dynamic neck motions.

Authors:  Yan Yu; Jing-Sheng Li; Tao Guo; Zhao Lang; James D Kang; Liming Cheng; Guoan Li; Thomas D Cha
Journal:  J Orthop Translat       Date:  2019-01-21       Impact factor: 5.191

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.