Literature DB >> 27441182

Cervical Disc Arthroplasty with Prestige LP Disc Versus Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: Seven-Year Outcomes.

Matthew F Gornet1, J Kenneth Burkus2, Mark E Shaffrey3, Hui Nian4, Frank E Harrell4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) has emerged as an alternative to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for the treatment of cervical pathologies. Studies are on-going to assess the long term outcomes of CDA. This study assessed the safety and efficacy of the Prestige(®) LP Disc at 84-months follow up.
METHODS: Prospective data from 280 CDA patients with single-level cervical disc disease with radiculopathy or myelopathy were compared with 265 historical control ACDF patients. Clinical and radiographic follow up was completed pre-operatively, intraoperatively, and at intervals up to 84 months.
RESULTS: Follow-up rate was 75.9% for CDA and 70.0% for ACDF patients. Statistical improvements (p < 0.001) in Neck Disability Index (NDI), neck/arm pain, and SF-36 were achieved by 1.5 months in both groups and maintained through 84 months. At 84 months, 86.1% of CDA versus 80.1% of ACDF patients achieved NDI success, (≥15-point improvement over baseline). Mean NDI score improvements exceeded 30 points in both groups. SF-36 PCS/MCS mean improvements were 13.1±11.9/8.2±12.3 points for CDA and 10.7±11.8/8.3±13.6 points for ACDF. Neurological success was 92.8% for CDA and 79.7% for ACDF patients. The rate of Overall Success was 74.9% for CDA and 63.2% for ACDF. At 84 months, 17.5% of CDA and 16.6% of ACDF patients had a possibly implant- or implant-surgical procedure-related adverse event. Eighteen (6.4%) CDA and 29 (10.9%) ACDF patients had a second surgery at the index level. In CDA patients, mean angular motion at the target level was maintained at 24 (7.5°) and 84 (6.9°) months. Bridging bone was reported in 5.9%/9.5%/10.2%/13.0% of CDA patients at 24/36/60/84 months. Change in mean preoperative angulation of the adjacent segment above/below the index level was1.06±4.39/1.25±4.06 for CDA and (-0.23)±5.37/1.25±5.07 for ACDF patients. At 84 months, 90.9% of CDA and 85.6% of ACDF patients were satisfied with the results of their treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: Prestige LP maintained significantly improved clinical outcomes and segmental motion; statistical superiority of CDA was concluded for overall success. This investigational device exemption study was sponsored by Medtronic Spinal and Biologics, Memphis, TN. Study approved by the Hughston Sports Medicine Center Institutional Review Board on January 7, 2005. Clinical trial registered at clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00667459. All participants signed an informed consent.

Entities:  

Keywords:  adjacent level disease; anterior cervical discectomy and fusion; artificial cervical disc; cervical disc arthroplasty; cervical myelopathy; cervical radiculopathy

Year:  2016        PMID: 27441182      PMCID: PMC4943164          DOI: 10.14444/3024

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Spine Surg        ISSN: 2211-4599


  30 in total

1.  Recurrent laryngeal nerve injury with anterior cervical spine surgery risk with laterality of surgical approach.

Authors:  W J Beutler; C A Sweeney; P J Connolly
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2001-06-15       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  Very late complications of cervical arthroplasty: results of 2 controlled randomized prospective studies from a single investigator site.

Authors:  Francis M Hacker; Rebecca M Babcock; Robert J Hacker
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2013-12-15       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  Long-term results after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with allograft and plating: a 5- to 11-year radiologic and clinical follow-up study.

Authors:  Wai-Mun Yue; Wolfram Brodner; Thomas R Highland
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2005-10-01       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  Five-year adjacent-level degenerative changes in patients with single-level disease treated using lumbar total disc replacement with ProDisc-L versus circumferential fusion.

Authors:  Jack E Zigler; Jamieson Glenn; Rick B Delamarter
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2012-10-19

5.  The 5-year cost-effectiveness of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion and cervical disc replacement: a Markov analysis.

