Results of the prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of the ProDisc-L total disc replacement versus circumferential fusion for the treatment of 1-level degenerative disc disease

Cervical and Lumbar Disk Replacement in Athletes: Is It Safe to Return to Play? A Systematic Review of the Scientific Literature and Lay Press

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Cervical/lumbar total disk replacements (TDRs) are often performed for degenerative conditions but rarely in athletes. Therefore, we sought to conduct a systematic review of athletes undergoing TDRs of both the scientific literature and lay press, with an emphasis on contact sport athletes.

METHODS

In accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines, PubMed/Embase/Cochrane/Scopus/Web of Science databases were queried for all primary literature reporting TDRs in athletes, including both cervical/lumbar disk replacements (CDRs/LDRs). Sports were dichotomized into contact vs limited/noncontact. Because of the public nature of injuries in elite athletes, the lay press was also queried.

RESULTS

A total of 488 scientific studies were screened, of which 10 met inclusion criteria. Cervical: seven studies reported CDRs in 53 athletes, of which 7 were professional, 22 semiprofessional, and 24 recreational. Of the seven professional athletes, there was one contact sport athlete (kickboxer). All 7/7 professional and 21/22 semiprofessional athletes successfully returned-to-play at 8-52 weeks without complication. Lumbar: Three studies discussed LDRs in 51 athletes, of which 17 were professional, 6 semiprofessional, and 28 recreational. Of the 17 professional athletes, eight played contact sports (2 boxing, 2 alpine skiing, 2 soccer, judo, rugby). All 17 professional and 6 semiprofessional athletes successfully returned to play at 9-21 weeks. Lay Press: five professional contact sport athletes underwent CDRs, and all returned to play: 3 hockey, 1 mixed-martial arts, and 1 Australian-rules football.

CONCLUSION

The scientific literature and lay press revealed 14 professional contact sport athletes who underwent TDR-6 CDRs and 8 LDRs-all with successful return to play. From the little data that exist, it seems that TDR may be safe in elite athletes; however, the small number of patients highlights the major paucity of data on the safety of TDR in elite contact sport athletes.

Magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) identification of chemically painful lumbar discs leads to improved 6-, 12-, and 24-month outcomes for discogenic low back pain surgeries

PURPOSE

MRS was shown to reliably quantify relative levels of degenerative pain biomarkers, differentiating painful versus non-painful discs in patients with chronic discogenic low back pain (DLBP), and this correlates with surgical success rates. We now report results based on more patients and longer follow-up.

METHODS

Disc MRS was performed in DLBP patients who subsequently received lumbar surgery. Custom post-processing (NOCISCAN-LS®; Aclarion Inc.) calculated disc-specific NOCISCORES® that reflect relative differences in degenerative pain biomarkers for diagnosing chemically painful discs. Outcomes in 78 patients were evaluated using Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores. Surgical success (≥ 15-point ODI improvement) was compared between surgeries that were "Concordant" (Group C) versus "Discordant" (Group D) with NOCISCORE-based diagnosis for painful discs.

RESULTS

Success rates were higher for Group C versus Group D: 6 months (88% vs. 62%; p = 0.01), 12 months (91% vs. 56%; p < 0.001), and 24 months (85% vs. 63%; p = 0.07). Success rates for Group C surgeries were also higher than Group D surgeries in a variety of sub-group comparisons. Group C had a greater reduction in ODI from pre-operative to follow-up than Group D [absolute change (% change), (p)]: 6 months: - 35 (- 61%) versus - 23 (- 39%), (p < 0.05); 12 months: - 39 (- 69%) versus - 22 (- 39%), (p < 0.01); and 24 months:  - 38 (- 66%) versus - 26 (- 48%), (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

More successful, sustained outcomes were obtained when surgically treating chemically painful discs identified by NOCISCAN-LS post-processed disc MRS exams. Results suggest that NOCISCAN-LS provides a valuable new diagnostic tool to help clinicians better select treatment levels.

Preservation of Motion in Spine Surgery

The number of spinal procedures and spinal fusions continues to grow. Although fusion procedures have a high success rate, they have inherent risks such as pseudarthrosis and adjacent segment disease. New innovations in spine techniques have sought to eliminate these complications by preserving motion in the spinal column. Several techniques and devices have been developed in the cervical and lumbar spine including cervical laminoplasty, cervical disk ADA, posterior lumbar motion preservation devices, and lumbar disk ADA. In this review, advantages and disadvantages of each technique will be discussed.

Lumbar arthroplasty for treatment of primary or recurrent lumbar disc herniation

PURPOSE

Microdiscectomy is the current gold standard surgical treatment for primary lumbar disc herniations that fail non-surgical measures. Herniated nucleus pulposus is the manifestation of underlying discopathy that remains unaddressed with microdiscectomy. Therefore, risk remains of recurrent disc herniation, progression of the degenerative cascade, and on-going discogenic pain. Lumbar arthroplasty allows for complete discectomy, complete direct and indirect decompression of neural elements, restoration of alignment, restoration of foraminal height, and preservation of motion. In addition, arthroplasty avoids disruption of posterior elements and musculoligamentous stabilizers. The purpose of this study is to describe the feasibility of the use of lumbar arthroplasty in the treatment of patients with primary or recurrent disc herniations. In addition, we describe the clinical and peri-operative outcomes associated with this technique.

METHODS

All patients that underwent lumbar arthroplasty by a single surgeon at a single institution from 2015 to 2020 were reviewed. All patients with radiculopathy and pre-operative imaging demonstrating disc herniation that received lumbar arthroplasty were included in the study. In general, these patients were those with large disc herniations, advanced degenerative disc disease, and a clinical component of axial back pain. Patient-reported outcomes of VAS back, VAS leg, and ODI pre-operatively, at three months, one year, and at last follow-up were collected. Reoperation rate, patient satisfaction, and return to work were documented at last follow-up.

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients underwent lumbar arthroplasty during the study period. Twenty-two (91.6%) patients underwent lumbar total disc replacement (LTDR) for a primary disc herniation. Two patients (8.3%) underwent LTDR for a recurrent disc herniation after prior microdiscectomy. The mean age was 40 years. The mean pre-operative VAS leg and back pain were 9.2 and 8.9, respectively. The mean pre-operative ODI was 22.3. Mean VAS back and leg pain was 1.2 and 0.5 at three months post-operative. The mean VAS back and leg pain was 1.3 and 0.6 at one year post-operative. The mean ODI was 3.0 at one year post-operative. One patient (4.2%) underwent re-operation for migrated arthroplasty device which required repositioning. At last follow-up, 92% of patients were satisfied with their outcome and would undergo the same treatment again. The mean time for return-to-work was 4.8 weeks. After returning to work, 89% of patients required no further leave of absence for recurrent back or leg pain at last follow-up. Forty-four percent of patients were pain free at last follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Most patients with lumbar disc herniations can avoid surgical intervention altogether. Of those that require surgical treatment, microdiscectomy may be appropriate for certain patients with preserved disc height and extruded fragments. In a subset of patients with lumbar disc herniation that require surgical treatment, lumbar total disc replacement is an effective option by performing complete discectomy, restoring disc height, restoring alignment, and preserving motion. The restoration of physiologic alignment and motion may result in durable outcomes for these patients. Longer follow-up and comparative and prospective trials are needed to determine how the outcomes of microdiscectomy may differ from lumbar total disc replacement in the treatment of primary or recurrent disc herniation.

Impact of previous lumbar spine surgery on the outcome of lumbar total disc replacement: analysis of prospective 5-year follow-up study data

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.

In which cases do surgeons specializing in total disc replacement perform fusion in patients with symptomatic lumbar disc degeneration?

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.

Self-Assembling Peptide Hydrogels as Functional Tools to Tackle Intervertebral Disc Degeneration

Low back pain (LBP), caused by intervertebral disc (IVD) degeneration, is a major contributor to global disability. In its healthy state, the IVD is a tough and well-hydrated tissue, able to act as a shock absorber along the spine. During degeneration, the IVD is hit by a cell-driven cascade of events, which progressively lead to extracellular matrix (ECM) degradation, chronic inflammation, and pain. Current treatments are divided into palliative care (early stage degeneration) and surgical interventions (late-stage degeneration), which are invasive and poorly efficient in the long term. To overcome these limitations, alternative tissue engineering and regenerative medicine strategies, in which soft biomaterials are used as injectable carriers of cells and/or biomolecules to be delivered to the injury site and restore tissue function, are currently being explored. Self-assembling peptide hydrogels (SAPHs) represent a promising class of de novo synthetic biomaterials able to merge the strengths of both natural and synthetic hydrogels for biomedical applications. Inherent features, such as shear-thinning behaviour, high biocompatibility, ECM biomimicry, and tuneable physiochemical properties make these hydrogels appropriate and functional tools to tackle IVD degeneration. This review will describe the pathogenesis of IVD degeneration, list biomaterials requirements to attempt IVD repair, and focus on current peptide hydrogel materials exploited for this purpose.

