Literature DB >> 26050106

Maverick total disc replacement in a real-world patient population: a prospective, multicentre, observational study.

Richard Assaker1, Karsten Ritter-Lang, Dominique Vardon, Stéphane Litrico, Stéphane Fuentes, Michael Putzier, Jörg Franke, Peter Jarzem, Pierre Guigui, Gérard Nakach, Jean-Charles Le Huec.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Controlled trials have shown that total disc replacement (TDR) can provide pain and disability relief to patients with degenerative disc disease; however, whether these outcomes can also be achieved for patients treated in normal surgical practice has not been well documented.
METHODS: This prospective, international study observed changes in disability and back pain in 134 patients who were implanted with Maverick TDR within the framework of routine clinical practice and followed for 2 years post-surgery. Primary and secondary outcomes were the differences from baseline to 6 months post-surgery in the means of the Oswestry Disability Index and the change in back pain intensity assessed on a 10-cm visual analogue scale, respectively. Mean patient age at surgery was 43 years, but ranged up to 65 years.
RESULTS: One hundred twenty-three patients had an implant at one level, 10 patients at two levels, and one patient at three levels. Statistically significant improvements in mean disability (-25.4) and low back pain intensity (-4.0) scores were observed at 6 months postoperatively (P < 0.0001 for both) in the hands of experienced surgeons (>10 TDRs per centre). During the study, 56 patients (42 %) experienced a complication or adverse event.
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first international observational study to report outcomes of TDR in real-world clinical settings. We showed statistically significant improvements in disability and pain scores at 6 months following Maverick TDR, which were maintained for 2 years alongside an acceptable rate of perioperative complications. The safety and tolerability shown in this observational study were comparable to those from controlled trials.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26050106     DOI: 10.1007/s00586-015-3918-x

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


  16 in total

Review 1.  Design rationale and biomechanics of Maverick Total Disc arthroplasty with early clinical results.

Authors:  Hallett H Mathews; Jean-Charles Lehuec; Tai Friesem; Thomas Zdeblick; Lukas Eisermann
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2004 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 4.166

2.  Clinical results of Maverick lumbar total disc replacement: two-year prospective follow-up.

Authors:  J C Le Huec; H Mathews; Y Basso; S Aunoble; D Hoste; B Bley; T Friesem
Journal:  Orthop Clin North Am       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 2.472

3.  Lumbar disc arthroplasty with Maverick disc versus stand-alone interbody fusion: a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter investigational device exemption trial.

Authors:  Matthew F Gornet; J Kenneth Burkus; Randall F Dryer; John H Peloza
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2011-12-01       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  Delayed hypersensitivity reaction caused by metal-on-metal total disc replacement.

Authors:  Fahed Zairi; Jean Michel Remacle; Mohamed Allaoui; Richard Assaker
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2013-07-05

5.  Comparative effectiveness research across two spine registries.

Authors:  Emin Aghayev; Julia Henning; Everard Munting; Peter Diel; Patrick Moulin; Christoph Röder
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-03-14       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  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

7.  Minimum clinically important difference in lumbar spine surgery patients: a choice of methods using the Oswestry Disability Index, Medical Outcomes Study questionnaire Short Form 36, and pain scales.

Authors:  Anne G Copay; Steven D Glassman; Brian R Subach; Sigurd Berven; Thomas C Schuler; Leah Y Carreon
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2008-01-16       Impact factor: 4.166

8.  Neurological complications of lumbar artificial disc replacement and comparison of clinical results with those related to lumbar arthrodesis in the literature: results of a multicenter, prospective, randomized investigational device exemption study of Charité intervertebral disc. Invited submission from the Joint Section Meeting on Disorders of the Spine and Peripheral Nerves, March 2004.

Authors:  Fred H Geisler; Scott L Blumenthal; Richard D Guyer; Paul C McAfee; John J Regan; J Patrick Johnson; Bradford Mullin
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2004-09

9.  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

10.  Prospective study on serum metal levels in patients with metal-on-metal lumbar disc arthroplasty.

Authors:  Matthew F Gornet; J K Burkus; M L Harper; F W Chan; A K Skipor; J J Jacobs
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-11-20       Impact factor: 3.134

View more
  7 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.  The Michel Benoist and Robert Mulholland yearly European Spine Journal Review: a survey of the "surgical and research" articles in the European Spine Journal, 2017.

Authors:  Robert C Mulholland
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-01-08       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 4.  Cervical and Lumbar Disc Arthroplasty: A Review of Current Implant Design and Outcomes.

Authors:  Ian J Wellington; Cameron Kia; Ergin Coskun; Barrett B Torre; Christopher L Antonacci; Michael R Mancini; John P Connors; Sean M Esmende; Heeren S Makanji
Journal:  Bioengineering (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-23

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

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

Review 6.  Lumbar total disc arthroplasty: outdated surgery or here to stay procedure? A systematic review of current literature.

Authors:  Matteo Formica; Stefano Divano; Luca Cavagnaro; Marco Basso; Andrea Zanirato; Carlo Formica; Lamberto Felli
Journal:  J Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2017-07-06

Review 7.  Pseudotumor after total disc replacement in the lumbar spine: A case report and review of the literature.

Authors:  Muadh AlZeedi; Salim Al Rawahi; Mashael Muwanis; Thamer M Alraiyes; Humaid Al Farii; Peter Jarzem
Journal:  N Am Spine Soc J       Date:  2022-02-26
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.