Jack E Zigler1, Richard D Guyer2, Scott L Blumenthal2, Donna D Ohnmeiss2,3. 1. Center for Disc Replacement at Texas Back Institute, 6020 W. Parker Rd. #200, Plano, TX, 75093, USA. jzigler@texasback.com. 2. Center for Disc Replacement at Texas Back Institute, 6020 W. Parker Rd. #200, Plano, TX, 75093, USA. 3. Texas Back Institute Research Foundation, Plano, TX, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: One important factor in evaluating the safety of an implant is the rate of subsequent surgery and the reasons for surgery, particularly those that are related to possible problems with the implant. The purpose of this study was to determine the overall re-operation rate (including revisions, removals, device-related, procedure-related, adjacent segment, and others) for a large consecutive series of cervical TDR patients beginning with the first case experience, using a single device at a single institution. METHODS: Surgery records were reviewed to identify cervical TDR patients and those who underwent subsequent surgery. Cervical TDR cases involving ProDisc-C were identified, beginning with the first case performed in 2003 at a multisite spine specialty centre. Only patients who were at least 2 years post-operative were included, producing a consecutive series of 535 patients. There were 115 hybrids in the series (TDR at one level and fusion at an adjacent segment). Data collected included general demographics and level(s) operated. A surgery log through 12-31-18 was reviewed to identify re-operations occurring in the TDR patients. For each re-operation, the reason, duration from index surgery, and procedure were recorded. The mean duration from the index surgery to the search of the surgery log for re-operations was 78.3 months, range 24 to 181 months. RESULTS: Re-operation occurred in 30 patients (5.6%). These included: 3 TDR removals and revision to anterior discectomy and fusion (1 for migration, 1 for subsidence, and 1 for spondylosis), 1 TDR repositioning, 21 secondary surgeries for adjacent segment degeneration (5 of which were adjacent to fusion levels in hybrid procedures), 1 wound infection, 1 hematoma, and 2 received stimulators for pain control. There were no re- operations for device failure. In cases of re-operation for adjacent segment degeneration, the mean duration between the index surgery and re-operation was 47.3 months. CONCLUSION: The re-operation rate was 5.6%. No surgeries were performed for device failure. These results support the safety of the TDR device.
INTRODUCTION: One important factor in evaluating the safety of an implant is the rate of subsequent surgery and the reasons for surgery, particularly those that are related to possible problems with the implant. The purpose of this study was to determine the overall re-operation rate (including revisions, removals, device-related, procedure-related, adjacent segment, and others) for a large consecutive series of cervical TDR patients beginning with the first case experience, using a single device at a single institution. METHODS: Surgery records were reviewed to identify cervical TDR patients and those who underwent subsequent surgery. Cervical TDR cases involving ProDisc-C were identified, beginning with the first case performed in 2003 at a multisite spine specialty centre. Only patients who were at least 2 years post-operative were included, producing a consecutive series of 535 patients. There were 115 hybrids in the series (TDR at one level and fusion at an adjacent segment). Data collected included general demographics and level(s) operated. A surgery log through 12-31-18 was reviewed to identify re-operations occurring in the TDR patients. For each re-operation, the reason, duration from index surgery, and procedure were recorded. The mean duration from the index surgery to the search of the surgery log for re-operations was 78.3 months, range 24 to 181 months. RESULTS: Re-operation occurred in 30 patients (5.6%). These included: 3 TDR removals and revision to anterior discectomy and fusion (1 for migration, 1 for subsidence, and 1 for spondylosis), 1 TDR repositioning, 21 secondary surgeries for adjacent segment degeneration (5 of which were adjacent to fusion levels in hybrid procedures), 1 wound infection, 1 hematoma, and 2 received stimulators for pain control. There were no re- operations for device failure. In cases of re-operation for adjacent segment degeneration, the mean duration between the index surgery and re-operation was 47.3 months. CONCLUSION: The re-operation rate was 5.6%. No surgeries were performed for device failure. These results support the safety of the TDR device.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cervical spine; Re-operations; Total disc replacement
Authors: Domagoj Coric; Richard D Guyer; Pierce D Nunley; David Musante; Cameron Carmody; Charles Gordon; Carl Lauryssen; Margaret O Boltes; Donna D Ohnmeiss Journal: J Neurosurg Spine Date: 2018-01-05
Authors: Robert J Jackson; Reginald J Davis; Gregory A Hoffman; Hyun W Bae; Michael S Hisey; Kee D Kim; Steven E Gaede; Pierce Dalton Nunley Journal: J Neurosurg Spine Date: 2016-01-22
Authors: George M Ghobrial; William F Lavelle; Jeffrey E Florman; K Daniel Riew; Allan D Levi Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2019-02-01 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Paul A Anderson; Ahmad Nassr; Bradford L Currier; Arjun S Sebastian; Paul M Arnold; Michael G Fehlings; Thomas E Mroz; K Daniel Riew Journal: Global Spine J Date: 2017-04-01
Authors: Venkat Boddapati; Nathan J Lee; Justin Mathew; Meghana M Vulapalli; Joseph M Lombardi; Marc D Dyrszka; Zeeshan M Sardar; Ronald A Lehman; K Daniel Riew Journal: Global Spine J Date: 2020-07-24
Authors: Nathan J Lee; Andrei F Joaquim; Venkat Boddapati; Justin Mathew; Paul Park; Jun S Kim; Zeeshan M Sardar; Ronald A Lehman; K Daniel Riew Journal: Global Spine J Date: 2021-01-19