Literature DB >> 32309661

Multilevel cervical arthroplasty-clinical and radiological outcomes.

Rui Reinas1, Djamel Kitumba1,2, Leopoldina Pereira1, António M Baptista1, Óscar L Alves1,3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) is a valid option for single-level cervical disc disease (CDD) as an alternative to fusion. However, the use in 3- and 4-level disc disease is under scrutiny with scarce data published so far. Our aim was to study clinical and radiological outcomes of arthroplasty in patients with multilevel CDD.
METHODS: Retrospective analysis of clinical records, pre- and post-operative neutral/dynamic X-rays of patients who underwent CDA in multilevel CDD (2-4 levels). We evaluated sagittal balance parameters (C2-7 and index angle, SVA), global and segmental range of motion (ROM)), neck and arm VAS, Odom's criteria, re-operation rate, adjacent segment disease (ASD), willingness to undertake the same procedure again. Rate of heterotopic ossification (HO) was studied for follow-up >2 years. A subgroup analysis was performed regarding 2-level versus 3- or 4-level arthroplasty.
RESULTS: Thirty-two patients were included, 6 males and 26 females, mean age of 46 years (range, 30-63). Seventy-seven cervical disc levels were treated with the same artificial disc. Twenty-one patients were operated on 2 levels, nine in 3 levels, and 2 patients in 4 levels. Post-operatively, there was a decrease in SVA (-2.2±8.36 mm, P=0.098) and an increase in global (3.7±9.6º, P=0.042) and index (1.3±6.1º, P=0.071) ROM. Mean nVAS and aVAS decreased (7.5±1.1 to 2.5±1.5; 6.3±1.9 to 2.2±1.7, P<0.05). Two-level versus 3-4 level patient subgroups showed a lower SVA (-1.3±8.1 mm P=0.47; -3.4±6.3 mm P=0.107), a slight increase in global (1.6±9.4º P=0.44; 7.2±11.7º P=0.07) and index (1.1±4.7º P=0.12; 1.3±8.1º P=0.35) ROM. HO was present in 9.9% (7/71) of disc levels operated, none of them with grade 3 or 4.
CONCLUSIONS: Multilevel CDA provides good clinical and radiological outcomes, preserving global and segmental cervical mobility, while having a beneficial effect on sagittal balance. These results hold for 2 to 4 levels, making this technique a valuable option in selected patients with cervical multilevel CDD. 2020 Journal of Spine Surgery. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Arthroplasty; cervical spondylosis; multilevel

Year:  2020        PMID: 32309661      PMCID: PMC7154349          DOI: 10.21037/jss.2020.01.09

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Spine Surg        ISSN: 2414-4630


  54 in total

1.  Five-Year Trends in Center of Rotation After Single-Level Cervical Arthroplasty with the Prestige-LP Disc.

Authors:  Xu Hu; Majiao Jiang; Hao Liu; Xin Rong; Ying Hong; Chen Ding; Beiyu Wang
Journal:  World Neurosurg       Date:  2019-07-11       Impact factor: 2.104

2.  Implant Design and the Anchoring Mechanism Influence the Incidence of Heterotopic Ossification in Cervical Total Disc Replacement at 2-year Follow-up.

Authors:  Christoph Mehren; Karin Wuertz-Kozak; Daniel Sauer; Wolfgang Hitzl; Tuna Pehlivanoglu; Franziska Heider
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2019-11-01       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  Long-term clinical outcomes following 3- and 4-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.

Authors:  Rafael De la Garza-Ramos; Risheng Xu; Seba Ramhmdani; Thomas Kosztowski; Mohamad Bydon; Daniel M Sciubba; Jean-Paul Wolinsky; Timothy F Witham; Ziya L Gokaslan; Ali Bydon
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2016-02-19

4.  The effects of carpentry on heterotopic ossification and mobility in cervical arthroplasty: determination by computed tomography with a minimum 2-year follow-up: Clinical article.

Authors:  Tsung-Hsi Tu; Jau-Ching Wu; Wen-Cheng Huang; Ching-Lan Wu; Chin-Chu Ko; Henrich Cheng
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2012-03-30

5.  Comparison between single- and multi-level patients: clinical and radiological outcomes 2 years after cervical disc replacement.

Authors:  J Huppert; J Beaurain; J P Steib; P Bernard; T Dufour; I Hovorka; J Stecken; P Dam-Hieu; J M Fuentes; J M Vital; T Vila; L Aubourg
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-02-20       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  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

7.  Is hybrid surgery of the cervical spine a good balance between fusion and arthroplasty? Pilot results from a single surgeon series.

Authors:  Hwee Weng Dennis Hey; Choon Chiet Hong; Ai Sha Long; Hwan Tak Hee
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-08-25       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  The Seven-Year Cost-Effectiveness of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Versus Cervical Disc Arthroplasty: A Markov Analysis.

Authors:  Jun S Kim; James Dowdell; Zoe B Cheung; Varun Arvind; Li Sun; Chanakya Jandhyala; Chierika Ukogu; William Ranson; Samantha Jacobs; Steven McAnany; Samuel Kang-Wook Cho
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2018-11-15       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  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

Review 10.  Cervical Disc Arthroplasty: A Comprehensive Review of Single-Level, Multilevel, and Hybrid Procedures.

Authors:  Joseph L Laratta; Jamal N Shillingford; Comron Saifi; K Daniel Riew
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2017-05-16
View more
  1 in total

1.  A Comparison of 2 Anterior Hybrid Techniques for 3-Level Cervical Degenerative Disc Disease.

Authors:  Han Wang; Yang Meng; Hao Liu; Xiaofei Wang; Chen Ding
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2020-11-06
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.