Comparison of Mid- to Long-term Follow-up of Patient-reported Outcomes Measures After Single-level Lumbar Total Disc Arthroplasty, Multi-level Lumbar Total Disc Arthroplasty, and the Lumbar Hybrid Procedure for the Treatment of Degenerative Disc Disease

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this article is to compare the mid- to long-term patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) between single-level total disc arthroplasty (TDA), multi-level TDA, and hybrid constructs (combination of TDA and anterior lumbar interbody fusion [ALIF] across multiple levels) for symptomatic degenerative disc disease (DDD).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The treatment of single-level DDD is well documented using TDA. However, there is still a paucity of published evidence regarding long-term outcomes on multi-level TDA and hybrid constructs for the treatment of multi-level DDD, as well as lack of long-term comparisons regarding treatment of single-level DDD and multi-level DDD.

METHODS

A total of 950 patients underwent surgery for single-level or multi-level DDD between July 1998 and February 2012 with single-level TDA (n = 211), multi-level TDA (n = 122), or hybrid construct (n = 617). Visual Analog Score for the back (VAS-B) and leg (VAS-L) were recorded, along with the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ).

RESULTS

All PROMs in all groups showed statistically and clinically significant improvements (P < 0.005) in pain and function that is well above the corresponding minimum clinically important difference (MCID) and exceeds literature thresholds for substantial clinical benefit (SCB). Unadjusted analyses show that there were no statistically significant differences in the change scores between the surgery groups for VAS back and leg pain, and RMDQ up to 8 years' follow-up. Adjusted analyses showed the ODI improvement score for the single group was 2.2 points better (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.6-3.9, P = 0.009) than in the hybrid group. The RMDQ change score was better in the hybrid group than in the multi-level group by 1.1 points (95% CI: 0.4-1.9, P = 0.003) at 6 months and a further 0.4 point at 2 years (95% CI: 0.1-0.8, P = 0.011).

CONCLUSION

In the setting of meticulous preoperative evaluation in establishing a precision diagnosis, clinically and statistically equivalent results can be achieved when treating symptomatic DDD through single-level TDA, multi-level TDA, and hybrid constructs. These results are sustained at mid- to long-term follow-up.Level of Evidence: 3.

An Artificial PVA-BC Composite That Mimics the Biomechanical Properties and Structure of a Natural Intervertebral Disc

Disc herniation is one of the most ubiquitous healthcare problems in modern cities—severe patients eventually require surgical intervention. However, the existing operations—spinal fusion and artificial disc replacement—alter the biomechanics of the spine, leaving much room for improvement. The appropriateness of polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) for biomedical applications has been recognised due to its high water content, excellent biocompatibility, and versatile mechanical properties. In this study, a newly-designed PVA–bacterial cellulose (PVA-BC) composite was assembled to mimic both the biomechanics and annular structure of natural intervertebral discs (IVDs). PVA-BC composites of various concentrations were fabricated and tested under unconfined compression and compressive creep in order to acquire the values of the normalised compressive stiffness and whole normalised deformation. The normalised compressive stiffness increased considerably with an increasing PVA concentration, spanning from 1.82 (±0.18) to 3.50 (±0.14) MPa, and the whole normalised deformation decreased from 0.25 to 0.13. Formulations of 40% PVA provided the most accurate mimicry of natural human IVDs in normalised whole deformation, and demonstrated higher dimensional stability. The biocompatible results further confirmed that the materials had excellent biocompatibility. The novel bionic structure and formulations of the PVA-BC materials mimicked the biomechanics and structure of natural IVDs, and ensured dimensional stability under prolonged compression, reducing the risk of impingement on the surrounding tissue. The PVA-BC composite is a promising material for third-generation artificial IVDs with integrated construction.

More Than 1 in 3 Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain Continue to Use Opioids Long-term After Spinal Fusion: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

A common expectation for patients after elective spine surgery is that the procedure will result in pain reduction and minimize the need for pain medication. Most studies report changes in pain and function after spine surgery, but few report the extent of opioid use after surgery. This systematic review aims to identify the rates of opioid use after lumbar spine fusion.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Ovid Medline were searched to identify studies published between January 1, 2005 and June 30, 2020 that assessed the effectiveness of lumbar fusion for the management of low back pain.

RESULTS

Of 6872 abstracts initially identified, 329 studies met the final inclusion criteria, and only 32 (9.7%) reported any postoperative opioid use. Long-term opioid use after surgery persists for more than 1 in 3 patients with usage ranging from 6 to 85.9% and a pooled mean of 35.0% based on data from 21 studies (6.4% of all lumbar fusion studies).

DISCUSSION

Overall, opioid use is not reported in the majority of lumbar fusion trials. Patients may expect a reduced need for opioid-based pain management after surgery, but the limited data available suggests long-term use is common. Lack of consistent reporting of these outcomes limits definitive conclusions regarding the efficacy of spinal fusion for reducing long-term opioid. Patient decisions about undergoing surgery may be altered if they had realistic expectations about rates of postsurgical opioid use. Spine surgery trials should track opioid utilization out to a minimum of 6 months after surgery as a core outcome.

Predictors of long-term clinical outcomes in adult patients after lumbar total disc replacement: development and validation of a prediction model

OBJECTIVE

Long-term outcomes of single-level lumbar arthroplasty are understood to be very good, with the most recent Investigational Device Exemption (IDE) trial showing a < 5% reoperation rate at the close of the 7-year study. This post hoc analysis was conducted to determine whether specific patients from the activL IDE data set had better outcomes than the mean good outcome of the IDE trial, as well as to identify contributing factors that could be optimized in real-world use.

METHODS

Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were developed using the randomized patient set (n = 283) from the activL trial and used to identify predictive factors and to derive risk equations. The models were internally validated using the randomized patient set and externally validated using the nonrandomized patient set (n = 52) from the activL trial. Predictive power was assessed using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis.

RESULTS

Two factors were significantly associated with achievement of better than the mean outcomes at 7 years. Randomization to receive the activL device was positively associated with better than the mean visual analog scale (VAS)-back pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, whereas preoperative narcotics use was negatively associated with better than the mean ODI score. Preoperative narcotics use was also negatively associated with return to unrestricted full-time work. Other preoperative factors associated with positive outcomes included unrestricted full-time work, working manual labor after index back injury, and decreasing disc height. Older age, greater VAS-leg pain score, greater ODI score, female sex, and working manual labor before back injury were identified as preoperative factors associated with negative outcomes. Preoperative BMI, VAS-back pain score, back pain duration ≥ 1 year, SF-36 physical component summary score, and recreational activity had no effect on outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Lumbar total disc replacement for symptomatic single-level lumbar degenerative disc disease is a well-established option for improving long-term patient outcomes. Discontinuing narcotics use may further improve patient outcomes, as this analysis identified associations between no preoperative narcotics use and better ODI score relative to the mean score of the activL trial at 7 years and increased likelihood of return to work within 7 years. Other preoperative factors that may further improve outcomes included unrestricted full-time work, working manual labor despite back injury, sedentary work status before back injury, and randomization to receive the activL device. Tailoring patient care before total disc replacement may further improve patient outcomes.

Risk factors for reoperation after lumbar total disc replacement at short-, mid-, and long-term follow-up

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The reoperation rate following TDR (Total Disc replacement) has been established at short- and mid-term time points through the Food and Drug Administration Investigational Device Exemption (FDA IDE) trials. However, these trials include highly selected centers and surgeons with strict governance of indications. The utilization of TDR throughout the community needs further analysis.

PURPOSE

To identify the risk factors for lumbar spine reoperation in patients undergoing lumbar total disc replacement (TDR) at short-, mid-, and long-term follow-up.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

This study is a multi-center retrospective cohort study utilizing the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database.

PATIENT SAMPLE

We identified 1,368 patients who underwent an elective primary lumbar TDR in New York State between January 1, 2005 and September 30, 2013.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary functional outcome of interest was lumbar reoperation, specifically the evaluation of independent risk factors for lumbar reoperation at a minimum of 2 years, with sub-analyses performed at 5 and ten years.

METHODS

International Classification of Diseases, Ninth revision codes were utilized to identify patients undergoing a primary lumbar TDR. We excluded patients with primary/revision lumbar fusion procedures and revision disc replacement procedures. Hospital academic status was determined by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. Unique encrypted patient identifiers allowed for longitudinal follow-up for reoperation. Logistic regression models compared reoperation and no-reoperation cohorts, and were performed on sub-analyses for significant univariate predictors of reoperation.

RESULTS

Between January 2005 and September 2013, 1368 patients underwent a primary lumbar TDR. Reoperation occurred in 8.8% by 2 years, 15.8% by 5 years, and 19.5% by ten years. Diabetics were more likely to have reoperations (7.5% vs 3.8%, p=.013). Teaching hospitals experienced a decreased reoperation rate compared to nonteaching hospitals at 2-year (5.0% vs 10.5%, p=.002), 5-year (10.7% vs 17.9%, p=.002) and 10-year (11.7% vs 21.9%, p=.045) follow-up. Lumbar fusion was the most common reoperation (14.2%).

