Literature DB >> 29303467

Prospective, randomized multicenter study of cervical arthroplasty versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: 5-year results with a metal-on-metal artificial disc.

Domagoj Coric1, Richard D Guyer2, Pierce D Nunley3, David Musante4, Cameron Carmody5, Charles Gordon6, Carl Lauryssen7, Margaret O Boltes1, Donna D Ohnmeiss8.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE Seven cervical total disc replacement (TDR) devices have received FDA approval since 2006. These devices represent a heterogeneous assortment of implants made from various biomaterials with different biomechanical properties. The majority of these devices are composed of metallic endplates with a polymer core. In this prospective, randomized multicenter study, the authors evaluate the safety and efficacy of a metal-on-metal (MoM) TDR (Kineflex|C) versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in the treatment of single-level spondylosis with radiculopathy through a long-term (5-year) follow-up. METHODS An FDA-regulated investigational device exemption (IDE) pivotal trial was conducted at 21 centers across the United States. Standard validated outcome measures including the Neck Disability Index (NDI) and visual analog scale (VAS) for assessing pain were used. Patients were randomized to undergo TDR using the Kineflex|C cervical artificial disc or anterior cervical fusion using structural allograft and an anterior plate. Patients were evaluated preoperatively and at 6 weeks and 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 60 months after surgery. Serum ion analysis was performed on a subset of patients randomized to receive the MoM TDR. RESULTS A total of 269 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to undergo either TDR (136 patients) or ACDF (133 patients). There were no significant differences between the TDR and ACDF groups in terms of operative time, blood loss, or length of hospital stay. In both groups, the mean NDI scores improved significantly by 6 weeks after surgery and remained significantly improved throughout the 60-month follow-up (both p < 0.01). Similarly, VAS pain scores improved significantly by 6 weeks and remained significantly improved through the 60-month follow-up (both p < 0.01). There were no significant changes in outcomes between the 24- and 60-month follow-ups in either group. Range of motion in the TDR group decreased at 3 months but was significantly greater than the preoperative mean value at the 12- and 24-month follow-ups and remained significantly improved through the 60-month period. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in terms of reoperation/revision surgery or device-/surgery-related adverse events. The serum ion analysis revealed cobalt and chromium levels significantly lower than the levels that merit monitoring. CONCLUSIONS Cervical TDR with an MoM device is safe and efficacious at the 5-year follow-up. These results from a prospective randomized study support that Kineflex|C TDR as a viable alternative to ACDF in appropriately selected patients with cervical radiculopathy. Clinical trial registration no.: NCT00374413 (clinicaltrials.gov).

Entities:  

Keywords:  ACDF = anterior cervical discectomy and fusion; ASD = adjacent-segment degeneration; FDA trial; HO = heterotopic ossification; IDE = investigational device exemption; Kineflex|C; MoM = metal on metal; NDI = Neck Disability Index; ROM = range of motion; TDR = total disc replacement; VAS = visual analog scale; anterior cervical fusion; anterior plate; artificial disc; cervical spine; prospective study; randomized study; total disc replacement

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29303467     DOI: 10.3171/2017.5.SPINE16824

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


  17 in total

1.  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

2.  In which cases do surgeons specializing in total disc replacement perform fusion in patients with cervical spine symptoms?

Authors:  Richard D Guyer; Donna D Ohnmeiss; Scott L Blumenthal; Jack E Zigler
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2020-01-02       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Long-term mechanical function and integration of an implanted tissue-engineered intervertebral disc.

Authors:  Sarah E Gullbrand; Beth G Ashinsky; Edward D Bonnevie; Dong Hwa Kim; Julie B Engiles; Lachlan J Smith; Dawn M Elliott; Thomas P Schaer; Harvey E Smith; Robert L Mauck
Journal:  Sci Transl Med       Date:  2018-11-21       Impact factor: 17.956

4.  Adjacent Segment Pathology After Treatment With Cervical Disc Arthroplasty or Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion, Part 1: Radiographic 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

5.  Outcomes of cervical degenerative disc disease treated by anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with self-locking fusion cage.

Authors:  Bo Zhang; Yu-Zhen Jiang; Qing-Peng Song; Yan An
Journal:  World J Clin Cases       Date:  2022-05-26       Impact factor: 1.534

6.  Late complication of cervical disc arthroplasty: heterotopic ossification causing myelopathy after 10 years. Illustrative case.

Authors:  Che-Han Hsu; Yi-Hsuan Kuo; Chao-Hung Kuo; Chin-Chu Ko; Jau-Ching Wu; Wen-Cheng Huang
Journal:  J Neurosurg Case Lessons       Date:  2021-08-23

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.  Nano-Scale Surface Modifications to Advance Current Treatment Options for Cervical Degenerative Disc Disease (CDDD).

Authors:  Anne Yau; Ian Sands; Yupeng Chen
Journal:  J Orthop Res Ther       Date:  2019-10-06

Review 10.  A meta-analysis comparing the short- and mid- to long-term outcomes of artificial cervical disc replacement(ACDR) with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for the treatment of cervical degenerative disc disease.

Authors:  Zihan Peng; Ying Hong; Yang Meng; Hao Liu
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2022-02-03       Impact factor: 3.479

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.