Search

Purpose: To analyze of the results of spine surgical treatment of athletes with lumbar degenerative disease and development of a surgical strategy based on the preoperative symptoms and radiological changes in the lumbar spine. Methods: For 114 athletes with lumbar degenerative disease were included in the present study. Four independent groups were studied: (1) microsurgical/endoscopic discectomy (n = 35); (2) PRP therapy in facet joints (n = 41); (3) total disc replacement (n = 11); (4) lumbar interbody fusion (n = 27). We evaluated postoperative clinical outcomes and preoperative radiological results. The average postoperative follow-up was 5 (3;6), 3.5 (3;5), 3 (2;4) and 4 (3;5) years, respectively. The analysis included an assessment of clinical outcomes (initial clinical symptoms, chronic pain syndrome level according to the VAS, quality of life according to the SF-36 questionnaire, degree of tolerance to physical activity according to the subjective Borg Rating of Perceived Exertion Scale) and radiological data (Dynamic Slip, Dynamic Segmental Angle, degenerative changes in the facet joint according to the Fujiwara classification and disc according to the Pfirrmann classification; changes in the diffusion coefficient using diffusion-weighted MRI). Results: The median and 25–75% quartiles timing of return to sports were 12.6 (10.2;14.1), 2.8 (2.4;3.7), 9 (6;12), and 14 (9;17) weeks, respectively. We examined the type of surgical treatment utilized, as well as the preoperative clinical symptoms, severity of degenerative changes in the intervertebral disc and facet joint, the timing of return to sports, the level of pain syndrome, the quality of life according to SF-36, and the degree of tolerance to physical activity. We then developed a surgical strategy based on individual preoperative neurological function and lumbar morphological changes. Conclusions: In this retrospective study, we report clinical results of four treatment options of lumbar spine degenerative disease in athletes. The use of developed patient selection criteria for the analyzed surgical techniques is aimed at minimizing return-to-play times. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Mechanical augmentation upon implantation is essential for the long‐term success of tissue‐engineered intervertebral discs (TE‐IVDs). Previous studies utilized stiffer materials to fabricate TE‐IVD support structures. However, these materials undergo various failure modes in the mechanically challenging IVD microenvironment. FlexiFil (FPLA) is an elastomeric 3D printing filament that is amenable to the fabrication of support structures. However, no present study has evaluated the efficacy of a flexible support material to preserve disc height and support the formation of hydrated tissues in a large animal model. Methods: We leveraged results from our previously developed FE model of the minipig spine to design and test TE‐IVD support cages comprised of FPLA and PLA. Specifically, we performed indentation to assess implant mechanical response and scanning electron microscopy to visualize microscale damage. We then implanted FPLA and PLA support cages for 6 weeks in the minipig cervical spine and monitored disc height via weekly x‐rays. TE‐IVDs cultured in FPLA were also implanted for 6 weeks with weekly x‐rays and terminal T2 MRIs to quantify tissue hydration at study endpoint. Results: Results demonstrated that FPLA cages withstood nearly twice the deformation of PLA without detrimental changes in mechanical performance and minimal damage. In vivo, FPLA cages and stably implanted TE‐IVDs restored native disc height and supported the formation of hydrated tissues in the minipig spine. Displaced TE‐IVDs yielded disc heights that were superior to PLA or discectomy‐treated levels. Conclusions: FPLA holds great promise as a flexible and bioresorbable material for enhancing the long‐term success of TE‐IVD implants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To describe modes of failure of cervical TDR, their related treatment strategies, and to describe a management strategy for the treatment of failed cervical TDR. Methods: This retrospective study was based on a consecutive series of 53 cervical TDR patients who underwent removal or revision surgery. Chart review was conducted to collect general descriptive data, reasons for TDR removal/revision, duration from index implantation to re-operation, and the subsequent procedure performed. Results: Among 53 patients, 36 underwent TDR removal and fusion, 16 underwent TDR removal and replacement with another TDR, and one patient's TDR was revised by repositioning. The mean duration from index surgery to removal/revision was 40.1 months (range: 3 days–222 months). In all cases, removal/revision surgery was completed without complication. The most common reason for removal was severe osteolysis, often involving C. acnes infection, and was primarily associated with one implant type. TDR removal and fusion were performed for subsidence, device migration, treatment of symptoms arising from posterior anatomy (facet joints, etc.), approach-related complications and pain. TDR replacement was feasible for hypermobility, metal allergy, implant locked in kyphosis, and oversized implant use. In one case of TDR malpositioning, the device was successfully revised into appropriate position. Conclusion: After cervical TDR failure, replacing a TDR with another implant can be feasible. Reasons for revision or removal after cervical TDR surgery include biomechanical failure, implant migration, surgeon or technical error, or biological reasons. The type of failure can help the surgeon create a strategy to address these complications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Design: Systematic Review. Objectives: To systematically review the clinical outcomes, re-operation, and complication rates of lumbar TDR devices at mid-to long-term follow-up studies for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD). Methods: A systematic search was conducted on PubMed, SCOPUS, and Google Scholar to identify follow-up studies that evaluated clinical outcomes of lumbar TDR in patients with DDD. The included studies met the following criteria: prospective or retrospective studies published from 2012 to 2022; a minimum of 5 years post-operative follow-up; a study sample size >10 patients; patients >18 years of age; containing clinical outcomes with Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), complication or reoperation rates. Results: Twenty-two studies were included with data on 2284 patients. The mean follow-up time was 8.30 years, with a mean follow-up rate of 86.91%. The study population was 54.97% female, with a mean age of 42.34 years. The mean VAS and ODI pain score improvements were 50.71 ± 6.91 and 30.39 ± 5.32 respectively. The mean clinical success and patient satisfaction rates were 74.79% ± 7.55% and 86.34% ± 5.64%, respectively. The mean complication and reoperation rates were 18.53% ± 6.33% and 13.6% ± 3.83%, respectively. There was no significant difference when comparing mid-term and long-term follow-up studies for all clinical outcomes. Conclusions: There were significant improvements in pain reduction at last follow-up in patients with TDRs. Mid-term follow-up data on clinical outcomes, complication and reoperation rates of lumbar TDRs were maintained longer term. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cervical total disc replacement (TDR) aims to maintain normal cervical kinematics after surgery. This study investigates the relation between shifted location of centre of rotation (COR) and subsequent surgical outcomes after multilevel cervical TDR (MCTDR) and identifies radiological parameter that corresponded to this change of COR after MCTDR. The study included a consecutive 24 patients treated with MCTDR following the diagnosis of multilevel cervical disc herniation or stenosis. Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), range of motion (ROM) at both C2-7 segment and TDR implanted levels, and location of COR at TDR level were evaluated at pre- and post-MCTDR. These parameters were compared between patients who experienced successful and unsuccessful pain relief. The inherent CORs relatively at ventro-cranial coordinates have demonstrated significant migrations to dorso-caudal location, more prominent shifts for the successful group, after MCTDR switch. The unsuccessful group showed markedly reduced C2-7 ROM and reduced angular improvement at C2-7 as well as MCTDR level in comparison with the successful group. Postoperative C2-7 ROM was related to postoperative COR along the X axis. The determinant for clinical success after MCTDR, other than mere preservation of the ROM both at C2-7 and TDR levels, was restoration of COR from ventro-cranial location close to normal coordinates by posterior and inferior shifts. The position of COR along the X axis after MCTDR was important factor to determine maintenance of C2-7 ROM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research / Zhongguo Zuzhi Gongcheng Yanjiu is the property of Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background Context: Cervical disc replacement (CDR) aims to restore motion of the treated level to reduce the risk of adjacent segment disease (ASD) compared with spinal fusion. However, first‐generation articulating devices are unable to mimic the complex deformation kinematics of a natural disc. Thus, a biomimetic artificial intervertebral CDR (bioAID), containing a hydroxyethylmethacrylate (HEMA)—sodium methacrylate (NaMA) hydrogel core representing the nucleus pulposus, an ultra‐high‐molecular‐weight‐polyethylene fiber jacket as annulus fibrosus, and titanium endplates with pins for primary mechanical fixation, was developed. Purpose: To assess the initial biomechanical effect of the bioAID on the kinematic behavior of the canine spine, an ex vivo biomechanical study in 6‐degrees‐of‐freedom was performed. Study Design: A canine cadaveric biomechanical study. Methods: Six cadaveric canine specimens (C3‐C6) were tested in flexion‐extension (FE), lateral bending (LB) axial rotation (AR) using a spine tester in three conditions: intact, after C4‐C5 disc replacement with bioAID, and after C4‐C5 interbody fusion. A hybrid protocol was used where first the intact spines were subjected to a pure moment of ±1 Nm, whereafter the treated spines were subjected to the full range of motion (ROM) of the intact condition. 