CONCLUSION

We identified an 8.8% reoperation rate after inpatient lumbar TDR at 2-years, 15.8% at 5-years, and 19.5% at 10-years. When stratifying by teaching status, reoperation rates at teaching centers align with those reported in FDA IDE studies. Diabetes was the only patient factor influencing reoperation rate. There is a growing consensus that lumbar TDR is a durable and appropriate surgical option for lumbar degenerative disc disease. Proper indications are crucial to obtaining good outcomes with lumbar TDR.

Advanced meta-analyses comparing the three surgical techniques total disc replacement, anterior stand-alone fusion and circumferential fusion regarding pain, function and complications up to 3 years to treat lumbar degenerative disc disease

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.

Invasive Treatments for Low Back Disorders

OBJECTIVE

This abbreviated version of the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine's Low Back Disorders guideline reviews the evidence and recommendations developed for invasive treatments used to manage low back disorders.

METHODS

Comprehensive systematic literature reviews were accomplished with article abstraction, critiquing, grading, evidence table compilation, and guideline finalization by a multidisciplinary expert panel and extensive peer-review to develop evidence-based guidance. Consensus recommendations were formulated when evidence was lacking and often relied on analogy to other disorders for which evidence exists. A total of 47 high-quality and 321 moderate-quality trials were identified for invasive management of low back disorders.

RESULTS

Guidance has been developed for the invasive management of acute, subacute, and chronic low back disorders and rehabilitation. This includes 49 specific recommendations.

CONCLUSION

Quality evidence should guide invasive treatment for all phases of managing low back disorders.

Long-Term Clinical Outcomes With the Activ-L Lumbar Arthroplasty System

BACKGROUND

Low back pain (LBP) due to degenerative disc disease (DDD) is the most common occupational disorder worldwide. Lumbar total disc replacement (LTDR) has provided an alternative to rigid fusion to relieve pain with less motion restriction. We present clinical results with long-term follow-up from a single-center, single-surgeon series of patients treated with the Activ-L artificial disc.

METHODS

Thirty-three patients with symptomatic single-level DDD who failed nonsurgical therapy for a minimum of 6 months underwent single-level arthroplasty with the Activ-L system between 2007 and 2012. Demographic, preoperative, and postoperative data were collected prospectively. Clinical factors reviewed included occupational status, sensory deficits, functional status determined by Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), back pain, leg pain, pain medication consumption, and radiographic imaging.

RESULTS

Average age at surgery was 38.0 ± 7.8 years, and the majority of patients were male (60.6%). Average follow-up was 2.7 ± 1.7 years. Average ODI at preoperative baseline was 54.6 ± 13.5, with scores significantly improved at 6 weeks (28.6 ± 17.4, P < .0001), 3 months (24.1 ± 16.8, P < .0001), 6 months (22.3 ± 16.3, P < .0001), 1 year (18.8 ± 15.3, P < .0001), and final follow-up (15.6 ± 16.4, P < .0001). Most patients (87.8%) reported pain medication usage within 14 days of baseline evaluation, with consumption decreasing significantly at 1-year (34.5%, P < .0001) and long-term follow-up (21.2%, P < .0001). One patient experienced mild unilateral graft subsidence at 1 year, which remained stable on radiographs at 5 years. None of the prostheses required revision surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

The Activ-L disc replacement system is safe and effective for treating single-level lumbar DDD. Patients reported significant improvement in functional outcomes and decreases in pain medication consumption. Further investigation of the Activ-L system in larger populations is warranted.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

LBP is a common cause of disability worldwide, and better treatment options are needed to improve outcomes, including pain and mobility. Spine surgeons may choose the Activ-L disc replacement as a safe and effective treatment for LBP caused by single-level lumbar DDD.

Characterization of biomaterials intended for use in the nucleus pulposus of degenerated intervertebral discs

Biomaterials for regeneration of the intervertebral disc must meet complex requirements conforming to biological, mechanical and clinical demands. Currently no consensus on their characterization exists. It is crucial to identify parameters and their method of characterization for accurate assessment of their potential efficacy, keeping in mind the translation towards clinical application. This review systematically analyses the characterization techniques of biomaterial systems that have been used for nucleus pulposus (NP) restoration and regeneration. Substantial differences in the approach towards assessment became evident, hindering comparisons between different materials with respect to their suitability for NP restoration and regeneration. We have analysed the current approaches and identified parameters necessary for adequate biomaterial characterization, with the clinical goal of functional restoration and biological regeneration of the NP in mind. Further, we provide guidelines and goals for their measurement. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: Biomaterials intended for restoration of regeneration of the nucleus pulposus within the intervertebral disc must meet biological, biomechanical and clinical demands. Many materials have been investigated, but a lack of consensus on which parameters to evaluate leads to difficulties in comparing materials as well as mostly partial characterization of the materials in question. A gap between current methodology and clinically relevant and meaningful characterization is prevalent. In this article, we identify necessary methods and their implementation for complete biomaterial characterization in the context of clinical applicability. This will allow for a more unified approach to NP-biomaterials research within the field as a whole and enable comparative analysis of novel materials yet to be developed.

Use of instrumented lumbar spinal surgery for degenerative conditions: trends and costs over time in Ontario, Canada

Background

Instrumented lumbar surgeries, such as lumbar fusion and lumbar disc replacement, are increasingly being used in the United States for low back pain, with utilization rates approaching those of total joint arthroplasty. It is unknown whether there is a similar pattern in Canada. We sought to determine utilization rates and total medical costs of instrumented lumbar surgeries in a single-payer system and to compare these with the rates and costs of total hip and knee replacements.

Methods

We included Ontarians aged 20 years and older who underwent instrumented lumbar surgery or total knee or total hip replacement between April 1993 and March 2012. Utilization and medical cost of the procedures were evaluated and compared using linear regression in a time-series analysis. Instrumented lumbar surgical procedures were stratified by age and main indication for surgery.

Results

Utilization of instrumented lumbar surgeries rose from 6.2 to 14.2 procedures per 100 000 population between 1993 and 2012 (p < 0.001), well below the utilization of knee and hip arthroplasties. Patients were younger than 50 years for 29.2% of all instrumented lumbar surgery cases; annual procedure rates among those older than 80 years rose 7.6-fold. Direct medical costs of instrumented lumbar surgeries from 2002 to 2012 totaled $176 million. Spinal stenosis and spondylolisthesis were the most common indications for instrumented lumbar surgeries.

Conclusion

Use of instrumented lumbar surgeries in Ontario’s single-payer system has increased rapidly, especially among patients older than 80 years. In contrast to the situation in the United States, these rates were well below those of total joint arthroplasties. These data provide useful insights about resource allocation for surgical treatment of lumbar degenerative disorders.

Superiority Claims for Spinal Devices: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

Superiority claims for medical devices are commonly derived from noninferiority trials, but interpretation of such claims can be challenging. This study aimed to (a) establish the prevalence of noninferiority and superiority designs among spinal device trials, (b) assess the frequency of post hoc superiority claims from noninferiority studies, and (c) critically evaluate the risk of bias in claims that could translate to misleading conclusions.

METHODS

Study bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. The risk of bias for the superiority claim was established based on post hoc hypothesis specification, analysis of the intention-to-treat population, post hoc modification of a priori primary outcomes, and sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

Forty-one studies were identified from 1895 records. Nineteen (46%) were noninferiority trials. Fifteen more (37%) were noninferiority trials with a secondary superiority hypothesis specified a priori. Seven (17%) were superiority trials. Of the 34 noninferiority trials, 14 (41%) made superiority claims. A medium or high risk of bias was related to the superiority claim in 9 of those trials (64%), which was due to the analyzed population, lacking sensitivity analyses, claims not being robust during sensitivity analyses, post hoc hypotheses, or modified endpoints. Only 4 of the 14 (29%) noninferiority studies provided low bias in the superiority claim, compared with 3 of the 5 (60%) superiority trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Health care decision makers should carefully evaluate the risk of bias in each superiority claim and weigh their conclusions appropriately.

Lumbar disc arthroplasty versus anterior lumbar interbody fusion: 5-year outcomes for patients in the Maverick disc investigational device exemption study

OBJECTIVE

Despite evidence of its safety and effectiveness, the use of lumbar disc arthroplasty has been slow to expand due in part to concerns about late complications and the risks of revision surgery associated with early devices. More recently, FDA approval of newer devices and improving reimbursements have reversed this trend in the United States. Additional long-term data on lumbar disc arthroplasty are still needed. This study reports the 5-year results of the FDA investigational device exemption clinical trial of the Medtronic Spinal and Biologics' Maverick total disc replacement.

