Literature DB >> 28337729

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

I David Kaye1, Alan S Hilibrand2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The precise etiology of adjacent segment disease following cervical spine surgery is controversial. Theories for development include inevitable changes secondary to the natural progression of the degenerative cascade and changes secondary to altered biomechanics of the fused cervical spine. Motion preserving techniques, such as cervical disc arthroplasties (CDA), have been introduced with the hopes of reducing the rates of adjacent segment pathology. Recently, 7-year data from the investigational device exemption (IDE) studies have been published. The purpose of this review is to provide an update on cervical adjacent segment disease incorporating this emerging data into the analysis. RECENT
FINDINGS: Although the 7-year data for CDA has confirmed continued success, specifically regarding improved neck pain and reduced re-operation rates, the influence of CDA on reducing rates of adjacent segment pathology remains questionable. Although some studies have found more radiographic adjacent segment disease after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) compared to CDA, an association between these findings and clinical symptoms has not been established. Cervical disc arthroplasty continues to outperform cervical disc fusion regarding some patient specific parameters, however, whether CDA reduces rates of radiographic and clinical adjacent segment pathology remains unknown. Without studies developed specifically to address this question, the answer remains elusive.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Adjacent segment disease; Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion; Cervical disc arthroplasty; Cervical spine; IDE studies

Year:  2017        PMID: 28337729      PMCID: PMC5435627          DOI: 10.1007/s12178-017-9396-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med        ISSN: 1935-9748


  37 in total

1.  Radiculopathy and myelopathy at segments adjacent to the site of a previous anterior cervical arthrodesis.

Authors:  A S Hilibrand; G D Carlson; M A Palumbo; P K Jones; H H Bohlman
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 5.284

2.  Long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes of cervical disc replacement with the Prestige disc: results from a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial.

Authors:  J Kenneth Burkus; Regis W Haid; Vincent C Traynelis; Praveen V Mummaneni
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2010-09

3.  Motion analysis of bryan cervical disc arthroplasty versus anterior discectomy and fusion: results from a prospective, randomized, multicenter, clinical trial.

Authors:  Rick C Sasso; Natalie M Best; Newton H Metcalf; Paul A Anderson
Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech       Date:  2008-08

4.  MRI of cervical intervertebral discs in asymptomatic subjects.

Authors:  M Matsumoto; Y Fujimura; N Suzuki; Y Nishi; M Nakamura; Y Yabe; H Shiga
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1998-01

5.  Clinical and radiographic analysis of an artificial cervical disc: 7-year follow-up from the Prestige prospective randomized controlled clinical trial: Clinical article.

Authors:  J Kenneth Burkus; Vincent C Traynelis; Regis W Haid; Praveen V Mummaneni
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2014-07-18

6.  Prospective, randomized, multicenter study of cervical arthroplasty: 269 patients from the Kineflex|C artificial disc investigational device exemption study with a minimum 2-year follow-up: clinical article.

Authors:  Domagoj Coric; Pierce D Nunley; Richard D Guyer; David Musante; Cameron N Carmody; Charles R Gordon; Carl Lauryssen; Donna D Ohnmeiss; Margaret O Boltes
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2011-06-24

7.  Factors affecting the incidence of symptomatic adjacent-level disease in cervical spine after total disc arthroplasty: 2- to 4-year follow-up of 3 prospective randomized trials.

Authors:  Pierce D Nunley; Ajay Jawahar; Eubulus J Kerr; Charles J Gordon; David A Cavanaugh; Elisa M Birdsong; Marolyn Stocks; Guy Danielson
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2012-03-15       Impact factor: 3.468

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

Authors:  Matthew F Gornet; J Kenneth Burkus; Mark E Shaffrey; Hui Nian; Frank E Harrell
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2016-06-22

9.  ProDisc-C Total Disc Replacement Versus Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion for Single-Level Symptomatic Cervical Disc Disease: Seven-Year Follow-up of the Prospective Randomized U.S. Food and Drug Administration Investigational Device Exemption Study.

Authors:  Michael E Janssen; Jack E Zigler; Jeffrey M Spivak; Rick B Delamarter; Bruce V Darden; Branko Kopjar
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2015-11-04       Impact factor: 5.284

Review 10.  Adjacent segment degeneration and adjacent segment disease: the consequences of spinal fusion?

Authors:  Alan S Hilibrand; Matthew Robbins
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2004 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 4.166

View more
  3 in total

1.  Adjacent Segment Pathology After Treatment With Cervical Disc Arthroplasty or Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion, Part 2: Clinical Results at 7-Year Follow-Up.

Authors:  Pierce D Nunley; Eubulus J Kerr; David A Cavanaugh; Phillip Andrew Utter; Peter G Campbell; Rishi Wadhwa; Kelly A Frank; Kyle E Marshall; Marcus B Stone
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2020-06-30

2.  Biomechanical evaluation of cervical disc replacement with a novel prosthesis based on the physiological curvature of endplate.

Authors:  Jigang Lou; Yuanchao Li; Beiyu Wang; Yang Meng; Quan Gong; Hao Liu
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2018-02-27       Impact factor: 2.359

3.  Mid- to long-term rates of symptomatic adjacent-level disease requiring surgery after cervical total disc replacement compared with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a meta-analysis of prospective randomized clinical trials.

Authors:  Yifei Deng; Guangzhou Li; Hao Liu; Ying Hong; Yang Meng
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2020-10-12       Impact factor: 2.359

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.