3D segmental motions at all levels were measured while recording the reaction torsion. Biomechanical parameters studied included ROM, neutral zone (NZ), and intradiscal pressure (IDP) at the adjacent cranial level (C3‐C4). Results: The bioAID retained the sigmoid shape of the moment‐rotation curves with a NZ similar to the intact condition in LB and FE. Additionally, the normalized ROMs at the bioAID‐treated level were statistically equivalent to intact during FE and AR while slightly decreased in LB. At the two adjacent levels, ROMs showed similar values for the intact compared to the bioAID for FE and AR and an increase in LB. In contrast, levels adjacent to the fused segment showed an increased motion in FE and LB as compensation for the loss of motion at the treated level. The IDP at the adjacent C3‐C4 level after implantation of bioAID was close to intact values. After fusion, increased IDP was found compared with intact but did not reach statistical significance. Conclusion: This study indicates that the bioAID can mimic the kinematic behavior of the replaced intervertebral disc and preserves that for the adjacent levels better than fusion. As a result, CDR using the novel bioAID is a promising alternative treatment for replacing severely degenerated intervertebral discs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: It is sometimes anticipated that patients with prior spine surgery will have a compromised outcome from future procedures. The purpose of this study was to compare TDR outcomes in patients with prior lumbar spine surgery to those with no previous surgery. Methods: Post hoc analysis was performed on 5-year follow-up data collected prospectively in the multi-centre FDA-regulated trial for the activL® Artificial Disc which involved 376 patients treated for single-level symptomatic disc degeneration. Clinical outcome measures included the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analog scales (VAS) assessing back and leg pain, SF-36, adverse events, and re-operations. Radiographic outcomes included flexion/extension range of motion (ROM) and translation of the operated segment. Patients were divided into two groups: Prior Lumbar Surgery (PLS, n = 92) and No Prior Lumbar Surgery (NPLS, n = 284). Results: Baseline demographics were similar in the two groups. ODI, VAS, and SF-36 Physical Component Scale scores improved significantly (p < 0.05) from baseline in both groups with improvements maintained through 5-year post-TDR with no significant differences between groups. There were no statistically significant differences in rates of serious device-related events, procedure-related events, or re-operations. While ROM was significantly less prior to TDR surgery in the PLS group, there was no significant difference in ROM at post-operative points. Conclusion: Prior lumbar spine surgery was not associated with compromised outcomes following TDR. These results are in line with reports from earlier studies with shorter follow-up, finding that non-destabilizing prior surgery is not a contra-indication for TDR provided that selection criteria are met. Level of Evidence I: Diagnostic: individual cross-sectional studies with the consistently applied reference standard and blinding. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Hybrid construction (HC) may be an ideal surgical strategy than noncontinuous total disc replacement (TDR) and noncontinuous anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in the treatment of noncontinuous cervical spondylopathy. However, there is still no consensus on the segmental selection for ACDF or TDR in HC. The study aims to analyse the effects of different segment selection of TDR and ACDF on cervical biomechanical characteristics after HC surgery. Methods: Twelve FEMs of C2–C7 were constructed based on CT images of 12 mild cervical spondylopathy volunteers. Two kinds of HC were introduced in our study: Fusion-arthroplasty group (Group 1), upper-level (C3/4) ACDF, and lower-level TDR (C5/6); Arthroplasty-fusion group (Group 2), upper-level (C3/4) TDR and lower-level ACDF (C5/6). The follow-load technique was simulated by applying an axial initial load of 73.6 N through the motion centre of FEM. A bending moment of 1.0 Nm was applied to the centre of C2 in all FEMs. Statistical analysis was carried out by SPSS 26.0. The significance threshold was 5% (P < 0.05). Results: In the comparison of ROMs between Group 1 and Group 2, the ROM in extension (P = 0.016), and lateral bending (P = 0.038) of C4/5 were significantly higher in Group 1 group. The average intervertebral disc pressures at C2/3 in all directions were significantly higher in Group 1 than those in Group 2 (P < 0.005). The average contact forces in facet joints of C2/3 (P = 0.007) were significantly more than that in Group 2; however, the average contact forces in facet joints of C6/7 (P < 0.001) in Group 1 group were significantly less than that in Group 2. Conclusions: Arthroplasty-fusion is preferred for intervertebral disc degeneration in adjacent upper segments. Fusion-arthroplasty is preferred for patients with lower intervertebral disc degeneration or lower posterior column degeneration. Trial registration: This research was registered in Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR1900020513). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Design: Prospective non-randomized single-center cohort study. Objectives: To analyze the quality of postoperative magnetic resonance imaging of 2 structurally different cervical disc arthroplasty devices at the index and adjacent levels. Methods: A non-randomized, comparative, prospective, single-center study included 40 patients (23 men and 17 women) aged 32 (26-40) years. Two study groups were utilized: in the first (n = 20), a titanium prosthesis was used; in the second (n = 20), a cobalt-chromium implant was used. Evaluation of MRI studies before and after surgery was performed using sagittal and axial T2 weighted images by 2 specialists who were blinded to the prosthesis that was used. To determine the quality of an MRI image, the classification of Jarvik 2000, the radiological and orthopedic scales for assessing artifacts were used. Results: There was good-to-excellent inter-observer agreement for all of the MR parameters used for the titanium and satisfactory-to-good for the cobalt chromium group. The analysis of the quality of postoperative imaging using the Jarvik 2000 scale showed a statistically significant deterioration in MR images in the cobalt chromium group (P < 0.001), compared to the titanium (P = 0.091). Following a single-level total arthroplasty, the titanium group had better MRI images according to radiological and orthopedic scales (P < 0.001). Conclusion: Titanium cervical disc arthroplasty devices result in superior postoperative MR imaging, as compared to cobalt chromium prostheses, as the latter significantly reduces image quality due to the pronounced ferromagnetic effect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate reasons and their frequency for why spine surgeons subspecializing in total disc replacement (TDR) performed lumbar fusion rather than TDR.Methods: The study was based on a consecutive series of 515 patients undergoing lumbar TDR or fusion during a 5-year period by three surgeons specializing in TDR. For each fusion patient, the reason for not performing TDR was recorded.Results: TDR was performed in 65.4% (n = 337) of patients and the remaining 34.6% (n = 178) underwent anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF ± posterior instrumentation). Of the 178 fusion patients, the most common reason for fusion was combined factors related to severe degenerative changes (n = 59, 11.5% of the study population). The second most common reason was > Grade 1 spondylolisthesis (n = 32, 6.2%), followed by insurance non-coverage (n = 24, 4.7%), and osteopenia/osteoporosis (n = 13, 2.5%). Fusion patients were significantly older than TDR patients (52.5 vs. 41.6 years; p < 0.01). There was no significant difference with respect to gender (41.2% female vs. 43.8% female, p > 0.05) or the percentage of patients with single-level surgery (61.2% vs. 56.7%, p > 0.05).Conclusion: The most common reason for not performing lumbar TDR was related to anatomic factors that may compromise stability of the operated segment and/or TDR functionality. The older age of fusion patients may be related to these factors. This study found that many patients are appropriate candidates for lumbar TDR. However, even among TDR subspecialists, fusion is preferred when there are factors that cannot be addressed with TDR and/or may compromise implant functionality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cervical disc replacement is an alternative option to an anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for cervical spine degenerative disease. We present the first reported case of a progressively worsening symptomatic spinal cord compression secondary to migration of the nucleus from a Mobi-C total disc replacement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The correlation between cervical alignment and clinical outcome of total disc replacement (TDR) surgery is arguable. We believe that this conflict exists because the parameters that influence the biomechanics of the cervical spine are not well understood, specifically the effect of TDR on different cervical alignments. Methods: A validated osseo-ligamentous model from C2-C7 was used in this study. The C2-C7 Cobb angle of the base model was modified to represent: lordotic (−10°), straight (0°), and kyphotic (+10°) cervical alignment. The TDR surgery was simulated at the C5-C6 segment. The range of motion (ROM), intradiscal pressure, annular stresses, and facet loads were computed for all the models. Results: The ROM results demonstrated kyphotic alignment after TDR surgery to be the most mobile when compared to intact base model (41% higher in flexion–extension, 