METHODS

Patients with single-level degenerative disc disease from L4 to S1 were randomized 2:1 at 31 investigational sites. In the period from April 2003 to August 2004, 405 patients received the investigational device and 172 patients underwent the control procedure of anterior lumbar interbody fusion. Outcome measures included the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), numeric rating scales (NRSs) for back and leg pain, the SF-36, disc height, interbody motion, heterotopic ossification (investigational device), adverse events (AEs), additional surgeries, and neurological status. Treatment was considered an overall success when all of the following criteria were met: 1) ODI score improvement ≥ 15 points over the preoperative score; 2) maintenance or improvement in neurological status compared with preoperatively; 3) disc height success, that is, no more than a 2-mm reduction in anterior or posterior height; 4) no serious AEs caused by the implant or by the implant and the surgical procedure; and 5) no additional surgery classified as a failure.

RESULTS

Compared to that in the control group, improvement in the investigational group was statistically greater according to the ODI and SF-36 Physical Component Summary (PCS) at 1, 2, and 5 years; the NRS for back pain at 1 and 2 years; and the NRS for leg pain at 1 year. The rates of heterotopic ossification increased over time: 1.0% (4/382) at 1 year, 2.6% (9/345) at 2 years, and 5.9% (11/187) at 5 years. Investigational patients had fewer device-related AEs and serious device-related AEs than the control patients at both 2 and 5 years postoperatively. Noninferiority of the composite measure overall success was demonstrated at all follow-up intervals; superiority was demonstrated at 1 and 2 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Lumbar disc arthroplasty is a safe and effective treatment for single-level lumbar degenerative disc disease, resulting in improved physical function and reduced pain up to 5 years after surgery.Clinical trial registration no.: NCT00635843 (clinicaltrials.gov).

Total Disc Replacement Surgery in a Professional Australian Rugby League Player: A Case Report

Chronic persistent lower back pain due to degenerative disc disease (DDD) of the lumbar spine is a common condition in the athletic population, which does not always improve with nonoperative treatment. We present a case report of a professional Australian rugby league player with DDD of the lumbar spine presenting with persistent lower back pain, which was not responding to conventional nonsurgical treatment. He then underwent a surgical total disc replacement of the lumbar spine and was subsequently able to return to playing professional rugby league at his previous level of competition. This is the only known documented case of a professional athlete in any form of contact sport successfully returning to his previous level of function and competition after undergoing a total disc replacement of the lumbar spine.

Lumbar Arthroplasty: Past, Present, and Future

Lumbar degenerative disc disease is a pathologic process that affects a large portion of our aging population. In the recent past, surgical treatment has involved fusion procedures. However, lumbar disc arthroplasty and replacement provides an alternative for carefully selected patients. It provides the major advantage of motion preservation and thus keeps adjacent segments from significantly progressive degeneration. The history of lumbar disc replacement has roots that start in the 1960s with the implantation of stainless-steel balls. Decades later, multiple implants with different material design and biomechanical properties were introduced to the market. New third-generation implants have made great strides in improved biomechanics and clinical outcomes. Although there is room for further advancement and studies are warranted to assess the long-term durability and sustainability of lumbar disc arthroplasty, it has certainly proven to be a very acceptable alternative within the surgical armamentarium that should be offered to patients who meet indications. In this review we present an overview of lumbar disc arthroplasty including its history, indications, biomechanics, challenges, and future directions.

Long-term clinical outcome of two revision strategies for failed total disc replacements

PURPOSE

To compare the long-term clinical results and complications of two revision strategies for patients with failed total disc replacements (TDRs).

METHODS

In 19 patients, the TDR was removed and the intervertebral defect was filled with a femoral head bone strut graft. In addition, instrumented posterolateral fusion was performed (removal group). In 36 patients, only a posterolateral instrumented fusion was performed (fusion group). Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were completed pre- and post-revision surgery. Intra- and post-operative complications of both revision strategies were assessed.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 12.3 years (range 5.3-24.3). In both the removal and fusion groups, a similar (p = 0.515 and p = 0419, respectively) but significant decrease in VAS (p = 0.001 and p = 0.001, respectively) and ODI score (p = 0.033 and p = 0.013, respectively) at post-revision surgery compared to pre-revision surgery was seen. A clinically relevant improvement in VAS and ODI score was found in 62.5% and 43.8% in the removal group and in 43.5% and 39.1% in the fusion group (p = 0.242 and p = 0.773, respectively). Removal of the TDR was associated with substantial intra-operative complications such as major vessel bleeding and ureter lesion. The percentage of late re-operations for complications such as pseudarthrosis were comparable for both revision strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

Revision of a failed TDR is clinically beneficial in about half of the patients. No clear benefits for additional TDR removal as compared to posterolateral instrumented fusion alone could be identified. In particular, when considering the substantial risks and complications, great caution is warranted with removal of the TDR. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Repeatability of Cervical Joint Flexion and Extension Within and Between Days

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to investigate within- and between-day repeatability of free and unrestricted healthy cervical flexion and extension motion when assessing dynamic cervical spine motion.

METHODS

Fluoroscopy videos of 2 repeated cervical flexion and 2 repeated extension motions were examined for within-day repeatability (20-second interval) for 18 participants (6 females) and between-day repeatability (1-week interval) for 15 participants (6 females). The dynamic cervical motions were free and unrestricted from neutral to end range. The flexion videos and extension videos were evenly divided into 10% epochs of the C0-to-C7 range of motion. Within-day and between-day repeatability of joint motion angles (all 7 joints and epochs, respectively) was tested in a repeated-measures analysis of variance. Joint motion angle differences between repetitions were calculated for each epoch and joint (7 joints), and these joint motion angle differences between within-day and between-day repetitions were tested in mixed-model analysis of variance.

RESULTS

For all joints and epochs, respectively, no significant differences were found in joint motion angle between within-day or between-day repetitions. There were no significant effects of joint motion angle differences between within-day and between-day repetitions. The average within-day joint motion angle differences across all joints and epochs were 0.00° ± 2.98° and 0.00° ± 3.05° for flexion and extension, respectively. The average between-day joint motion angle differences were 0.02° ± 2.56° and 0.05° ± 2.40° for flexion and extension, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to report the within-day and between-day joint motion angle differences of repeated cervical flexion and extension. This study supports the idea that cervical joints repeat their motion accurately.

Total disc replacement versus fusion for lumbar degenerative diseases - a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Lumbar fusion is considered to the gold standard for treatment of spinal degenerative diseases but results in adjacent segment degeneration and acquired spinal instability. Total disc replacement is a relatively new alternative avoiding the occurrence of the above complications. The systematic review and meta-analysis was designed to evaluate whether total disc replacement exhibited better outcomes and safety.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure Database(CNKI), Wangfang database, and VIP database were searched for RCTs comparing total disc replacement with lumbar fusion. All statistical analyses were carried out using the RevMan5.3 and STATA12.0 software.

RESULTS

Of 1116 citations identified by our search strategy, 14 RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Compared to lumbar fusion, total disc replacement significantly improved ODI, VAS, SF-36, patient satisfaction, overall success, reoperation rate, ODI successful, reduced operation time, shortened duration of hospitalization, decreased postsurgical complications. However, total disc replacement did not show a significant difference regarding blood loss, consumption of analgesics, neurologic success and device success with lumbar fusion. And charges were significantly lower for total disc replacement compared with lumbar fusion in the 1-level patient group, while charges were similar in the 2-level group.

CONCLUSION

Total disc replacement is recommended to alleviate the pain of degenerative lumbar diseases, improve the state of lumbar function and the quality of life of patients, provide a high level of security, have better health economics benefits for 1-level patients.

Future Studies and Directions for the Optimization of Outcomes for Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

Randomized prospective studies show clear benefits for operative versus nonoperative management of symptomatic lumbar spondylolisthesis, but there is no universally accepted surgical treatment. This article presents options for surgical management of lumbar spondylolisthesis, reviews the clinical trials delineating the role and type of surgical intervention, and explores the directions of future investigations. The next decade will add further clarity to the surgical management of spondylolisthesis, not by randomized prospective trials, but by surgical registries. The power of "big data" offered by registries will likely become the vehicle best suited to amass data on current and novel therapies.

Chronic low back pain: Relevance of a new classification based on the injury pattern

BACKGROUND

The objectives of this study were to define the role for surgery in the treatment of chronic low back pain (cLBP) and to develop a new classification of cLBP based on the pattern of injury.

HYPOTHESIS

Surgery may benefit patients with cLBP, and a new classification based on the injury pattern may be of interest.

METHOD

A systematic literature review was performed by searching Medline, the Cochrane Library, the French public health database (Banque de Données en Santé Publique), Science Direct, and the National Guideline Clearinghouse. The main search terms were "back pain" OR "lumbar" OR "intervertebral disc replacement" OR "vertebrae" OR "spinal" AND "surgery" OR "surgical" OR "fusion" OR "laminectomy" OR "discectomy".

