Literature DB >> 27015130

Five-year clinical results of cervical total disc replacement compared with anterior discectomy and fusion for treatment of 2-level symptomatic degenerative disc disease: a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter investigational device exemption clinical trial.

Kris Radcliff1, Domagoj Coric2, Todd Albert3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to report the outcome of a study of 2-level cervical total disc replacement (Mobi-C) versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Although the long-term outcome of single-level disc replacement has been extensively described, there have not been previous reports of the 5-year outcome of 2-level cervical disc replacement. METHODS This study reports the 5-year results of a prospective, randomized US FDA investigational device exemption (IDE) study conducted at 24 centers in patients with 2-level, contiguous, cervical spondylosis. Clinical outcomes at up to 60 months were evaluated, including validated outcome measures, incidence of reoperation, and adverse events. The complete study data and methodology were critically reviewed by 3 independent surgeon authors without affiliation with the IDE study or financial or institutional bias toward the study sponsor. RESULTS A total of 225 patients received the Mobi-C cervical total disc replacement device and 105 patients received ACDF. The Mobi-C and ACDF follow-up rates were 90.7% and 86.7%, respectively (p = 0.39), at 60 months. There was significant improvement in all outcome scores relative to baseline at all time points. The Mobi-C patients had significantly more improvement than ACDF patients in terms of Neck Disability Index score, SF-12 Physical Component Summary, and overall satisfaction with treatment at 60 months. The reoperation rate was significantly lower with Mobi-C (4%) versus ACDF (16%). There were no significant differences in the adverse event rate between groups. CONCLUSIONS Both cervical total disc replacement and ACDF significantly improved general and disease-specific measures compared with baseline. However, there was significantly greater improvement in general and disease-specific outcome measures and a lower rate of reoperation in the 2-level disc replacement patients versus ACDF control patients. Clinical trial registration no. NCT00389597 ( clinicaltrials.gov ).

Entities:  

Keywords:  ACDF = anterior cervical discectomy and fusion; IDE = investigational device exemption; MCS = Mental Component Summary; NDI = Neck Disability Index; PCS = Physical Component Summary; ROM = range of motion; SF-12 = 12-Item Short Form Health Survey; VAS = visual analog scale; cTDR = cervical total disc replacement; cervical arthroplasty; cervical disc herniation; cervical disc replacement; cervical radiculopathy

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27015130     DOI: 10.3171/2015.12.SPINE15824

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine        ISSN: 1547-5646


  33 in total

1.  Clinical and radiological evaluation of cervical disc arthroplasty with 5-year follow-up: a prospective study of 384 patients.

Authors:  T Dufour; J Beaurain; J Huppert; P Dam-Hieu; P Bernard; J P Steib
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2019-07-30       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Motion analysis of dynamic cervical implant stabilization versus anterior discectomy and fusion: a retrospective analysis of 70 cases.

Authors:  Zhonghai Li; Huarong Wu; Jin Chu; Mozhen Liu; Shuxun Hou; Shunzhi Yu; Tiesheng Hou
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-09-07       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Analysis of re-operations after cervical total disc replacement in a consecutive series of 535 patients receiving the ProDisc-C device.

Authors:  Jack E Zigler; Richard D Guyer; Scott L Blumenthal; Donna D Ohnmeiss
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2020-04-10       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 4.  Bias in cervical total disc replacement trials.

Authors:  Kristen Radcliff; Sean Siburn; Hamadi Murphy; Barrett Woods; Sheeraz Qureshi
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2017-06

Review 5.  Cervical disc replacement surgery: indications, technique, and technical pearls.

Authors:  Dante Leven; Joshua Meaike; Kris Radcliff; Sheeraz Qureshi
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2017-06

6.  Spondylolisthesis adjacent to a cervical disc arthroplasty does not increase the risk of adjacent level degeneration.

Authors:  David Christopher Kieser; Derek Thomas Cawley; Cecile Roscop; Simon Mazas; Pierre Coudert; Louis Boissiere; Ibrahim Obeid; Jean-Marc Vital; Vincent Pointillart; Olivier Gille
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-03-31       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Cervical Artificial Disc Replacement Versus Fusion for Cervical Degenerative Disc Disease: A Health Technology Assessment.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2019-02-19

8.  Cervical disc arthroplasty versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a meta-analysis of rates of adjacent-level surgery to 7-year follow-up.

Authors:  Jetan H Badhiwala; Andrew Platt; Christopher D Witiw; Vincent C Traynelis
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2020-03

9.  One-Level Versus 2-Level Treatment With Cervical Disc Arthroplasty or Fusion: Outcomes Up to 7 Years.

Authors:  Matthew F Gornet; Todd H Lanman; J Kenneth Burkus; Scott D Hodges; Jeffrey R McConnell; Randall F Dryer; Francine W Schranck; Anne G Copay
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2019-12-31

10.  Long-term Evaluation of Cervical Disc Arthroplasty with the Mobi-C© Cervical Disc: A Randomized, Prospective, Multicenter Clinical Trial with Seven-Year Follow-up.

Authors:  Kris Radcliff; Reginald J Davis; Michael S Hisey; Pierce D Nunley; Gregory A Hoffman; Robert J Jackson; Hyun W Bae; Todd Albert; Dom Coric
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2017-11-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.