Literature DB >> 25895882

An 11-year minimum follow-up of the Charite III lumbar disc replacement for the treatment of symptomatic degenerative disc disease.

Shi-bao Lu1, Yong Hai, Chao Kong, Qing-yi Wang, Qingjun Su, Lei Zang, Nan Kang, Xiang-long Meng, Yu Wang.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To report our 11-year minimum clinical and radiological outcomes, as well as complications of the Charite III total disc replacement (TDR).
METHODS: A total of 35 patients indicated for total disc replacement were implanted with the Charite III prosthesis. Clinical evaluation included visual analog scale (VAS) for back pain and the Oswestry disability index (ODI). Radiological parameters of intervertebral disc height (IDH), range of motion (ROM), lumbar lordosis, lumbar scoliosis and prosthesis position were evaluated. Complications and reoperation rates were also assessed.
RESULTS: Thirty-two patients had a minimum 11-year follow-up, and 33 prostheses were implanted. The mean follow-up time was 11.8 years, ranging from 11.3 to 13.8 years. Twenty-eight patients (87.5 %) had a successful outcome, as defined by the FDA. Reoperation was performed in 2 patients for adjacent segment degeneration and pedicle fracture (1 case each). Both VAS and ODI scores showed significant improvement compared to baseline. At the final follow-up, the ROM of both the index- and adjacent-level showed an obvious decrease. The IDH of the index level showed a tendency to decrease, but the difference was not significant. The IDH of adjacent levels were not significantly affected by the surgery. Mean lumbar lordosis was increased at the final follow-up, and lumbar scoliosis over 3° was observed in 12 patients (37.5%), with a mean angle of 5.6° (range 3°-12°). Of all 35 prostheses, 15 were left-shifted, 3 were right-shifted and 14 were just in the middle. In the coronal plane, 25 were rated as ideally placed, 5 were discretely shifted, 4 were slightly shifted and 1 was markedly shifted. In the sagittal plane, only 12 prostheses were rated as ideally placed, 14 were discretely shifted and 9 were suboptimally placed. Prosthesis subsidence was noted in 3 (9.4%) patients (the subsidence distances were 3.1, 4.2 and 2.8 mm, respectively). Heterotopic ossification was detected in 25 segments (71.4%), consisting of Class-I heterotopic ossification in 7 segments (20.0%), Class-II in 9 segments (25.7%), and Class-III in 9 segments (25.7%). Class-IV heterotopic ossification was not observed.
CONCLUSION: The cumulative survival was 100% at a mean follow-up of 11.8 years. Clinical and radiological results were satisfactory and long-term clinical results were maintained for a mean follow-up of 11.8 years. Reoperation and complication rates are acceptable, and our study does not substantiate the fear of reoperation or late complications. The results of our long-term follow-up indicate that, with strict indication, TDR is a safe and effective procedure as an alternative to lumbar fusion.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25895882     DOI: 10.1007/s00586-015-3939-5

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


  43 in total

1.  The treatment of disabling multilevel lumbar discogenic low back pain with total disc arthroplasty utilizing the ProDisc prosthesis: a prospective study with 2-year minimum follow-up.

Authors:  Rudolf Bertagnoli; James J Yue; Rahul V Shah; Regina Nanieva; Frank Pfeiffer; Andrea Fenk-Mayer; Trace Kershaw; Daniel S Husted
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2005-10-01       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  One versus two BAK fusion cages in posterior lumbar interbody fusion to L4-L5 degenerative spondylolisthesis: a randomized, controlled prospective study in 25 patients with minimum two-year follow-up.

Authors:  Jie Zhao; Xinwei Wang; Tiesheng Hou; Shisheng He
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2002-12-15       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  Results of disc prosthesis after a minimum follow-up period of 2 years.

Authors:  G Cinotti; T David; F Postacchini
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1996-04-15       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  Total disc arthroplasty: consequences for sagittal balance and lumbar spine movement.

Authors:  C Tournier; S Aunoble; J C Le Huec; J P Lemaire; P Tropiano; V Lafage; W Skalli
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2006-09-08       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  A prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemptions study of lumbar total disc replacement with the CHARITE artificial disc versus lumbar fusion: part I: evaluation of clinical outcomes.

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

Review 6.  Update on the evidence for adjacent segment degeneration and disease.

Authors:  Melvin D Helgeson; Adam J Bevevino; Alan S Hilibrand
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2013-02-15       Impact factor: 4.166

7.  Total disc replacement compared to lumbar fusion: a randomised controlled trial with 2-year follow-up.

Authors:  Svante Berg; Tycho Tullberg; Björn Branth; Claes Olerud; Hans Tropp
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-06-09       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  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

9.  Prospective, randomized trial of metal-on-metal artificial lumbar disc replacement: initial results for treatment of discogenic pain.

Authors:  Rick C Sasso; David M Foulk; Michael Hahn
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2008-01-15       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 10.  Total disc replacement surgery for symptomatic degenerative lumbar disc disease: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Karin D van den Eerenbeemt; Raymond W Ostelo; Barend J van Royen; Wilco C Peul; Maurits W van Tulder
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-05-28       Impact factor: 3.134

View more
  16 in total

1.  The Michel Benoist and Robert Mulholland yearly European spine journal review: a survey of the "surgical and research" articles in the European spine journal, 2015.

Authors:  Robert C Mulholland
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-01-05       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  The Michel Benoist and Robert Mulholland yearly European Spine Journal review: a survey of the "medical" articles in the European Spine Journal, 2015.

Authors:  Michel Benoist
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-11-23       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 3.  Lumbar disc replacement surgery-successes and obstacles to widespread adoption.

Authors:  Stephan N Salzmann; Nicolas Plais; Jennifer Shue; Federico P Girardi
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2017-06

4.  Maverick total disc arthroplasty performs well at 10 years follow-up: a prospective study with HRQL and balance analysis.

Authors:  N Plais; X Thevenot; A Cogniet; J Rigal; J C Le Huec
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-04-05       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Single and Multilevel Lumbar Total Disc Replacement Adjacent to L5-S1 ALIF (Lumbar Hybrid): 6 Years of Follow-up.

Authors:  Jason M Cuellar; Alexandre Rasouli; Todd H Lanman; Lea Kanim; Rick Delamarter
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2021-10-08

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

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

Review 7.  What can we learn from long-term studies on chronic low back pain? A scoping review.

Authors:  Alisa L Dutmer; Remko Soer; André P Wolff; Michiel F Reneman; Maarten H Coppes; Henrica R Schiphorst Preuper
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2022-01-19       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 8.  The activL(®) Artificial Disc: a next-generation motion-preserving implant for chronic lumbar discogenic pain.

Authors:  James J Yue; Rolando Garcia; Larry E Miller
Journal:  Med Devices (Auckl)       Date:  2016-05-10

Review 9.  Operative Management of Lumbar Degenerative Disc Disease.

Authors:  Yu Chao Lee; Mario Giuseppe Tedesco Zotti; Orso Lorenzo Osti
Journal:  Asian Spine J       Date:  2016-08-16

10.  Elastomeric Lumbar Total Disc Replacement: Clinical and Radiological Results With Minimum 84 Months Follow-Up.

Authors:  Luiz Pimenta; Luis Marchi; Leonardo Oliveira; Joes Nogueira-Neto; Etevaldo Coutinho; Rodrigo Amaral
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2018-03-30
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.