RESULTS

Surgical techniques available for treating cLBP consist of fusion, disc replacement, dynamic stabilisation, and inter-spinous posterior devices. Compared to non-operative management including intensive rehabilitation therapy and cognitive behavioural therapy, fusion is not better in terms of either function (evaluated using the Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]) or pain (level 2). Fusion is better than non-operative management without intensive rehabilitation therapy (level 2). There is no evidence to date that one fusion technique is superior over the others regarding the clinical outcomes (assessed using the ODI). Compared to fusion or multidisciplinary rehabilitation therapy, disc replacement can produce better function and less pain, although the differences are not clinically significant (level 2). The available evidence does not support the use of dynamic stabilisation or interspinous posterior devices to treat cLBP due to degenerative disease (professional consensus within the French Society for Spinal Surgery). The following recommendations can be made: non-operative treatment must be provided for at least 1 year before considering surgery in patients with cLBP due to degenerative disease; patients must be fully informed about alternative treatment options and the risks associated with surgery; standing radiographs must be obtained to assess sagittal spinal alignment and a magnetic resonance imaging scan to determine the mechanism of injury; and, if fusion is performed, the lumbar lordotic curvature must be restored.

DISCUSSION

This work establishes the need for a new classification of cLBP based on the presumptive mechanism responsible for the pain. Three categories should be distinguished: non-degenerative cLBP (previously known as symptomatic cLBP), in which the cause of pain is a trauma, spondylolysis, a tumour, an infection, or an inflammatory process; degenerative cLBP (previously known as non-specific cLBP) characterised by variable combinations of degenerative alterations in one or more discs, facet joints, and/or ligaments, with or without regional and/or global alterations in spinal alignment (which must be assessed using specific parameters); and cLBP of unknown mechanism, in which the pain seems to bear no relation to the anatomical abnormalities (and the Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale may be helpful in this situation). This classification should prove useful in the future for constituting well-defined patient groups, thereby improving the assessment of treatment options.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II, systematic review of level II studies.

Lumbar Spinal Fusion Affects Sitting Disability on the Floor

Background

Lumbar spinal fusion is a standard of care for certain lumbar spinal diseases. However, its impact on sitting, especially on the floor, has not been assessed, even in the countries where people usually sit on the floor instead of using a chair.

Methods

A total of 100 Korean patients who underwent lumbar spinal fusion and 47 patients who underwent decompression surgery were enrolled. In a postoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) questionnaire, an additional section 11 (Sitting on the Floor) was inserted, in which the phrase "sitting in a chair" of section 5 was replaced with "sitting on the floor." The ODI scores were calculated twice using either the section with "sitting in a chair" or the section with "sitting on the floor" and comparing the two.

Results

In the fusion group, the mean postoperative ODI calculated with "sitting on the floor" is significantly worse than that with "sitting in a chair" (P < .0001). This difference was the same regardless of whether the fusion was done at a single level (P < .0001) or 2 or more levels (P = .006) or whether location was at L4-L5 (P = .002) or L5-S1 (P = .02) in a single-level fusion. The scores of the decompression group showed no difference. Though preoperative and postoperative ODI showed no difference between groups, the postoperative ODI using "sitting on the floor" was significantly worse in the fusion group than the decompression group (P = .009).

Conclusion

ODI scores using "sitting on the floor" after lumbar fusion were significantly worse than those with "sitting in a chair." A sitting disability on the floor after lumbar arthrodesis has not been appreciated adequately so far and should be seriously considered if a lumbar arthrodesis is planned in a society where people's usual style of sitting is on the floor.

Multiple-Level Lumbar Total Disk Replacement: A Prospective Clinical and Radiographic Analysis of Motion Preservation at 24-72 Months

BACKGROUND

Recent studies demonstrate the efficacy of lumbar arthroplasty using the ProDisc-L. Patients frequently present with multilevel pathology and may be candidates for multilevel disk replacement.

PURPOSE

To evaluate clinical outcomes and sagittal range of motion of operated levels and adjacent lumbar motion segments in multiple-level ProDisc-L constructs after 2-6 years follow-up.

PATIENT SAMPLE

A total of 159 patients underwent adjacent 2-level (n=114), 3-level (n=41), or 4-level (n=4) lumbar total disk replacement (TDR).

STUDY-DESIGN

This is a prospective cohort.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Clinical measures: Oswestry Disability Index and Visual Analog Score of patient satisfaction (VAS-S) and pain (VAS-P) data were collected. Radiographic measures: sagittal motion on preoperative and postoperative lumbar radiographs at each operative segment and adjacent segment.

METHODS

Patients were evaluated with radiographic and clinical outcomes measures preoperatively, at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and annually for 24-72 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

Radiographic: at the motion segment adjacent to the TDR, mean preoperative range of motion (ROM) was 8.20±2.88 degrees, compared with 8.40±2.4 degrees postoperatively at last follow-up (P>0.05). Between the 3 TDR groups, there were no significant differences in ROM at any time point except at L5-S1. Across both groups for TDR motion segments, the mean preoperative ROM was 10.15±2.71 versus 12.30±2.25 degrees postoperatively (P=0.011) at last follow-up. At L5-S1 mean preoperative motion was 7.60±3.90 versus 5.81±3.1 degrees postoperatively (P=0.60). Clinical: at 24-72 months postoperatively, all patients had significant reductions in Oswestry Disability Index, VAS-P, and VAS-S scores (P<0.05). At up to 72 months of follow-up, no patient underwent adjacent-level surgery but there were 3 cases of index-level revision surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Multilevel TDR preserves ROM at the individual TDR levels. Most significantly, the nonoperative adjacent level maintains its preoperative ROM at 2-6 years postoperatively. At up to 6 years of follow-up, there has been no need for revision or adjacent-segment surgery. Patients also demonstrate significant improvement in pain and disability at latest follow-up.

Magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) can identify painful lumbar discs and may facilitate improved clinical outcomes of lumbar surgeries for discogenic pain

PURPOSE

The goal of this study was to refine clinical MRS to optimize performance and then determine whether MRS-derived biomarkers reliably identify painful discs, quantify degeneration severity, and forecast surgical outcomes for chronic low back pain (CLBP) patients.

METHODS

We performed an observational diagnostic development and accuracy study. Six hundred and twenty-three (623) discs in 139 patients were scanned using MRS, with 275 discs also receiving provocative discography (PD). MRS data were used to quantify spectral features related to disc structure (collagen and proteoglycan) and acidity (lactate, alanine, propionate). Ratios of acidity to structure were used to calculate pain potential. MRS-SCOREs were compared to PD and Pfirrmann grade. Clinical utility was judged by evaluating surgical success for 75 of the subjects who underwent lumbar surgery.

RESULTS

Two hundred and six (206) discs had both a successful MRS and independent pain diagnosis. When comparing to PD, MRS had a total accuracy of 85%, sensitivity of 82%, and specificity of 88%. These increased to 93%, 91%, and 93% respectively, in non-herniated discs. The MRS structure measures differed significantly between Pfirrmann grades, except grade I versus grade II. When all MRS positive discs were treated, surgical success was 97% versus 57% when the treated level was MRS negative, or 54% when the non-treated adjacent level was MRS positive.

CONCLUSION

MRS correlates with PD and may support improved surgical outcomes for CLBP patients. Noninvasive MRS is a potentially valuable approach to clarifying pain mechanisms and designing CLBP therapies that are customized to the patient. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Mid- to long-term results of total disc replacement for lumbar degenerative disc disease: a systematic review

Background

Lumbar total disc replacement (TDR) has shown satisfactory clinical outcomes with few complications and reoperations at short-term follow-up, but the mid- to long-term results are not clear.

Purpose

The objective of this study was to evaluate the mid- to long-term clinical outcomes of artificial TDR for lumbar degenerative disc diseases.

Patients and methods

A systematic search was conducted using the PubMed database to identify studies of TDR surgery that included at least 3 years of follow-up. The search keywords were as follows: lumbar, total disc replacement, and arthroplasty. The following data were extracted: patient demographics, visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores, satisfactory rate, clinical success rate, complications, and reoperations.

Results

Thirteen studies, including eight prospective studies and five retrospective studies, met the criteria. A total of 946 patients were identified who reported at least 3 years of follow-up results. The artificial prostheses in these studies were ProDisc-L, Charité, AcroFlex, Maverick, and XL TDR. Patients with lumbar TDR demonstrated significant improvements in VAS scores of 51.1 to 70.5% and of − 15.6 to − 44.4 for Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores at the last follow-up. Patient satisfaction rates were reported in eight studies and ranged from 75.5 to 93.3%. Complication rates were reported in 11 studies, ranging from 0 to 34.4%. The overall reoperation rate was 12.1% (119/986), ranging from 0 to 39.3%, with eight of the 13 studies reporting a reoperation rate of less than 10%.

