Literature DB >> 29878713

Comparative Study Between M6-C and Mobi-C Cervical Artificial Disc Replacement: Biomechanical Outcomes and Comparison with Normative Data.

My Pham1, Kevin Phan1, Ian Teng1, Ralph J Mobbs1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Cervical spondylosis affects a huge proportion of the middle-aged population. Degenerative changes can occur in multiple regions of the cervical spine typically affecting the joints, intervertebral discs and endplates. These changes lead to compression of adjacent nervous structures, which results in radiculopathic and myelopathic pain. Various treatment modalities are currently available with non-surgical approaches the initial go to if there is no symptomatic cord compression. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, or arthroplasty are the two common surgical approaches if non-surgical treatments fail to relieve symptoms of the patients or there are signs of central cord compression. However, studies have shown that there is an increased risk of adjacent segment disease related to fusion. Cervical disc arthroplasty aims to restore normal range of motion (ROM) in patients with pain and disability due to degenerative disc disease resistant to conservative care. Two common disc prostheses used include M6-C and Mobi-C. Both prostheses comprise a mobile polymer segment sandwiched between two metal endplates with mechanisms resembling an actual intervertebral disc. This study aims to compare the kinematics associated with these prostheses, against the normal range of motion in the non-degenerative population.
METHOD: Patients who underwent M6-C or Mobi-C disc replacements by the senior author from 2012 to 2015 were identified at a single tertiary institution. Routine 3-month postoperative lateral radiographs were analyzed for flexion and extension ROM angles at the involved vertebral level by two independent authors. Data was compared to previous published studies investigating cervical spine ROM of asymptomatic patients.
RESULTS: There was no statistical significance in the difference of overall flexion range between M6-C and Mobi-C prostheses. However, overall range of extension of Mobi-C was greater compared to M6-C (P = 0.028). At C5-6 , the range of flexion for both implants were similar but lesser compared to asymptomatic patients (P < 0.001). Range of extension was greater in the Mobi-C group (14.2° ± 5.1°) compared to the M6-C (7.3° ± 4.6°) (P = 0.0009). At C6-7 , there were no statistical differences in both range of flexion and extension between the two prostheses and asymptomatic patients (P > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: The early results regarding restoration of ROM following cervical arthroplasty using either M6-C or Mobi-C prosthesis are encouraging. Long-term follow-up studies are necessary to observe the change in ROM over time with physiological loading and wear patterns.
© 2018 Chinese Orthopaedic Association and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Artificial disc prosthesis; Biomechanics; Cervical arthroplasty; M6-C; Mobi-C

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29878713      PMCID: PMC6594480          DOI: 10.1111/os.12376

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Orthop Surg        ISSN: 1757-7853            Impact factor:   2.071


  33 in total

1.  Anatomic bases for anterior spinal surgery: surgical anatomy of the cervical vertebral body and disc space.

Authors:  J Lu; N A Ebraheim; H Yang; J Rollins; R A Yeasting
Journal:  Surg Radiol Anat       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 1.246

2.  Cervical flexion, extension, protrusion, and retraction. A radiographic segmental analysis.

Authors:  N R Ordway; R J Seymour; R G Donelson; L S Hojnowski; W T Edwards
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1999-02-01       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  PREVALENCE OF CERVICAL SPONDYLOSIS IN A GENERAL PRACTICE.

Authors:  D H IRVINE; J B FOSTER; D J NEWELL; B N KLUKVIN
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1965-05-22       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  The morbid anatomy of cervical spondylosis and myelopathy.

Authors:  M WILKINSON
Journal:  Brain       Date:  1960-12       Impact factor: 13.501

5.  Assessment of adjacent-segment disease in patients treated with cervical fusion or arthroplasty: a prospective 2-year study.

Authors:  James T Robertson; Stephen M Papadopoulos; Vincent C Traynelis
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2005-12

Review 6.  Clinical practice. Cervical radiculopathy.

Authors:  Simon Carette; Michael G Fehlings
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2005-07-28       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Therapeutic selective nerve root block in the nonsurgical treatment of atraumatic cervical spondylotic radicular pain: a retrospective analysis with independent clinical review.

Authors:  C W Slipman; J S Lipetz; H B Jackson; D P Rogers; E J Vresilovic
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 3.966

8.  Early clinical experience with the mobi-C disc prosthesis.

Authors:  Sang Hyun Kim; Hyun Chul Shin; Dong Ah Shin; Keung Nyun Kim; Do Heum Yoon
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  2007-06-30       Impact factor: 2.759

9.  Cervical arthroplasty for myelopathy adjacent to previous multisegmental fusion.

Authors:  Ralph J Mobbs; Nicholas Mehan; Peter Khong
Journal:  J Clin Neurosci       Date:  2008-11-14       Impact factor: 1.961

10.  Adjacent segment disease after anterior cervical interbody fusion.

Authors:  Hirokazu Ishihara; Masahiko Kanamori; Yoshiharu Kawaguchi; Hiroshi Nakamura; Tomoatsu Kimura
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2004 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 4.166

View more
  4 in total

1.  Current Concepts of Cervical Disc Arthroplasty.

Authors:  David Turkov; Alan Job; Cesar Iturriaga; Rohit B Verma
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2021-12

2.  The MOVE-C Cervical Artificial Disc - Design, Materials, Mechanical Safety.

Authors:  Annette Kienle; Nicolas Graf; Carina Krais; Hans-Joachim Wilke
Journal:  Med Devices (Auckl)       Date:  2020-09-25

3.  Comparison of in vivo kinematic and radiological parameters of three cervical disc prostheses.

Authors:  Nicholas Chang; Ralph Mobbs; Nicholas Hui; Henry Lin
Journal:  J Craniovertebr Junction Spine       Date:  2022-03-09

4.  Comparison of M6-C and Mobi-C cervical total disc replacement for cervical degenerative disc disease in adults.

Authors:  Nicholas Hui; Kevin Phan; Jack Kerferd; Meiyi Lee; Ralph J Mobbs
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2019-12
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.