Literature DB >> 32699748

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

Pierce D Nunley1, Eubulus J Kerr1, David A Cavanaugh1, Phillip Andrew Utter1, Peter G Campbell1, Rishi Wadhwa1, Kelly A Frank1, Kyle E Marshall1, Marcus B Stone1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Adjacent segment pathology (ASP) following cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) or anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is identified by imaging (RASP) or clinical symptoms (CASP). Clinical symptoms of CASP have been broadly defined, but subsequent adjacent-level surgeries are clear indicators of CASP. Current literature remains inconsistent in the incidence and potential predictors of CASP. Here, we will evaluate a robust data set for the incidence of CASP resulting in subsequent surgery, attempt to identify factors that might affect CASP, and analyze the association of CASP with patient-reported outcomes (PROS) and RASP.
METHODS: Data were prospectively collected during a US Food and Drug Administration randomized, multicenter, investigational device exemption trial comparing CDA (Mobi-C, Zimmer Biomet, Westminster, CO) with ACDF. CASP was defined as any adjacent-level subsequent surgical intervention. Post hoc analyses were conducted on the incidence, time to CASP diagnosis, and relationship of CASP with patient demographics. Longitudinal retrospective case-control analysis was used to assess the correlation of CASP to PROs and radiographic adjacent segment pathology (RASP).
RESULTS: Kaplan-Meier estimates indicated significantly lower probability of CASP over time for 1-level (P = .002) and 2-level (P = .008) CDA patients. Treatment with ACDF and younger age were associated with higher CASP risk. CDA was more effective than ACDF (70.5%; 95% CI = 45.1, 84.2; P < .0001) at preventing CASP. Case-control analysis indicated increased probability of CASP for patients with grade 3/4 RASP, but the difference was not statistically significant. When we pooled CASP patients, the median grade of RASP at the visit prior to surgery was 1, with only 6 patients presenting with grade 3/4 RASP.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with CDA have a lower incidence of CASP than do patients treated with ACDF, although the mechanism remains unclear. CASP and RASP remain uncorrelated in this large data set, but other predictive variables such as treatment, age, and number of levels should be further investigated. ©International Society for the Advancement of Spine Surgery 2020.

Entities:  

Keywords:  adjacent segment pathology; anterior cervical discectomy and fusion; cervical disc arthroplasty

Year:  2020        PMID: 32699748      PMCID: PMC7343266          DOI: 10.14444/7037

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Spine Surg        ISSN: 2211-4599


  49 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.  Lower incidence of adjacent segment degeneration after anterior cervical fusion found with those fusing C5-6 and C6-7 than those leaving C5-6 or C6-7 as an adjacent level.

Authors:  Shingo Komura; Kei Miyamoto; Hideo Hosoe; Nobuki Iinuma; Katsuji Shimizu
Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech       Date:  2012-02

3.  Cervical total disc replacement with the Mobi-C cervical artificial disc compared with anterior discectomy and fusion for treatment of 2-level symptomatic degenerative disc disease: a prospective, randomized, controlled multicenter clinical trial: clinical article.

Authors:  Reginald J Davis; Kee D Kim; Michael S Hisey; Gregory A Hoffman; Hyun W Bae; Steven E Gaede; Ralph F Rashbaum; Pierce Dalton Nunley; Daniel L Peterson; John K Stokes
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2013-09-06

4.  Clinical outcomes with selectively constrained SECURE-C cervical disc arthroplasty: two-year results from a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter investigational device exemption study.

Authors:  Alexander Vaccaro; William Beutler; Walter Peppelman; Joseph M Marzluff; Jason Highsmith; Andrew Mugglin; George DeMuth; Manasa Gudipally; Kelly J Baker
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2013-12-15       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 5.  Rate of Adjacent Segment Degeneration of Cervical Disc Arthroplasty Versus Fusion Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Authors:  Jiaquan Luo; Hongbo Wang; Jun Peng; Zhongyuan Deng; Zhen Zhang; Shixue Liu; Daidong Wang; Ming Gong; Shuo Tang
Journal:  World Neurosurg       Date:  2018-02-28       Impact factor: 2.104

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.  Clinical and radiographic analysis of cervical disc arthroplasty compared with allograft fusion: a randomized controlled clinical trial.

Authors:  Praveen V Mummaneni; J Kenneth Burkus; Regis W Haid; Vincent C Traynelis; Thomas A Zdeblick
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2007-03

8.  Symptomatic adjacent segment disease after cervical total disc replacement: re-examining the clinical and radiological evidence with established criteria.

Authors:  Pierce D Nunley; Ajay Jawahar; David A Cavanaugh; Charles R Gordon; Eubulus J Kerr; Phillip Andrew Utter
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2013-01-11       Impact factor: 4.166

9.  Comparison of BRYAN cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical decompression and fusion: clinical and radiographic results of a randomized, controlled, clinical trial.

Authors:  John G Heller; Rick C Sasso; Stephen M Papadopoulos; Paul A Anderson; Richard G Fessler; Robert J Hacker; Domagoj Coric; Joseph C Cauthen; Daniel K Riew
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2009-01-15       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  Prevalence of adjacent segment disc degeneration in patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion based on pre-operative MRI findings.

Authors:  Kristopher M Lundine; Gavin Davis; Myron Rogers; Margaret Staples; Gerald Quan
Journal:  J Clin Neurosci       Date:  2013-09-11       Impact factor: 1.961

View more
  3 in total

1.  Economic Impact of Revision Operations for Adjacent Segment Disease of the Subaxial Cervical Spine.

Authors:  John Bonano; Daniel D Cummins; Shane Burch; Sigurd H Berven; Vedat Deviren; Christopher P Ames; Bobby Tay; Aaron J Clark; Alekos A Theologis
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev       Date:  2022-04-01

2.  [Analysis of infuence factors of anterior bone loss after cervical disc arthroplasty and its effect on effectiveness].

Authors:  Tingkui Wu; Hao Liu; Beiyu Wang; Chen Ding; Yang Meng; Xin Rong; Hua Chen; Yi Yang; Ying Hong; Kangkang Huang; Junbo He
Journal:  Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi       Date:  2021-01-15

3.  ProDisc-C versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the surgical treatment of symptomatic cervical disc disease: two-year outcomes of Asian prospective randomized controlled multicentre study.

Authors:  Naresh Kumar; Zhong Jun Liu; Wai Sang Poon; Chun-Kun Park; Ruey-Mo Lin; Kyoung-Suok Cho; Chi Chien Niu; Hung Yi Chen; Sirisha Madhu; Liang Shen; Yu Sun; Wai Kit Mak; Cheng Li Lin; Sang-Bok Lee; Choon Keun Park; Dong Chan Lee; Fu-I Tung; Hee-Kit Wong
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2022-03-24       Impact factor: 2.721

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.