51% higher in lateral bending, and 27% higher in axial rotation) followed by straight and lordotic alignment, respectively. The annular stresses for the kyphotic alignment when compared to intact base model were higher at the index level (33% higher in flexion–extension and 48% higher in lateral bending) compared to other alignments. The lordotic model demonstrated higher facet contact forces at the index level (75% higher in extension than kyphotic alignment, 51% higher in lateral bending than kyphotic alignment, and 78% higher in axial rotation than kyphotic alignment) when compared among the three alignment models. Conclusion: Preoperative cervical alignment should be an integral part of surgical planning for TDR surgery as different cervical alignments may significantly alter the postsurgical outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Our study aimed to evaluate non-inferiority of ProDisc-C to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in terms of clinical outcomes and incidence of adjacent segment disease (ASD) at 24-months post-surgery in Asian patients with symptomatic cervical disc disease (SCDD). Methods: This multicentre, prospective, randomized controlled trial was initiated after ethics committee approval at nine centres (China/Hong Kong/Korea/Singapore/Taiwan). Patients with single-level SCDD involving C3-C7-vertebral segments were randomized (2:1) into: group-A treated with ProDisc–C and group-B with ACDF. Assessments were conducted at baseline, 6-weeks, 3/6/12/18/24-months post-surgery and annually thereafter till 84-months. Primary endpoint was overall success at 24-months, defined as composite of: (1) ≥ 20% improvement in neck disability index (NDI); (2) maintained/improved neurologic parameters; (3) no implant removal/revision/re-operation at index level; and (4) no adverse/severe/life-threatening events. Results: Of 120 patients (80ProDisc–C,40ACDF), 76 and 37 were treated as per protocol (PP). Overall success (PP) was 76.5% in group-A and 81.8% in group-B at 24-months (p = 0.12), indicating no clear non-inferiority of ProDisc-C to ACDF. Secondary outcomes improved for both groups with no significant inter-group differences. Occurrence of ASD was higher in group-B with no significant between-group differences. Range of motion (ROM) was sustained with ProDisc–C but lost with ACDF at 24-months. Conclusion: Cervical TDR with ProDisc–C is feasible, safe, and effective for treatment of SCDD in Asians. No clear non-inferiority was demonstrated between ProDisc-C and ACDF. However, patients treated with ProDisc–C demonstrated significant improvement in NDI, neurologic success, pain scores, and 36-item-short-form survey, along with ROM preservation at 24-months. Enrolment difficulties resulted in inability to achieve pre-planned sample size to prove non-inferiority. Future Asian-focused, large-scale studies are needed to establish unbiased efficacy of ProDisc-C to ACDF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Cervical total disc replacement (CTDR) is an alternative to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for select patients that may preserve range of motion and reduce adjacent segment disease. Various CTDR prostheses are available; however, comparative data are limited. This study aimed to compare the short-term kinematic and radiological parameters of the M6-C, Mobi-C, and the CP-ESP prostheses. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included patients treated with CTDR between March 2005 and October 2020 at a single institution. Patients were included if their follow-up assessment included lateral erect and flexion/extension radiographs. The primary outcome assessed at 3-months postoperatively was range of motion, measured by the difference in functional spinal unit angle between flexion and extension. Results: A total of 131 CTDR levels (120 patients, 46.2 ± 10.1 years, 57% male) were included. Prostheses implanted included the M6-C (n = 52), Mobi-C (n = 54), and CP-ESP (n = 25). Range of motion varied significantly (8.2° ± 4.4° vs. 10.9° ± 4.7° vs. 6.1° ± 2.7°, P < 0.001). On post hoc analysis, the Mobi-C prosthesis demonstrated a significantly greater range of motion than either the M6-C prosthesis (P = 0.003) or CP-ESP (P < 0.001). Conclusion: Although the optimal range of motion for CTDR has not been established, short-term differences in the range of motion may guide the selection of CTDR prosthesis. Further studies with longer follow-up and consideration of clinical outcome measures are necessary. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The purpose of our meta-analyses is to find the most appropriate surgical technique treating lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD). Spinal fusion is the conventional treatment for lumbar DDD. Total disc replacement (TDR) has been developed to avoid negative effects of fusions by preserving functionality. To our knowledge, there is no evaluation comparing meta-analytically the clinical results of three different surgical techniques with same inclusion and exclusion criteria for treating DDD. Methods: The surgical techniques TDR, anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and circumferential fusion (CFF) are pairwise meta-analytically compared. Primary outcomes are pain measured by the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and function measured by the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Secondary outcomes are the mean number of complications per case (MNOC) at surgery and follow-up and the overall MNOC. Results: In our systematic search, we found finally six prospective studies with the minimum follow-up of two years: four randomized controlled trials and two cohort studies. In VAS and ODI, TDR is proved to be superior to ALIF and CCF (p < 0.05), whereat ALIF is more effective than CFF without statistical significance. CFF presents the best result in complications with the lowest overall MNOC (0.1), followed by TDR (1.2) and ALIF (1.5). Conclusion: According to our meta-analyses, we regard TDR to be the most appropriate surgical technique treating DDD, followed by ALIF. Further studies with a longer follow-up are needed using the same methodical approach to strengthen the VAS and ODI results and to explain the discrepant result to complications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Design: The study examined and compared four artificial cervical disks using validated finite element models. Purpose: To compare and contrast the biomechanical behavior of four artificial cervical disks by determining the external (range of motion) and internal (facet force and intradiscal pressure) responses following cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) and to elucidate any device design effects on cervical biomechanics. Overview of Literature: Despite CDA’s increasing popularity most studies compare the CDA procedure with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. There is little comparative evaluation of different artificial disks and, therefore, little understanding of how varying disk designs may influence spinal biomechanics. Methods: A validated C2–T1 finite element model was subjected to flexion-extension. CDAs were simulated at the C5–C6 level with the Secure-C, Mobi-C, Prestige LP, and Prodisc C prosthetic disks. We used a hybrid loading protocol to apply sagittal moments. Normalized motions at the index and adjacent levels, and intradiscal pressures and facet column loads were also obtained. Results: The ranges of motion at the index level increased after CDA. The Mobi-C prosthesis demonstrated the highest amount of flexion, followed by the Secure-C, Prestige LP, and Prodisc C. The Secure-C demonstrated the highest amount of extension, followed by the Mobi-C, Prodisc C, and Prestige LP. The motion decreased at the rostral and caudal adjacent levels. Facet forces increased at the index level and decreased at the rostral and caudal adjacent levels following CDA. Intradiscal pressures decreased at the adjacent levels for the Mobi-C, Secure-C, and Prodisc C. Conversely, the use of the Prestige LP increased intradiscal pressure at both adjacent levels. Conclusions: While all artificial disks were useful in restoring the index level motion, the Secure-C and Mobi-C translating abilities allowed for lower intradiscal pressures at the adjacent segments and may be the driving mechanism for minimizing adjacent segment degenerative arthritic changes. The facet joint integrity should also be considered in the clinical decision-making process for CDA selection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: We aimed to evaluate reliability, radiological outcomes, and the impacts of anterior cervical hybrid construction on the adjacent segments for the multilevel cervical degenerative disc disease (mCDDD) and spondylotic spinal stenosis (SSS). Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed using data extracted from the medical files of 195 patients (105 males, 90 females; mean age: 47.7 years). From 2008 to 2018, these patients underwent anterior cervical hybrid construction for symptomatic contiguous at least 2-level cervical degenerative disc diseases and cervical spondylosis. Clinical and radiological data including Neck Disability Index (NDI), visual analogue scale (VAS), local cervical degenerative disk disease in adjacent segments on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) views, and complications were reviewed. Results: The mean clinical and radiological follow-up was 45.2 months (range 24 to 102). Radiculopathy and/or myelopathy were the main clinical problems in all patients. The mean VAS scores of HC for arm pain were 7.4 ± 0.8 preoperatively; 2.8 ± 0.6, 1 month after surgery; 2.3 ± 0.6, 6 months after surgery; 1.8 ± 0.6, 12 month after surgery; and 1.6 ± 0.6, 24 months after surgery. The mean NDI scores (mean ± SD) of HC significantly improved after surgery (on admission, 57.2 ± 5.5%; 1 month after surgery, 27.35 ± 5.3%; 6 month after surgery, 21.43 ± 2.8%; 12 months after surgery, 21.9 ± 2.3%; 24 months after surgery, 20.6 ± 2.6%, p = 0.006). Hoarseness and dysphagia were the most common complications and osteophyte formation was the most frequent radiographic change. Conclusion: Anterior cervical hybrid construction appears to be an acceptable option in the management of multilevel cervical degenerative disc diseases and spondylotic spinal stenosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) immobilizes surgical segments and can lead to the development of adjacent segment degeneration and adjacent segment disease. Thus, cervical total disc replacement (CTDR) has been developed with the aim to preserve the biomechanics of spine. However, heterotopic ossification (HO), a complication following CTDR, can reduce the segmental range of motion (ROM) and defects the motion-preservation benefit of CTDR. The pathological process of HO in CTDR remains unknown. HO has been suggested to be a self-defense mechanism in response to the non-physiological biomechanics of the cervical spine following CTDR. The current literature review is concerned with the association between the biomechanical factors and HO formation and the clinical significance of HO in CTDR. Endplate coverage, disc height, segmental angle, and center of rotation may be associated with the development of HO. The longer the follow-up, the higher the rate of ROM-limiting HO. Regardless of the loss of motion-preservation benefit of CTDR in patients with HO, CTDR confers patients with a motion-preservation period before the development of ROM-limiting HO. This may delay the development of adjacent segment degeneration compared with ACDF. Future clinical studies should explore the association between HO and changes in biomechanical factors of the cervical spine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The effectiveness of lumbar total disc replacement (TDR) with different prostheses for sagittal alignment has been reported previously. However, there are only few reports on Activ L TDR and no specific evidence regarding whether sagittal alignment affects the clinical outcomes. Methods: Eighty-seven patients who underwent mono- or bi-segmental lumbar TDR with Activ L were studied. The films of the upright anteroposterior and lateral spine in neutral, flexion, and extension positions were obtained before surgery and at 1 month and 1 and 3 years after surgery. The radiographic parameters such as lumbar lordosis (LL), index level lordosis (IL), pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), segmental lordosis (SL), and sacral slope (SS) were measured based on the lateral upright radiographs. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and visual analog scale (VAS) pre- and post-operatively. Results: Eighty-seven patients with complete radiographic data were available for a 3-year follow-up period. Of these, 66 received a single-level TDR, and 21 received a 2-level TDR. At 1 month, the mean LL was similar to the pre-operative data and then was significantly increased to 45.1° at 3 years. On average, the IL tended to significantly increase, while the mean SL at L–5 was increased from 16.5° pre-operatively to 21.0° at 3 years. The mean SL at L1–2, L2–3, L3–4, and L5–S1; PI; PT; and SS showed no obvious difference after 3 years. In contrast, VAS and ODI scores showed significant improvement after surgery. Conclusions: Activ L TDR showed a favorable effect on sagittal alignment, enhancing the IL while preserving the LL and SS. However, satisfactory clinical results for over a 3-year follow-up were not affected by sagittal alignment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The principles of choosing an appropriate implant height remain controversial in total cervical disc replacement (TDR). By performing an in vitro biomechanical study and exploring the biomechanical impact of implant height on facet joint and motion function, the study aimed to offer valid proposals regarding implant height selection during TDR. Methods: A total of 6 fresh-frozen male cadaveric cervical spines (C2–C7) with 5 mm intervertebral disc height at C5/6 level were enrolled in the study. Specimens with the intact condition and with different height artificial discs were tested. Facet joint pressures and range of motion under each condition were recorded using a specialized machine. Results: The artificial disc heights that were involved in this study were 5 mm, 6 mm, and 7 mm. The range of motion decreased along with the increment of implant height, while facet joint pressure showed an opposite trend. Specimens with a 5 mm implant height could provide a similar range of motion (11.8° vs. 12.2° in flexion-extension, 8.7° vs. 9.0° in rotation, 7.9° vs. 8.2° in lateral bending) and facet joint pressure (27.8 psi vs. 25.2 psi in flexion, 59.7 psi vs. 58.9 psi in extension, 24.0 psi vs. 22.7 psi in rotation, 32.0 psi vs. 28.8 psi in lateral bending) compared with intact specimens. Facet joint pressure of specimens with 6 mm implant height (≥ 1 mm in height) increased during flexion at the C5–6 segment (30.4 psi vs. 25.2 psi, P = 0.076). However, specimens with 7 mm implant height (≥ 2 mm in height) showed a significant reduction in motion (9.5° vs. 12.2° in flexion-extension, P < 0.001) and increment of facet joint pressure at C5–6 segment (44.6 psi vs. 25.2 psi in flexion, 90.3 psi vs. 58.9 psi in extension, P < 0.0001) and adjacent segments. Conclusions: This study suggested that an appropriate artificial disc height can achieve near-normal biomechanical properties and is recommended. We should be very cautious when using artificial discs ≥ 1 mm in height compared to normal. However, implants ≥ 2 mm in height compared to normal significantly increased the facet joint pressure and decreased the range of motion; therefore, it should not be used in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Meta-analyses on the comparison between fusion and prosthesis in the treatment of cervical radiculopathy mainly analyse studies including mixed patient populations: patients with radiculopathy with and without myelopathy. The outcome for patients with myelopathy is different compared to those without. Furthermore, apart from decompression of the spinal cord, restriction of motion is one of the cornerstones of the surgical treatment of spondylotic myelopathy. From this point of view, the results for arthroplasty might be suboptimal for this category of patients. Comparing clinical outcome in patients exclusively suffering from radiculopathy is therefore a more valid method to compare the true clinical effect of the prosthesis to that of fusion surgery.Aim: The objective of this study was to compare clinical outcome of cervical arthroplasty (ACDA) to the clinical outcome of fusion (ACDF) after anterior cervical discectomy in patients exclusively suffering from radiculopathy, and to evaluate differences with mixed patient populations.Methods: A literature search was completed in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, COCHRANE, CENTRAL and CINAHL using a sensitive search strategy. Studies were selected by predefined selection criteria (i.a.) patients exclusively suffering from cervical radiculopathy), and risk of bias was assessed using a validated Cochrane Checklist adjusted for this purpose. An additional overview of results was added from articles considering a mix of patients suffering from myelopathy with or without radiculopathy.Results: Eight studies were included that exclusively compared intervertebral devices in radiculopathy patients. Additionally, 29 articles concerning patients with myelopathy with or without radiculopathy were studied in a separate results table. All articles showed intermediate to high risk of bias. There was neither a difference in decrease in mean NDI score between the prosthesis (20.6 points) and the fusion (20.3 points) group, nor was there a clinically important difference in neck pain (VAS). Comparing these data to the mixed population data demonstrated comparable mean values, except for the 2-year follow-up NDI values in the prosthesis group: mixed group patients that received a prosthesis reported a mean NDI score of 15.6, indicating better clinical outcome than the radiculopathy patients that received a prosthesis though not reaching clinical importance.Conclusions: ACDF and ACDA are comparably effective in treating cervical radiculopathy due to a herniated disc in radiculopathy patients. Comparing the 8 radiculopathy with the 29 mixed population studies demonstrated that no clinically relevant differences were present in clinical outcome between the two types of patients. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The purpose was to investigate reasons and their frequency for why total disc replacement (TDR) specialty surgeons performed anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) rather than TDR.Methods: A consecutive series of 464 patients undergoing cervical spine surgery during a 5-year period by three TDR specialty surgeons was reviewed. For each ACDF, the reason for not performing TDR was recorded.Results: TDR was performed in 76.7% of patients (n = 356) and ACDF in 23.3% (n = 108). The most common reason for ACDF versus TDR was anatomical (conditions that may not be adequately addressed with TDR and/or may interfere with device function), which occurred in 64 of 464 patients (13.79%). The second most common reason was insurance (denial/lack of coverage n = 17, 3.23%), and deformity/kyphosis not addressable with TDR was noted in 13 (2.80%). Pseudoarthrosis repair led to ACDF in three patients (0.65%), two did not receive TDR due to osteoporosis (0.43%), and in two others (0.43%) ACDF was undertaken due to high risk of heterotopic ossification. There was one case (0.22%) each of: nickel allergy, trauma with posterior element fracture, TDR removal, multiple prior cervical spine surgeries, concern about artifact on future imaging studies, benign osteoblastic bone, and limitation to adequate surgical approach for TDR. ACDF patients' mean age was significantly greater than TDR patients' (55.3 vs. 46.7 years; p < 0.01). TDR group had significantly more single-level procedures than ACDF (60.8% vs. 43.5%; p < 0.05).Conclusion: The most common reason for ACDF versus TDR was anatomy that may compromise segmental stability and/or TDR functionality. Older age and greater number of operated levels may be related to anatomical factors, primarily significant osteophytes and severely degenerated facets. These factors, as well as deformity/kyphosis, are more common in older patients and require multi-level treatment. This study found that many patients are good cervical TDR candidates; however, even among TDR specialists, ACDF may be preferred where it is prudent to not take undue risks. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: We investigated a new metric for assessing the quality of motion of the cervical segments over the arc of extension-to-flexion motion after cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA). We quantified: (1) the amount of motion contributed by individual spinal segments to the total cervical spine motion, termed segmental motion fraction, and its variation throughout the arc of extension-to-flexion motion and (2) how cervical disc arthroplasty using two distinct prosthesis designs may influence the segmental motion contributions. Materials and methods: We tested 16 human C3–T1 spine specimens under physiologic loads; first intact, after CDA at C5–C6, and then at C5–C6 and C6–C7. The M6-C (Orthofix, USA) and Mobi-C (Zimmer, USA) disc prostheses were used in eight specimens each. Results and conclusions: The designs of the cervical disc prostheses tested significantly influenced the variation in segmental motion fraction as the spine underwent motion between the endpoints of extension and flexion. While the mean segmental motion contribution to the total cervical motion was not influenced by prosthesis design, the way the motion took place between the extension and flexion endpoints was significantly influenced. The M6-C artificial disc restored physiologic motion quality such that implanted segments continued to function in harmony with other segments of the cervical spine as measured before arthroplasty. Conversely, the Mobi-C prosthesis, while maintaining average motion contributions similar to the pre-implantation values, demonstrated large deviations in motion contribution over the extension-to-flexion arc motion in ten of 16 implanted segments. Such non-physiologic implant kinematics could cause excessive prosthesis wear and motion and stress shielding at adjacent segments. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy is one of the most frequent ailments encountered by spine surgeon. Motion‑preserving surgeries in cervical spine is a standard of care due to its certain advantages such as biomechanical anatomical conformity, reduced chances of adjacent segment degeneration, and revision surgeries. While there is abundant data from some centers, data from developing countries are still limited. Aims: The aim was to study the clinico‑radiological outcome of single‑level and hybrid total disc replacement (TDR) with Spineart Baguera®‑C cervical prosthesis for cervical myeloradiculopathy. Settings and Design: Retrospective study. Materials and Methods: Retrospective analysis of the 29 consecutive patient undergoing single level TDR and hybrid fixation (i.e., TDR with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion) with Spineart Baguera®‑C cervical prosthesis for myeloradiculopathy from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2017, was done. Radiological features and outcome were studied from data collected on Insta‑picture archiving and communication system. Statistical Analysis Used: SAS 9.4 was used for all computations. Results on continuous measurements were presented as mean and standard deviation (min‑max) and results on categorical measurements were presented as numbers (n) and percentages. Results: Twenty‑nine patients were included in the study. The mean age was 43.31 ± 9.04 years with 14 males and 15 females. The most common level of TDR was C5‑C6 (72.41%). The mean follow‑up duration was 3.14 years ± 1.13 years (2–5 years). The mean hospital stay was 4.93 ± 2.12 days. The mean neck disability index (NDI) at admission was 27.24 ± 7.66 which decreased to 6.41 ± 4.29 at final follow‑up. Conclusions: Two‑year data on treatment with Spineart Baguera®‑C cervical prosthesis shows significantly improved NDI, visual analog scale (arm) with maintenance of movement of the prosthesis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research / Zhongguo Zuzhi Gongcheng Yanjiu is the property of Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Study Design: Retrospective design/spine clinic and tertiary referral hospital. Purpose: This study investigated the association between shifted location of center of rotation (COR) and subsequent surgical outcomes and identified radiological parameters that corresponded to COR change after multilevel cervical total disc replacement (MCTDR). Overview of Literature: Cervical total disc replacement (TDR) maintains normal cervical kinematics after surgery. However, there is a paucity of literature analyzing the relationship between radiological shifts of COR and subsequent clinical success, especially when it comes to the issue of MCTDR switch. Methods: This study included 24 consecutive patients treated with MCTDR following the diagnosis of multilevel cervical disc herniation or stenosis. Numeric rating scale, range of motion (ROM) at both C2-7 segment and TDR implanted levels, and location of COR at TDR level were evaluated pre- and post-MCTDR. These parameters were compared between patients who experienced successful and unsuccessful pain relief. Results: The inherent CORs relatively at ventrocranial coordinates demonstrated significant migrations to dorsocaudal location, more prominent shifts for the successful group, after MCTDR switch. The unsuccessful group showed markedly reduced C2-7 ROM and reduced angular improvement at C2-7 segment and MCTDR level compared with the successful group. Postoperative C2-7 ROM was related to postoperative COR along the x-axis. Conclusions: Aside from ROM preservation at both C2-7 and TDR levels, COR restoration from ventrocranial location close to normal coordinates by posterior and inferior shifts was marked as a clinical success after MCTDR. The COR position along the x-axis after MCTDR was an important factor to determine maintenance of C2-7 ROM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: As yet, there are no studies describing a relationship between radiographic subsidence after lumbar total disc replacement (TDR) and patient symptoms. To investigate if subsidence, in terms of penetrated bone volume or angular rotation over time (ΔPBV and ΔAR), is related to clinical outcome. To assess if subsidence can be predicted by position implant asymmetry (IA) or relative size of the TDR, areal undersizing index (AUI) on direct post-operative radiographs.Methods: Retrospective cohort study consists of 209 consecutive patients with lumbar TDR for degenerative disc disease. A three-dimensional graphical representation of the implant in relation to the bony endplates was created on conventional radiographs. Consequently, the PBV, AR, IA and AUI were calculated, direct post-operative (DPO) and at last follow-up (LFU). For clinical evaluation, patients with substantial pain (VAS ≥ 50) and malfunction (ODI ≥ 40) were considered failures.Results: At a mean follow-up of 16.7 years, 152 patients (73%) were available for analysis. In 32 patients, revision by spinal fusion had been performed. Both ΔAR (4.33° vs. 1.83°, p = 0.019) and ΔPBV (1448.4 mm3 vs. 747.3 mm3, p = 0.003) were significantly higher in the failure-compared to the success-group. Using ROC curves, thresholds for symptomatic subsidence were defined as ΔPBV ≥ 829 mm3 or PBV-LFU ≥ 1223 mm3 [area under the curve (AUC) 0.723, p = 0.003 and 0.724, p = 0.005, respectively]. Associations between symptomatic subsidence and AUI-DPO ≥ 0.50 (AUC 0.750, p = 0.002) and AR-DPO ≥ 3.95° (AUC 0.690, p = 0.022) were found.Conclusion: Subsidence of a TDR is associated with a worse clinical outcome. The occurrence of subsidence is higher in case of incorrect placement or shape mismatch. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To report clinical and radiographic outcomes, rate of complications and influence on spinal alignment on long-term follow-up (FU) of patients who underwent lumbar total disc arthroplasty (TDR), bringing some evidence to determine the profile of the most well-suited patients for TDR. Methods: A retrospective review of patients underwent TDR for low back pain from degenerative disc disease (DDD) resistant to conservative treatment was performed. Demographic features, surgical data, clinical and radiographic outcomes, complications and spinopelvic parameters were evaluated. Results: Thirty patients (32 TDR) were included with a mean FU of 164 ± 36.5 months. The clinical outcomes measured by visual analogue scale and Oswestry Disability Index showed a significant improvement between preoperative and 1-year FU (p < 0.01). No significant temporal variance has been identified between 1-year and long-term follow-up (p > 0.05). The surgical revision rate was 10%. The overall rate of complications was 20%. At final follow-up, the mobility of the prosthesis was preserved in 68.75% of the cases, and 73.3% of the patients were globally well aligned. Conclusion: The optimal surgical indication is crucial to achieve excellent clinical and radiological outcomes. According to the literature and to our experience, we underline the importance of a coronal deformity < 15° Cobb angle and a Roussouly type 1 or 2 as the profile of the most well-suited patient for TDR. Our long-term results confirm the existing evidence about efficacy and safety of TDR as a reliable option, in optimal surgery indication, to treat DDD. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Adverse clinical outcomes for total disc arthroplasty (TDA), including subsidence, heterotopic ossification, and adjacent‐level vertebral fracture, suggest problems with the underlying biomechanics. To gain insight, we investigated the role of size and stiffness of TDA implants on load‐transfer within a vertebral body. Uniquely, we accounted for the realistic multi‐scale geometric features of the trabecular micro‐architecture and cortical shell. Using voxel‐based finite element analysis derived from a micro‐computed tomography scan of one human L1 vertebral body (74‐μm‐sized elements), a series of generic elliptically shaped implants were analyzed. We parametrically modeled three implant sizes (small, medium [a typical clinical size], and large) and three implant materials (metallic, E = 100 GPa; polymeric, E = 1 GPa; and tissue‐engineered, E = 0.01 GPa). Analyses were run for two load cases: 800 N in uniform compression and flexion‐induced anterior impingement. Results were compared to those of an intact model without an implant and loaded instead via a disc‐like material. We found that TDA implantation increased stress in the bone tissue by over 50% in large portions of the vertebra. These changes depended more on implant size than material, and there was an interaction between implant size and loading condition. For the small implant, flexion increased the 98th‐percentile of stress by 32 ± 24% relative to compression, but the overall stress distribution and trabecular‐cortical load‐sharing were relatively insensitive to loading mode. In contrast, for the medium and large implants, flexion increased the 98th‐percentile of stress by 42 ± 9% and 87 ± 29%, respectively, and substantially re‐distributed stress within the vertebra; in particular overloading the anterior trabecular centrum and cortex. We conclude that TDA implants can substantially alter stress deep within the lumbar vertebra, depending primarily on implant size. For implants of typical clinical size, bending‐induced impingement can substantially increase stress in local regions and may therefore be one factor driving subsidence in vivo. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Dynamic stabilization of the spine has been performed since the 1990s with the double purpose of restoring spinal segmental stability and allowing residual movement at the operated level. When we take into account the different motion-preserving devices and the spinal areas where they are applied, we can identify three categories of spinal implants: anterior cervical, anterior lumbar, and posterior lumbar. However, as in all prosthetic procedures performed in orthopedic surgery, the life span of a joint replacement device is a central topic of discussion, and this is true also for spinal dynamic devices, being revision surgery a complex procedure in specific cases.Materials and Methods: We performed a literature review on the different dynamic spinal implants and the most common causes of failure, providing clinical cases as illustrative options for revision surgery.Results: The review of the literature showed a 11.3% to 22.6% revision rate in posterior lumbar dynamic systems, with a peak of 40.6% in case of adjacent segment disease. In lumbar TDRs, infection and severe dislocations are the most frequent causes of anterior revisions, while posterior pedicle screw fixation could be a suitable option in minimal subsidence or TDR displacement. An algorithm for the planning of revision surgery is proposed.Conclusions: Surgical revision of spinal dynamic implants could be a demanding surgery especially in anterior approaches. Anterior cervical revision remains globally safe, but careful preoperative evaluation of vessels and ureter are suggested to avoid intraoperative complications in the lumbar spine. In posterior revision, a proper sagittal alignment of the spine should be restored. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Design: Systematic review Objective: Examine the clinical evidence for the use of osteobiologics in hybrid surgery (combined anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and total disc replacement (TDR)) in patients with multilevel cervical degenerative disc disease (DDD). Methods: PubMed and Embase were searched between January 2000 and August 2020. Clinical studies investigating 18-80 year old patients with multilevel cervical DDD who underwent hybrid surgery with or without the use of osteobiologics were considered eligible. Two reviewers independently screened and assessed the identified articles. The methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS) tool and the risk of bias (RoB 2.0) assessment tool were used to assess risk of bias. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) was used to evaluate quality of evidence across studies per outcome. Results: Eleven studies were included. A decrease in cervical range of motion was observed in most studies for both the hybrid surgery and the control groups consisting of stand-alone ACDF or TDR. Fusion rates of 70-100% were reported in both the hybrid surgery and control groups consisting of stand-alone ACDF. The hybrid surgery group performed better or comparable to the control group in terms of adjacent segment degeneration. Studies reported an improvement in visual analogue scale for pain and neck disability index values after surgery compared to preoperative scores for both treatment groups. The included studies had moderate methodological quality. Conclusions: There is insufficient evidence for assessing the use of osteobiologics in multilevel hybrid surgery and additional high quality and controlled research is deemed essential. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Several studies showed encouraging results after total disc replacement (TDR) in patients with cervical-brachial syndrome (CBS).Objective: The aim of this study was to supplement the existing documentation of results after total disc replacement and to underline the importance of the correct indication.Methods: The clinical and radiological outcome of 34 patients was evaluated in a 2-year follow-up by several parameters as the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain, the Neck Disability Index (NDI) and the Kellgren and Lawrence Score.Results: The median values for NDI changed from 65% (20-90) before surgery to 20% (0-86) 2 years after surgery (p< 0.0001). Pain intensity had an average rate of reduction from 8.4 ± 2 cm (VAS scale 0-10 cm) to 2.9 ± 2 cm (p< 0.0001). A median of 1 (0-3) was calculated for the Kellgren and Lawrence Score in the affected segment preoperatively. Due to loosening in five cases the TDR was removed and changed into anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF). In all of these five cases a preoperative Kellgren and Lawrence Score of 2 or 3 was calculated and five of five patients (100%) were smokers.Conclusion: The use of TDR in nonsmoking patients with a low preoperative Kellgren and Lawrence Score of 0-1 lead to a clinically and radiologically successful outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study is a retrospective cost-benefit analysis of cervical anterior interbody fusion and cervical artificial disc replacement, which are the main surgical methods to treat degenerative cervical disc disease. Methods: We analyzed 156 patients who underwent anterior cervical disc fusion and cervical artificial disc replacement from January 1, 2008 to December 31, 2009, diagnosed with degenerative cervical disc disorder. In this study, the costs and benefits were analyzed by using quality adjusted life year (QALY) as the outcome index for patients undergoing surgery, and a Markov model was used for the analysis. Only direct medical costs were included in the analysis; indirect medical costs were excluded. Data were analyzed with TreeAge Pro 2015™ (TreeAge Software, Inc, Williamstown, MA, USA). Results: Patients who underwent cervical anterior fusion had a total cost of KRW 2501807/USD 2357 over 5 years and obtained a utility of 3.72 QALY. Patients who underwent cervical artificial disc replacement received 4.18 QALY for a total of KRW 3685949/USD 3473 over 5 years. The cumulative cost-effectiveness ratio of cervical spine replacement surgery was KRW 2549511/QALY (USD 2402/QALY), which was lower than the general Korean payment standard. Conclusion: Both cervical anterior fusion and cervical artificial disc replacement are cost-effective treatments for patients with degenerative cervical disc disease. Cervical artificial disc replacement may be an effective alternative to obtain more benefits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Wear debris-induced osteolysis is a common cause of arthroplasty failure in several joints including the knee, hip and intervertebral disc. Debris from the prosthesis can trigger an inflammatory response that leads to aseptic loosening and prosthesis failure. In the spine, periprosthetic pain also occurs following accumulation of wear debris through neovascularization of the disc. The role of the immune system in the pathobiology of periprosthetic osteolysis of joint replacements is debatable. Areas covered: We discussed the stimulation of pro-inflammatory and pro-protective and pro-regenerative pathways due to debris from the prosthetics. The balance between the two pathways may determine the outcome results. Also, the role of cytokines and immune cells in periprosthetic inflammation in the etiology of osteolysis is critically reviewed. Expert commentary: Therapies targeting the inflammatory process associated with ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene wear debris could reduce implant failure. Additionally, therapies targeting neovascularization of discs following arthroplasty could mitigate periprosthetic pain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We present two cases of unexpected postoperative intractable cervicalgia due to over-sized implant insertion during simple anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) or artificial disc replacement (ADR). These patients experienced severe cervicalgia mostly related to their neck motion even after standard cervical operations. In both cases, the restored disc heights after the operations were prominently greater than the preoperative disc heights. The patients had not responded to any of the conservative treatments, and unloading of these excessively distracted segments through ultimate revision surgery led to dramatic pain relief. This report emphasizes the increase in distractional forces that takes place after a standard ACDF or ADR, as well as the importance of a proper sized implant. It also includes the reviews of other biomechanical or clinical reports dealing with this issue, thereby cautioning the surgeons not to