Conclusions

This review shows that lumbar TDR effectively results in pain relief and an improvement in quality of life at mid- to long-term follow-up. Complication and reoperation rates were acceptable. However, this study did not provide sufficient evidence to show that lumbar TDR is superior to fusion surgery. To answer that question, a greater number of high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are needed.

Comparison of Lumbar Total Disc Replacement With Surgical Spinal Fusion for the Treatment of Single-Level Degenerative Disc Disease: A Meta-Analysis of 5-Year Outcomes From Randomized Controlled Trials

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of total disc replacement (TDR) compared with fusion in patients with functionally disabling chronic low back pain due to single-level lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD) at 5 years.

METHODS

PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched for randomized controlled trials reporting outcomes at 5 years for TDR compared with fusion in patients with single-level lumbar DDD. Outcomes included Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) success, back pain scores, reoperations, and patient satisfaction. All analyses were conducted using a random-effects model; analyses were reported as relative risk (RR) ratios and mean differences (MDs). Sensitivity analyses were conducted for different outcome definitions, high loss to follow-up, and high heterogeneity.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 4 studies. TDR patients had a significantly greater likelihood of ODI success (RR 1.0912; 95% CI 1.0004, 1.1903) and patient satisfaction (RR 1.13; 95% CI 1.03, 1.24) and a significantly lower risk of reoperation (RR 0.52; 95% CI 0.35, 0.77) than fusion patients. There was no association with improvement in back pain scores whether patients received TDR or fusion (MD -2.79; 95% CI -8.09, 2.51). Most results were robust to sensitivity analyses. Results for ODI success and patient satisfaction were sensitive to different outcome definitions but remained in favor of TDR.

CONCLUSIONS

TDR is an effective alternative to fusion for lumbar DDD. It offers several clinical advantages over the longer term that can benefit the patient and reduce health care burden, without additional safety consequences.

Sexual activity after spine surgery: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Sexual function is an important determinant of quality of life, and factors such as surgical approach, performance of fusion, neurological function and residual pain can affect it after spine surgery. Our aim was to perform a systematic review to collate evidence regarding the impact of spine surgery on sexual function.

METHODS

A systematic review of studies reporting measures of sexual function, and incidence of adverse sexual outcomes (retrograde ejaculation) after major spine surgery was done, regardless of spinal location. Pubmed (MEDLINE) and Google Scholar databases were queried using the following search words "Sex", "Sex life", "Sexual function", "Sexual activity", "retrograde ejaculation", "Spine", "Spine surgery", "Lumbar surgery", "Lumbar fusion", "cervical spine", "cervical fusion", "Spinal deformity", "scoliosis" and "Decompression". All articles published between 1997 and 2017 were retrieved from the database. A total of 81 studies were included in the final review.

RESULTS

Majority of the studies were retrospective case series and were low quality (Level IV) in evidence. Anterior lumbar approaches were associated with a higher incidence of retrograde ejaculation, especially with the utilization of transperitoneal laparoscopic approach. There is inconclusive evidence on the preferred sexual position following fusion, and also on the impact of BMP-2 usage on retrograde ejaculation/sexual dysfunction.

CONCLUSION

Despite limited evidence from high-quality articles, there is a general trend towards improvement of sexual activity and function after spine surgery. Future studies incorporating specific assessments of sexual activity will be required to address this important determinant of quality of life so that appropriate pre-operative counselling can be done by providers. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Total Disc Replacement Versus Anterior-Posterior Interbody Fusion in the Lumbar Spine and Lumbosacral Junction: A Cost Analysis

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective observational cohort study.

OBJECTIVES

To analyze clinical and economic results in patients with degenerative disc disease in the lumbar area for patients who received combined anterior and posterior fusion or total disc replacement (TDR).

METHODS

The study included 75 patients, 38 in the fusion group and 37 in the TDR group, who received either anterior/posterior fusion or TDR for lumbar disc disease from January 2005 to December 2008 with a minimum follow-up of 24 months. We collected data with regard to clinical parameters, demographics, visual analogue scale scores, Oswestry Disability Index scores, SF-36 and SF-6D data, surgery time, amount of blood loss, transfusion of blood products, number of levels, duration of hospital stay, and complications. For cost analysis, general infrastructure, theatre costs, as well as implant costs were examined, leading to primary hospital costs. Furthermore, average revision costs were examined, based on the actual data. Statistical analysis was performed using t tests for normal contribution and Mann-Whitney test for skew distributed values. The significance level was set to .05.

RESULTS

There was a higher surgery time, more blood loss, and longer hospital stay for the fusion group, compared with the TDR group. In addition, the hospital costs for the primary procedure and revision were 35% higher in the fusion group. The clinical data in terms of SF-36 and SF-6D showed no difference between these 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

TDR is a good alternative to anterior and posterior lumbar fusion in terms of short follow-up analysis for clinical data and cost analysis. General advice cannot be given due to missing data for long-term costs in terms of surgical treatment of adjacent level or further fusion techniques.

Comparison of therapies in lumbar degenerative disc disease: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Aim: To compare the efficacy and safety of total disc replacement, lumbar fusion, and conservative care in the treatment of single-level lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD). Materials & methods: A network meta-analysis was conducted to determine the relative impact of lumbar DDD therapies on Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) success, back pain score, patient satisfaction, employment status, and reoperation. Odds ratios or mean differences and 95% credible intervals were reported. Results: Six studies were included (1417 participants). Overall, the activL total disc replacement device had the most favorable results for ODI success, back pain, and patient satisfaction. Results for employment status and reoperation were similar across therapies. Conclusion: activL substantially improves ODI success, back pain, and patient satisfaction compared with other therapies for single-level lumbar DDD.

Intraosseous basivertebral nerve ablation for the treatment of chronic low back pain: a prospective randomized double-blind sham-controlled multi-center study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of radiofrequency (RF) ablation of the basivertebral nerve (BVN) for the treatment of chronic low back pain (CLBP) in a Food and Drug Administration approved Investigational Device Exemption trial. The BVN has been shown to innervate endplate nociceptors which are thought to be a source of CLBP.

METHODS

A total of 225 patients diagnosed with CLBP were randomized to either a sham (78 patients) or treatment (147 patients) intervention. The mean age within the study was 47 years (range 25-69) and the mean baseline ODI was 42. All patients had Type I or Type II Modic changes of the treated vertebral bodies. Patients were evaluated preoperatively, and at 2 weeks, 6 weeks and 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively. The primary endpoint was the comparative change in ODI from baseline to 3 months.

RESULTS

At 3 months, the average ODI in the treatment arm decreased 20.5 points, as compared to a 15.2 point decrease in the sham arm (p = 0.019, per-protocol population). A responder analysis based on ODI decrease ≥ 10 points showed that 75.6% of patients in the treatment arm as compared to 55.3% in the sham control arm exhibited a clinically meaningful improvement at 3 months.

CONCLUSION

Patients treated with RF ablation of the BVN for CLBP exhibited significantly greater improvement in ODI at 3 months and a higher responder rate than sham treated controls. BVN ablation represents a potential minimally invasive treatment for the relief of chronic low back pain. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Five-Year Reoperation Rates of 2-Level Lumbar Total Disk Replacement Versus Fusion: Results of a Prospective, Randomized Clinical Trial

STUDY DESIGN

Long-term analysis of prospective randomized clinical trial data.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Lumbar total disk replacement (TDR) has been found to have equivalent or superior clinical outcomes compared with fusion and decreased radiographic incidence of adjacent level degeneration in single-level cases.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this particular analysis was to determine the incidence and risk factors for secondary surgery in patients treated with TDR or circumferential fusion at 2 contiguous levels of the lumbar spine.

METHODS

A total of 229 patients were treated and randomized to receive either TDR or circumferential fusion to treat degenerative disk disease at 2 contiguous levels between L3 and S1 (TDR, n=161; fusion, n=68).

RESULTS

Overall, at final 5-year follow-up, 9.6% of subjects underwent a secondary surgery in this study. The overall rate of adjacent segment disease was 3.5% (8/229). At 5 years, the percentage of subjects undergoing secondary surgeries was significantly lower in the TDR group versus fusion (5.6% vs. 19.1%, P=0.0027).Most secondary surgeries (65%, 17/26) occurred at the index levels. Index level secondary surgeries were most common in the fusion cohort (16.2%, 11/68 subjects) versus TDR (3.1%, 5/161 subjects, P=0.0009). There no statistically significant difference in the adjacent level reoperation rate between TDR (2.5%, 4/161) and fusion (5.9%, 4/68). The most common reason for index levels reoperation was instrumentation removal (n=9). Excluding the instrumentation removals, there was not a significant difference between the treatments in index level reoperations or in reoperations overall.

CONCLUSIONS

There were significantly fewer reoperations in TDR patients compared with fusion patients. However, most of the secondary surgeries were instrumentation removal in the fusion cohort. Discounting the instrumentation removals, there was no significant difference in reoperations between TDR and fusion. These results are indicative that lumbar TDR is noninferior to fusion.