Authors:  Steven J McAnany; Samuel Overley; Evan O Baird; Samuel K Cho; Andrew C Hecht; Jack E Zigler; Sheeraz A Qureshi
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2014-11-01       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Two-level total disc replacement with Mobi-C cervical artificial disc versus anterior discectomy and fusion: a prospective, randomized, controlled multicenter clinical trial with 4-year follow-up results.

Authors:  Reginald J Davis; Pierce Dalton Nunley; Kee D Kim; Michael S Hisey; Robert J Jackson; Hyun W Bae; Gregory A Hoffman; Steven E Gaede; Guy O Danielson; Charles Gordon; Marcus B Stone
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2015-01

7.  Long-term Outcomes of the US FDA IDE Prospective, Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Comparing PCM Cervical Disc Arthroplasty With Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.

Authors:  Frank M Phillips; Fred H Geisler; Kye M Gilder; Christopher Reah; Kelli M Howell; Paul C McAfee
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2015-05-15       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  Clinical outcomes of BRYAN cervical disc arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter trial with 24-month follow-up.

Authors:  Rick C Sasso; Joseph D Smucker; Robert J Hacker; John G Heller
Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech       Date:  2007-10

9.  Multi-center, prospective, randomized, controlled investigational device exemption clinical trial comparing Mobi-C Cervical Artificial Disc to anterior discectomy and fusion in the treatment of symptomatic degenerative disc disease in the cervical spine.

Authors:  Michael S Hisey; Hyun W Bae; Reginald Davis; Steven Gaede; Greg Hoffman; Kee Kim; Pierce D Nunley; Daniel Peterson; Ralph Rashbaum; John Stokes
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2014-12-01

10.  Results at 24 months from the prospective, randomized, multicenter Investigational Device Exemption trial of ProDisc-C versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with 4-year follow-up and continued access patients.

Authors:  Rick B Delamarter; Daniel Murrey; Michael E Janssen; Jeffrey A Goldstein; Jack Zigler; Bobby K-B Tay; Bruce Darden
Journal:  SAS J       Date:  2010-12-01
View more
  25 in total

1.  The Norwegian Cervical Arthroplasty Trial (NORCAT): 2-year clinical outcome after single-level cervical arthroplasty versus fusion-a prospective, single-blinded, randomized, controlled multicenter study.

Authors:  Jarle Sundseth; Oddrun Anita Fredriksli; Frode Kolstad; Lars Gunnar Johnsen; Are Hugo Pripp; Hege Andresen; Erling Myrseth; Kay Müller; Øystein P Nygaard; John-Anker Zwart
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-12-23       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 2.  Adjacent level disease-background and update based on disc replacement data.

Authors:  I David Kaye; Alan S Hilibrand
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2017-06

3.  Cervical radiculopathy: is a prosthesis preferred over fusion surgery? A systematic review.

Authors:  Caroline M W Goedmakers; Tessa Janssen; Xiaoyu Yang; Mark P Arts; Ronald H M A Bartels; Carmen L A Vleggeert-Lankamp
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2019-10-22       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.  [Effectiveness evaluation of Prodisc-C prosthesis for more than 10 years follow-up after total cervical disc replacement].

Authors:  Shuai Xu; Yan Liang; Zhenqi Zhu; Kaifeng Wang; Haiying Liu
Journal:  Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi       Date:  2019-04-15

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.  Long-Term Clinical Experience with Selectively Constrained SECURE-C Cervical Artificial Disc for 1-Level Cervical Disc Disease: Results from Seven-Year Follow-Up of a Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Investigational Device Exemption Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Alexander Vaccaro; William Beutler; Walter Peppelman; Joseph Marzluff; Andrew Mugglin; Prem S Ramakrishnan; Jacqueline Myer; Kelly J Baker
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2018-08-15

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.  Multilevel cervical arthroplasty-clinical and radiological outcomes.

Authors:  Rui Reinas; Djamel Kitumba; Leopoldina Pereira; António M Baptista; Óscar L Alves
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2020-03
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.