disregard these factors, which might have an adverse effect in patients with cervicalgia even after radiographically successful cervical procedures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Fusion is one of the most commonly performed spinal procedures, indicated for a wide range of spinal problems. Elimination of motion though results in accelerated degeneration of the adjacent level, known as adjacent level disease. Motion preservation surgical methods were developed in order to overcome this complication. These methods include total disc replacement, laminoplasty, interspinous implants and dynamic posterior stabilization systems. The initial enthusiasm about these methods was followed by certain concerns about their clinical usefulness and their results. The main indications for total disc replacement are degenerative disc disease, but the numerous contraindications for this method make it difficult to find the right candidate. Application of interspinous implants has shown good results in patients with spinal stenosis, but a more precise definition is needed regarding the severity of spinal stenosis up to which these implants can be used. Laminoplasty has several advantages and less complications compared to fusion and laminectomy in patients with cervical myelopathy/radiculopathy. Dynamic posterior stabilization could replace conventional fusion in certain cases, but also in this case the results are successful only in mild to moderate cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective : The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 3-level hybrid surgery (HS), which combines fusion and cervical disc replacement (CDR), compared to 3-level fusionin patient with cervical spondylosis involving 3 levels. Methods : Patients in the anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) group (n=30) underwent 3-level fusion and the HS group (n=19) underwent combined surgery with fusion and CDR. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the visual analogue scale for the arm, the neck disability index (NDI), Odom criteria and postoperative complications. The cervical range of motion (ROM), fusion rate and adjacent segments degeneration were assessed with radiographs. Results : Significant improvements in arm pain relief and functional outcome were observed in ACDF and HS group. The NDI in the HS group showed better improvement 6 months after surgery than that of the ACDF group. The ACDF group had a lower fusion rate, higher incidence of device related complications and radiological changes in adjacent segments compared with the HS group. The better recovery of cervical ROM was observed in HS group. However, that of the ACDF group was significantly decreased and did not recover. Conclusion : The HS group was better than the ACDF group in terms of NDI, cervical ROM, fusion rate, incidence of postoperative complications and adjacent segment degeneration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The purpose of this study was to summarize the available evidence about total lumbar disc replacement (TDR), focusing our attention on four main topics: clinical and functional outcomes, comparison with fusion surgery results, rate of complications and influence on sagittal balance.Materials and Methods: We systematically searched Pubmed, Embase, Medline, Medscape, Google Scholar and Cochrane library databases in order to answer our four main research questions. Effective data were extracted after the assessment of methodological quality of the trials.Results: Fifty-nine pertinent papers were included. Clinical and functional scores show statistically significant improvements, and they last at all time points compared to baseline. The majority of the articles show there is no significant difference between TDR groups and fusion groups. The literature shows similar rates of complications between the two surgical procedures.Conclusions: TDR showed significant safety and efficacy, comparable to lumbar fusion. The major advantages of a lumbar TDR over fusion include maintenance of segmental motion and the restoration of the disc height, allowing patients to find their own spinal balance. Disc arthroplasty could be a reliable option in the treatment of degenerative disc disease in years to come.Level Of Evidence: II. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose of review: Lumbar disc replacement has been a surgical alternative to fusion surgery for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD) for many years. Despite enthusiasm after the approval of the first devices, implantation rates have remained low, especially in the USA. The goal of this review is to provide a general overview of lumbar disc replacement in order to comprehend the successes and obstacles to widespread adoption. Recent findings: Although a large amount of evidence-based data including satisfactory long-term results is available, implantation rates in the USA have not increased in the last decade. Possible explanations for this include strict indications for use, challenging surgical techniques, lack of device selection, fear of late complications or revision surgeries, and reimbursement issues. Summary: Recent publications can address some of the past concerns, but there still remain obstacles to widespread adoption. Upcoming data on long-term outcome, implant durability and possible very late complications will determine the future of lumbar disc replacement surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Design: Retrospective review of a patient cohort through a prospective study. Purpose: To determine whether there are correlations between radiographic measurements, including sacral slope (SS) and pelvic incidence (PI), and self-reported clinical outcomes among single-level L5/S1 ProDisc-L patients. Overview of Literature: The lumbosacral juncture presents unique biomechanical challenges with respect to artificial disc replacement (ADR) because of its orientation and consequential shear loading. Reports of inferior outcomes at L5/S1 compared to those of the outcomes at the levels above, including increased facet joint pain, suggest a relationship with the sacral inclination at L5/S1. Methods: Plain standing lateral radiographs of 71 patients (age, 26-65 years) who underwent ADR at L5/S1 for degenerative disc disease were reviewed. SS and PI were measured based on pretreatment and initial follow-up standing films. Patient's average adjusted self assessments included the Oswestry disability index and visual analog scale for pain 2 years after ADR. Correlation coefficients were computed to evaluate relationships between radiographic parameters and clinical outcomes. Analysis of covariance was used to evaluate multivariate relationships among factors, including radiographic parameters, body mass index (BMI), and clinical outcomes. Results: SS and PI values were obtained from 71 patients. The average SS was 33.3° and average PI was 39.9°. At the 24-month follow-up, no significant correlations (p =0.05) were observed between radiographic parameters and clinical outcomes. BMI, age, and sex did not explain any variability in the relationships between clinical outcomes and SS and PI. Conclusions: We reviewed a large range of SS angles and found no associations between SS, PI, or BMI and clinical outcomes after ADR at L5/S1. These preliminary results demonstrate that ADR provided maintainence of pain relief and functional improvement for a wide range of SS angles, suggesting that steeper angles are not a contraindication for ADR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Many investigators have reported the financial conflicts of interest (COI), which could result in potential bias in the reporting of outcomes for patients undergoing total disc replacement (TDR) rather than anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). This bias may be subconsciously introduced by the investigator in a non-blinded radiographic review. The purpose of this study was to determine if bias was present when a group of spine specialists rated adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) following cervical TDR or ACDF.Methods: Potential bias in the assessment of ASD was evaluated through the reviews of cervical radiographs (pre- and 6 years post-operative) from patients participating in the ProDisc-C FDA trial (ProDisc-C IDE #G030059). The index level was blinded on all radiographs during the first review, but unblinded in the second. Five reviewers (a radiologist, two non-TDR surgeons, and two TDR surgeons), two of whom had a COI with the ProDisc-C trial sponsor, assessed ASD on a three point scale: yes, no, or unable to assess. Intra- and inter-rater reliabilities between all raters were assessed by the Kappa statistic.Results: The intra-rater reliability between reviews was substantial, indicating little to no bias in assessing ASD development/progression. The Kappa statistics were 0.580 and 0.644 for the TDR surgeons (p < 0.0001), 0.718 and 0.572 for the non-TDR surgeons (p < 0.0001), and 0.642 for the radiologist (p < 0.0001). Inter-rater reliability for the blinded review ranged from 0.316 to 0.607 (p < 0.0001) and from 0.221 to 0.644 (p < 0.0001) for the unblinded review.Conclusions: The knowledge of the surgical procedure performed did not bias the assessment of ASD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Total disc arthroplasty can be a viable alternative to fusion for degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine. The correct placement of the prosthesis within 3 mm from midline is critical for optimal function. Intra-operative radiographic error could lead to malposition of the prosthesis. The objective of this study was first to measure the effect of fluoroscopy angle on the placement of prosthesis under fluoroscopy. Secondly, determine the visual accuracy of the placement of artificial discs using different anatomical landmarks (pedicle, waist, endplate, spinous process) under fluoroscopy.Methods: Artificial discs were implanted into three cadaver specimens at L2-3, L3-4, and L4-L5. Fluoroscopic images were obtained at 0°, 2.5°, 5°, 7.5°, 10°, and 15° from the mid axis. Computerized tomography (CT) scans were obtained after