Literature DB >> 26335669

Five-Year Follow-Up of a Prospective, Randomized Trial Comparing Two Lumbar Total Disc Replacements.

Richard D Guyer1, Kenneth Pettine, Jeffrey S Roh, Thomas A Dimmig, Domagoj Coric, Paul C McAfee, Donna D Ohnmeiss.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: This was a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter study.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of two lumbar total disc replacements (TDRs) at 5-year follow-up and report results of serum ion level analysis in a subgroup of patients receiving a metal-on-metal implant. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Lumbar TDR has been compared with fusion in several randomized studies, finding TDR noninferior to fusion and superior on some measures. Receiving less attention has been comparing TDR devices. Additionally, there is concern about metal-on-metal implants, with little data available for spine devices.
METHODS: The study included 204 patients receiving Kineflex-L (investigational) and 190 receiving CHARITÉ (control). Outcome measure included Oswestry Disability Index, visual analog pain scales (VAS), patient satisfaction, neurological status, complications, reoperations, and a composite success score. Radiographic assessment included range of motion, subsidence, and heterotrophic ossification. In 32 investigational patients, serum ion analysis was performed for cobalt and chromium. These values were compared with Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency values to merit monitoring total hip replacement patients for potential wear problems.
RESULTS: Mean Oswestry and VAS scores in both groups improved significantly by 6 weeks and remained improved during 5-year follow-up (Oswestry Disability Index, scores in both groups were approximately 60 preoperatively vs. 20 at 2- and 5-year follow-up; P < 0.01; VAS scores improved >50% by 6 weeks and remained significantly improved; P < 0.05). Approximately 11% of both groups underwent reoperation. Radiographic analysis found segmental range of motion decreased at 3 month, then increased through 24 months, and was maintained thereafter. Serum ion level analysis found the greatest mean value at any follow-up point was less than 20% of Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency recommended minimum value to merit monitoring hip replacement patients.
CONCLUSION: This prospective, randomized study comparing two TDRs found no significant differences in outcomes during 5-year follow-up. Both provided statistically significant improvements by 6 weeks that were maintained. This results support other studies. Serum ion levels in TDR patients were well below the recommended threshold levels to merit monitoring.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26335669     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001168

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


  9 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  Incidence and Resolution Strategies for Early-Onset Postoperative Leg Pain Following Lumbar Total Disc Replacement.

Authors:  Richard D Guyer; Nicole Ferko; Ashley Bonner; Aaron Situ; Donna D Ohnmeiss
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2021-09-22

Review 3.  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

4.  Lumbar total disc replacement: predictors for long-term outcome.

Authors:  Håvard Furunes; Christian Hellum; Jens Ivar Brox; Ivar Rossvoll; Ansgar Espeland; Linda Berg; Helga Maria Brøgger; Milada Cvancarova Småstuen; Kjersti Storheim
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-11-04       Impact factor: 3.134

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.  Comparison of Lumbar Total Disc Replacement With Surgical Spinal Fusion for the Treatment of Single-Level Degenerative Disc Disease: A Meta-Analysis of 5-Year Outcomes From Randomized Controlled Trials.

Authors:  Jack Zigler; Matthew F Gornet; Nicole Ferko; Chris Cameron; Francine W Schranck; Leena Patel
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2017-11-16

8.  Impact of heterotopic ossification following lumbar total disk replacement: a systematic review.

Authors:  Colleen Hood; Reza Zamani; Mohammad Akrami
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2022-04-23       Impact factor: 2.562

9.  The short-term efficacy and safety of artificial total disc replacement for selected patients with lumbar degenerative disc disease compared with anterior lumbar interbody fusion: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xiaoping Mu; Jianxun Wei; Jiancuo A; Zhuhai Li; Yufu Ou
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-12-28       Impact factor: 3.240

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.