Clinical and Radiological Mid-Term Outcomes of Lumbar Single-Level Total Disc Replacement

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective single-center case cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

Evaluation of clinical and radiographic outcomes of a consecutive 122-patient cohort with discogenic back pain, at 2- to 10-year follow-up periods, treated by a single surgeon, with CHARITÉ Artificial Disc (DePuy Spine, Raynham, MA).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Minimum 2-year clinical and radiographic level 1 data for the first lumbar artificial disc, the CHARITÉ Artificial Disc (DePuy Spine), have recently been published, demonstrating sustained clinical benefit of the device for the treatment of degenerative disc disease.

METHODS

Patients were assessed preoperatively using clinical outcome measures, including visual analog scale (VAS) score back and leg, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), and Roland-Morris Questionnaires (RMDQ), and further assessed postoperatively, 3-, 6-, 12-months, and yearly thereafter.

RESULTS

Average follow-up was 44.9 ± 23.3 months (n = 122). The median age at surgery was 43.0 ± 9.0 years. Preoperative diagnosis included degenerative disc disease in 118 (96.7%) and internal disc disruption in 4 (3.3%). Surgery was performed at L5-S1 in 96 (77.9%) patients and at L4-L5 in 27 (22.1%). Statistically significant clinical improvements from baseline were observed on VAS (back and leg), ODI, SF-36 PCS, SF-36 MCS, and RMDQ 3 months onward. Back VAS scores decreased from 78.2 ± 21.3 preoperatively to 21.9 ± 27.8 by final follow-up. ODI scores decreased from 51.1 ± 17.3 to 16.2 ± 17.9 at last follow-up. The RMDQ scores also decreased from 16.7 ± 4.7 to 4.2 ± 5.8. SF-36 PCS and MCS increased from 25.7 ± 11.0 to 46.4 ± 10.3 for PCS and from 35.5 ± 17.4 to 51.6 ± 10.8 for MCS. Patient satisfaction surveys indicated that 90.56% patients rated their satisfaction with the surgery as "excellent" or "good" at 2 years. Range of motion averaged 8.6 ± 3.5 (median = 8.0°) at the last follow-up time point.

CONCLUSION

Outcomes verify the clinical efficacy of total disc replacement for treatment of discogenic back pain with or without radiculopathy. The outcomes instruments demonstrated statistically significant improvements 3 months onward.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

N/A.

Concurrent Use of Lumbar Total Disc Arthroplasty and Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: The Lumbar Hybrid Procedure for the Treatment of Multilevel Symptomatic Degenerative Disc Disease: A Prospective Study

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective study.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical and patient outcomes post combined total disc arthroplasty (TDA) and anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), known as hybrid surgery for the treatment of multilevel symptomatic degenerative disc disease (DDD).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Class I studies comparing the treatment of one-level lumbar DDD with TDA and ALIF have confirmed the effectiveness of those treatments through clinical and patient outcomes. Although the success of single-level disease is well documented, the evidence relating to the treatment of multilevel DDD with these modalities is emerging. With the evolution of the TDA technology, a combined approach to multilevel disease has developed in the form of the hybrid procedure.

METHODS

A total of 617 patients underwent hybrid surgery for chronic back pain between July 1998 and February 2012. Visual Analog Pain Scale for the back and leg were recorded along with the Oswestry Disability Index and Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire.

RESULTS

Both statistically and clinically significant (p < 0.005) reductions were seen in back and leg pain, which were sustained for at least 8 years postsurgery. In addition, significant improvements (P < 0.001) in self-rated disability and function were also maintained for at least 8 years. Patient satisfaction was rated as good or excellent in >90% of cases.

CONCLUSION

The results of this research indicate that improvements in both back and leg pain and function can be achieved using the hybrid lumbar reconstructive technique.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Motion preservation following total lumbar disc replacement at the lumbosacral junction: a prospective long-term clinical and radiographic investigation

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Total lumbar disc replacement (TDR) intends to avoid fusion-related negative side effects by means of motion preservation. Despite their widespread use, the adequate quality and quantity of motion, as well as the correlation between radiographic data with the patient's clinical symptomatology, remains to be established. Long-term data are lacking in particular.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to perform a clinical and radiographic long-term investigation following TDR with special emphasis on motion preservation assessment and to establish any potential correlation with patient-reported outcome parameters.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

A prospective, single-center, clinical, and radiological investigation following TDR with ProDisc II (Synthes, Paoli, PA, USA) was carried out.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Patients with a minimum 5-year follow-up (FU) after TDR performed for the treatment of intractable and predominant (≥80%) axial low back pain resulting from single-level degenerative disc disease without instabilities or deformities at the lumbosacral junction (L5-S1) comprised the sample.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and patient satisfaction rates (three-scale outcome rating), range of motion (ROM) at the index- and cranially adjacent level as well as segmental lumbar lordosis (SLL) and global lumbar lordosis (GLL) were the outcome measures.

METHODS

All data were acquired within the framework of an ongoing prospective clinical trial. Patients were examined preoperatively, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively, and annually thereafter. X-rays were performed in antero-posterior and lateral views as well as functional flexion/extension images. Radiological examinations included ROM at the index and cranially adjacent level as well as SLL and GLL. X-ray measurements were correlated with the clinical outcome parameters. A longitudinal analysis was performed between baseline data with those from the early (3-6 months), mid- (12-24 months), and late FU stages (≥5 years).

RESULTS

Results from 51 patients with a mean FU of 7.8 years (range 5.0-13.3 years) were available for the final analysis. X-ray measurements revealed a maintained mobility with a trend toward gradually declining ROM values. Although no statistically significant difference in ROM was detected between the preoperative and early FU (6.8° vs. 5.8°, p=.1), a further reduction in ROM became statistically significant at the mid- and final FU, with mean ROM of 5.2° and 4.4°, respectively (p<.001). Global lumbar lordosis increased from 48.8° to 54.4° (p<.0001) which was attributed to a lordotic shift from 18.2° to 28.0° at the index segment (p<.00001) and which was positively correlated with the applied implant lordosis (p<.05). A compensatory reduction of lordosis was observed at the cranially adjacent segment (p<.0001). The mobility of the cranially adjacent level remained unchanged (p>.05). The clinical outcome scores (VAS, ODI) revealed a significant improvement from baseline levels (p<.05). The reduction in ROM was not negatively correlated with the patient's clinical symptomatology (p>.05).

CONCLUSION

The present data reveal an increased GLL resulting from a lordotic shift of the index segment, which was strongly correlated with the applied implant lordosis. This lordotic shift was accompanied by a compensatory reduction of lordosis at the cranially adjacent segment. A gradual and statistically significant decline of the device mobility was noted over time which, however, did not negatively impact the patient's clinical symptomatology. Although the present long-term investigation provides additional insight into longitudinal radiographic changes and their influence on the patient's clinical symptomatology following TDR, the adequate quality and quantity of motion with artificial motion-preserving implants remains to be established, which will aid in defining more refined treatment concepts for both fusion and motion preserving techniques alike.

Total Disc Arthroplasty Versus Anterior Interbody Fusion in the Lumbar Spine Have Relatively a Few Differences in Readmission and Short-term Adverse Events

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective matched cohort study of prospectively collected data.

OBJECTIVE

To compare rates of adverse events and readmission between lumbar total disc arthroplasty (TDA) and anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

TDA and ALIF may be considered for similar degenerative indications. However, there have been a few large-cohort comparison studies of short-term clinical outcomes for these procedures.

METHODS

The 2011-2015 NSQIP databases were retrospectively queried to identify patients who underwent elective stand-alone ALIF and TDA. After propensity matching, the association of procedure type with adverse events and readmission was determined using McNemar's test. Operative time and postoperative length of stay (LOS) were compared using multivariate linear regression. Risk factors for adverse events were determined using multivariate Poisson regression.

RESULTS

In total, 1801 ALIF and 255 TDA patients were identified. After matching with propensity scores, there were no significant differences in the rates of any adverse event, serious adverse events, individual adverse events, or readmission other than blood transfusion, which occurred more frequently in the ALIF cohort (3.92% vs. 0.39%, P = 0.007). Operative time was not significantly different between the two cohorts, but postoperative LOS was significantly longer for ALIF cases (+0.28 days, P < 0.001). When evaluating 10 preoperative variables as potential risk factors for adverse events and readmission after TDA and ALIF, the majority of results were similar.

CONCLUSION

The only identified differences in perioperative outcomes between TDA and ALIF were a 3.53% higher incidence of blood transfusion and 0.28-day longer LOS for the ALIF group. These results suggest overall similar short-term general-health outcomes between the two groups, and that the choice between the two procedures, for the appropriately selected patient, should be based on longer-term functional outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Two-year Outcomes from a Single Surgeon's Learning Curve Experience of Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion without Intraoperative Neuromonitoring

Introduction

Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) is a newer procedure that avoids the psoas and lumbosacral plexus due to its oblique trajectory into the retroperitoneal space. While early experience with OLIF is reassuring, the longer-term clinical efficacy has not been well established. The purpose of this study was to describe two-year clinical outcomes with OLIF performed by a single surgeon during the learning curve without the aid of the neuromonitoring.