the procedure. Distances were measured from each of the anatomic landmarks to the center of the implant on both fluoroscopy and CT. The difference between fluoroscopy and CT scans was compared to evaluate the position of prosthesis to each anatomic landmark at different angles.Results: The differences between the fluoroscopy to CT measurements from the implant to pedicle was 1.31 mm, p < 0.01; implant to waist was 1.72 mm, p < 0.01; implant to endplate was 1.99 mm, p < 0.01; implant to spinous process was 3.14 mm, p < 0.01. When the fluoroscopy angle was greater than 7.5°, the difference between fluoroscopy and CT measurements was greater than 3 mm for all landmarks.Conclusions: A fluoroscopy angle of 7.5° or more can lead to implant malposition greater than 3 mm. The pedicle is the most accurate of the anatomic landmarks studied for placement of total artificial discs in the lumbar spine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Although many meta-analyses have been performed to compare total disc replacement (TDR) and fusion for treating lumbar degenerative disc disease (LDDD), their findings are inconsistent. This study aimed to conduct a systematic review of overlapping meta-analyses comparing TDR with fusion for treating LDDD, to assist decision makers in selection among conflicting meta-analyses, and to provide treatment recommendations based on the best available evidence.Methods: This study was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. Multiple databases were comprehensively searched for meta-analyses comparing TDR with fusion for treating LDDD. Meta-analyses only comprising randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Two authors independently assessed meta-analysis quality and extracted data. The Jadad decision algorithm was used to ascertain which meta-analyses represented the best evidence.Results: A total of five meta-analyses were included. All these studies only included RCTs were determined as Level-II evidence. The scores of Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) ranged from 6 to 9 (median 7). A high-quality Cochrane review was chosen according to the Jadad algorithm. This best available evidence found that statistical significances were observed between TDR and fusion for LDDD regarding disability, pain relief, and pain in the short term, but it was not over clinically important differences. The prevent effects on adjacent segment and facet joint degeneration, as the primary goal of adopting TDR stated by the manufacturers, were not appropriately evaluated.Conclusions: There is discord in results from meta-analyses that assessed TDR and fusion for LDDD. According to this systematic review of overlapping meta-analyses comparing TDR and fusion for LDDD, the current best available evidence suggests that TDR may be an effective technique for the treatment of selected patients with LDDD, and is at least equal to lumbar fusion in the short term. However, considering that disadvantages may appear after years, spine surgeons should be cautions about performing TDR on a large scale. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective : To compare the clinical outcomes and biomechanical effects of total disc replacement (TDR) and posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF) and to propose relative inclusion criteria. Methods : Thirty-five patients who underwent surgery between 2006 and 2008 were included. All patients had single-level disease and only radiculopathy. The overall sagittal balance and angle and height of a functional segmental unit (FSU; upper and lower vertebral body of the operative lesion) were assessed by preoperative and follow-up radiographs. C2-7 range of motion (ROM), FSU, and the adjacent segment were also checked. Results : The clinical outcome of TDR (group A) was tended to be superior to that of PCF (group B) without statistical significance. In the group A, preoperative and postoperative upper adjacent segment level motion values were 8.6±2.3 and 8.4±2.0, and lower level motion values were 8.4±2.2 and 8.3±1.9. Preoperative and postoperative FSU heights were 37.0±2.1 and 37.1±1.8. In the group B, upper level adjacent segment motion values were 8.1±2.6 and 8.2±2.8, and lower level motion values were 6.5±3.3 and 6.3±3.1. FSU heights were 37.1±2.0 and 36.2±1.8. The postoperative FSU motion and height changes were significant (p<0.05). The patient's satisfaction rates for surgery were 88.2% in group A and 88.8% in group B. Conclusion : TDR and PCF have favorable outcomes in patients with unilateral soft disc herniation. However, patients have different biomechanical backgrounds, so the patient's biomechanical characteristics and economic status should be understood and treated using the optimal procedure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The effect of kinematics, loading and centre of rotation on the wear of an unconstrained total disc replacement have been investigated using the ISO 18192-1 standard test as a baseline. Mean volumetric wear rate and surface morphological effects were reported. Changing the phasing of the flexions to create a low (but finite) amount of crossing path motion at the bearing surfaces resulted in a significant fall in wear volume. However, the rate of wear was still much larger than previously reported values under zero cross shear conditions. Reducing the load did not result in a significant change in wear rate. Moving the centre of rotation of the disc inferiorly did significantly increase wear rate. A phenomenon of debris re-attachment on the UHMWPE surface was observed and hypothesised to be due to a relatively harsh tribological operating regime in which lubricant replenishment and particle migration out of the bearing contact zone were limited. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater, 105B: 46-52, 2017. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT Total intervertebral disc replacement with a biologic engineered disc may be an alternative to spinal fusion for treating end-stage disc disease. In previous work, we developed disc-like angle ply structures (DAPS) that replicate the structure and function of the native disc and a rat tail model to evaluate DAPS in vivo. Here, we evaluated a strategy in which, after in vivo implantation, endogenous cells could colonize the acellular DAPS and form an extracellular matrix organized by the DAPS topographical template. To do so, acellular DAPS were implanted into the caudal spines of rats and evaluated over 12 weeks by mechanical testing, histology, and microcomputed tomography. An external fixation device was used to stabilize the implant site and various control groups were included to evaluate the effect of immobilization. There was robust tissue formation within the DAPS after implantation and compressive mechanical properties of the implant matched that of the native motion segment. Immobilization provided a stable site for fibrous tissue formation after either a discectomy or a DAPS implantation, but bony fusion eventually resulted, with segments showing intervertebral bridging after long-term implantation, a process that was accelerated by the implanted DAPS. Thus, while compressive mechanical properties were replicated after DAPS implantation, methods to actively prevent fusion must be developed. Future work will focus on limiting fusion by remobilizing the motion segment after a period of integration, delivering pro-chondrogenic factors, and pre-seeding DAPS with cells prior to implantation. © 2016 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 35:23-31, 2017. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Although cervical total disc replacement (TDR) is becoming popular, there are no finite analysis (FEA) studies involving a model of the full spine cervical (C1-C7) and determination of the influence of materials assigned to different parts of a specified TDR design on biomechanics of the model when TDR implantation is simulated. OBJECTIVE: To determine the influence of assigned material combination, for a given cervical TDR design, on the kinematics of a model of the full cervical spine. METHODS: A three-dimensional solid model of the full cervical spine was constructed, a finite element mesh was obtained (INT Model), after which FEA was used to determine range of motion (ROM) at each of the intersegmental positions under three clinically-relevant loadings. INT model was then modified by simulated implantation of a notional endplates-and-mobile insert TDR design, at C5-C6 (TDR Model), and six clinically-relevant applied loadings were applied. Four variants of TDR Model were used, the difference between them being in the materials assigned to the endplates and the mobile insert. Under each of the loadings, principal motions at each of the intersegmental positions were determined and compared to counterpart motions when INT Model was used. RESULTS: Comparison of ROM results of INT Model with relevant experimental results reported in the literature showed that the model was validated. With TDR Model, the smallest overall mean of the absolute values of the % change in principal intersegmental motions (relative to corresponding results in INT Model) was when the material assigned to both the endplates and the mobile insert was poly(ether-ether-ketone). CONCLUSION: In a simulated implantation of a notional endplates-and-mobile-insert TDR design in a model of the full cervical spine, material combination assigned to the parts of the design exerts a marked influence on the kinematics of the model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Authors aim to evaluate the correct placement of TDR using the instant center of rotation (ICR) as a guide. Methods: Placement of disc would be divided into three groups using a standard of 1mm from the ICR: Posterior to ICR, In line with ICR and Anterior to ICR. Results: 49 patients, mean age was 39.96 ± 1.45 years. 42 intraop fluoroscopy images compared to 41 post op radiographic images demonstrated TDR in line with ICR. Conclusion: Total discs replacements can be placed intraoperatively using proper technique with verification confirmed using the ICR postoperatively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]