Materials and methods

Chart review was performed for the consecutive patients who underwent OLIF by a single surgeon. Back pain severity on a visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were collected preoperatively and postoperatively at six weeks, three months, six months, one year and two years.

Results

A total of 21 patients (38 levels) were included in this study. The indications for surgery were degenerative disc disease (n=10, 47.6%), spondylolisthesis (n=9, 42.9%) and spinal stenosis (n=6, 28.6%). The median operating room time was 351 minutes (interquartile range (IQR): 279-406 minutes), blood loss was 40 ml (IQR: 30-150 ml), and hospital stay was 2.0 days (IQR: 1.0-3.5 days). The complication rate was 9.5%, both venous injuries. There were no other perioperative complications. Back pain severity decreased by 70%, on average, over two years (p <0.001). A total of 17 (81%) patients reported at least a two-point decrease from the baseline. The ODI scores decreased by 55%, on average, over two years (p <0.001), with 16 (76%) patients reporting at least a 15-point decrease from the baseline. Over two years, no symptomatic pseudarthrosis, hardware failure, reoperations, or additional complications were reported.

Conclusions

The oblique lateral interbody fusion performed without the intraoperative neuromonitoring was safe and clinically efficacious for up to two years. The complication rate in this cohort is similar to other published OLIF series and appears acceptable when compared to the lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) and the anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF). No motor or sensory deficits were observed in this study, supporting the premise that the neuromonitoring is unnecessary in OLIF.

Anterior Longitudinal Ligament Reconstruction to Reduce Hypermobility of Cervical and Lumbar Disc Arthroplasty

Study Design

Retrospective case series

Purpose

This study aims to present the early clinical and radiological outcomes of anterior longitudinal ligament (ALL) reconstruction following disc arthroplasty.

Overview of Literature

Although cervical and lumbar disc arthroplasty have entered the clinical setting, there are still concerns regarding the short and long term complications arising from hypermobility of current prosthesis designs. Reconstruction of the ALL is a potential solution to disc arthroplasty hypermobility.

Methods

ALL reconstruction following disc arthroplasty have been performed by the senior author over a 24 month period. Ligament replacements used include allograft and synthetic, ligament advanced reinforcement system (LARS) ligaments. Methods of fixation used include titanium staples, bone anchors and suture fixation. Radiological follow-up pre- and postoperative Oswestry disability index, Neck Disability Index, Patient Satisfaction index scores were recorded on all patients.

Results

A total of 18 ALL reconstructions were performed. There have been no cases of early complications, revision surgery for recurrent symptoms or implant failure. Of the 6 patients receiving a minimum of 15 months follow-up, 4 patients received an allograft, 2 patients received the LARS ligament. Favourable, postoperative clinical and radiographic outcomes have been demonstrated.

Conclusions

ALL reconstruction following cervical and lumbar disc arthroplasty is a promising solution to addressing non-physiological kinematics of current disc arthroplasty devices. Randomized, controlled studies with larger study samples and long-term follow-up are required to establish these conclusions.

RESULTS OF TOTAL LUMBAR INTERVERTEBRAL DISK REPLACEMENT WITH M6-L: A MULTICENTER STUDY

ABSTRACT Objective: In this paper we report the clinical and radiological results of lumbar intervertebral disk (IVD) replacement with M6-L for the treatment of patients with IVD degeneration. Methods: One hundred and fifty-six patients with IVD degeneration were operated with the one level implantation of an M6-L prosthesis at three neurosurgical departments, in Irkutsk, Krasnoyarsk and Vladivostok. We assessed pain intensity (VAS), the Oswestry disability index (ODI) and outcomes by the Macnab scale up to 36 months after surgery. Instrumental data were used to assess range of motion in the operated segment and heterotopic ossification by the McAfee-Suchomel classification. Results: The average VAS before surgery was 6.9 ± 1.6 cm. After surgery, this value reduced significantly, to an average of 1.3 ± 1.2 cm (p<0.001). The average ODI before surgery was 40.2 ± 6.9%, and after IVD arthroplasty, this indictor improved to 12.3 ± 6.1% (p <0.001). Range of motion in the operated segment at baseline averaged 36.8 ± 2.6o, and within 36 months after the operation, this had increased to 41.2 ± 2.9o. During the entire follow-up period, signs of severe (13.4%, n = 21) or moderate (10.2%, n = 16) heterotopic ossification were observed. Conclusions: The use of M6-L prosthesis can significantly reduce the level of pain, improve quality of life and maintain the physiological range of motion in the operated spinal segment in patients with degenerative lesions IVD at a low level of adverse outcomes. [249 Words].

Lumbar Disk Arthroplasty for Degenerative Disk Disease: Literature Review

Low back pain is the principal cause of long-term disability worldwide. We intend to address one of its main causes, degenerative disk disease, a spinal condition involving degradation of an intervertebral disk. Following unsuccessful conservative treatment, patients may be recommended for surgery. The two main surgical treatments for lumbar degenerative disk disease are lumbar fusion: traditional standard surgical treatment and lumbar disk arthroplasty, also known as lumbar total disk replacement. Lumbar fusion aims to relieve pain by fusing vertebrae together to eliminate movement at the joint, but it has been criticized for problems involving insignificant pain relief, a reduced range of motion, and an increased risk of adjacent segment degeneration. This leads to development of the lumbar total disk replacement technique, which aims to relieve pain replacing a degenerated intervertebral disk with a moveable prosthesis, thus mimicking the functional anatomy and biomechanics of a native intervertebral disk. Over the years a large range of prosthetic disks has been developed. The efficacy and current evidence for these prostheses are discussed in this review. The results of this study are intended to guide clinical practice and future lumbar total disk replacement device choice and design.

Clinical Outcomes of Total Disc Replacement Versus Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Surgical Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Disc Disease

STUDY DESIGN

The authors performed a retrospective controlled study of patients diagnosed with lumbar degenerative disc disease who received surgical intervention (either total disc replacement [TDR]/Activ-L or anterior lumbar interbody fusion [ALIF]) at a single tertiary-care hospital from 2007-2010.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the clinical outcomes after TDR in comparison with ALIF for surgical treatment of lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD).

METHODS

Analyzed data included intra-operative blood loss, time to return to work, and clinical outcomes as evaluated through the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain questionnaires pre-operatively and at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year postoperative follow-up.

RESULTS

At the univariate analysis, patients submitted to TDR presented significantly lower VAS pain scores than patients who received ALIF starting at 6 weeks (P < .001) and continuing through one year postoperatively (P = .007). Patients submitted to TDR also presented significantly lower ODI disability scores at all time points. There was a significant difference in the number of days to return to work, with TDR patients returning to work on average 65 days sooner than ALIF patients (P = .011). There was no significant difference in the total blood loss between both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this retrospective controlled study suggest that, in comparison with patients submitted to ALIF, patients submitted to TDR present quicker return to work, less back pain, and lower disability scores at 1 year follow-up.

Autologous bone marrow concentrate intradiscal injection for the treatment of degenerative disc disease with three-year follow-up

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to assess safety and feasibility of intradiscal bone marrow concentrate (BMC) injections to treat low back discogenic pain as an alternative to surgery with three year minimum follow-up.

METHODS

A total of 26 patients suffering from degenerative disc disease and candidates for spinal fusion or total disc replacement surgery were injected with 2 ml autologous BMC into the nucleus pulposus of treated lumbar discs. A sample aliquot of BMC was characterized by flow cytometry and CFU-F assay to determine progenitor cell content. Improvement in pain and disability scores and 12 month post-injection MRI were compared to patient demographics and BMC cellularity.

RESULTS

After 36 months, only six patients progressed to surgery. The remaining 20 patients reported average ODI and VAS improvements from 56.7 ± 3.6 and 82.1 ± 2.6 at baseline to 17.5 ± 3.2 and 21.9 ± 4.4 after 36 months, respectively. One year MRI indicated 40% of patients improved one modified Pfirrmann grade and no patient worsened radiographically. Cellular analysis showed an average of 121 million total nucleated cells per ml, average CFU-F of 2713 per ml, and average CD34+ of 1.82 million per ml in the BMC. Patients with greater concentrations of CFU-F (>2000 per ml) and CD34+ cells (>2 million per ml) in BMC tended to have significantly better clinical improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no adverse events related to marrow aspiration or injection, and this study provides evidence of safety and feasibility of intradiscal BMC therapy. Patient improvement and satisfaction with this surgical alternative supports further study of the therapy.

Lumbar total disc arthroplasty: outdated surgery or here to stay procedure? A systematic review of current literature

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.