Segmental contribution toward total cervical range of motion: a comparison of cervical disc arthroplasty and fusion

Influence of cervical total disc replacement on motion in the target and adjacent segments

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The motion limitation after cervical discectomy and fusion alters the spine´s kinematics. Unphysiological strains may be the result and possible explanation for adjacent segment degeneration. Alterations to cervical kinematics due to cervical total disc replacement (TDR), especially two-level, are still under investigated.

PURPOSE

To investigate cervical motion including coupled motions after one-level and two-level TDR in the treated and also the adjacent segments.

STUDY DESIGN

An in-vitro study using pure moment loading of human donor spines.

METHODS

Seven fresh frozen human cervical spine specimens (C4-T1, median age 46 with range 19-60 years, four female) were included in this study. Specimens were tested in the intact condition first, followed by one-level TDR at C5-6 which was subsequently extended one level further caudal (C5-7). Each specimen was quasistatically loaded with pure moments up to 1.5 Nm in flexion/extension (FE), lateral bending (LB), and axial rotation (AR) in a universal spine tester for 3.5 cycles at 1 °/s. During the tests three dimensional motion tracking was performed for each vertebral body individually. From that, the primary and coupled ROM of each spinal level during the third full cycle of motion were evaluated. Nonparametric statistical analysis was performed using a Friedman-test and post hoc correction with Dunn-Bonferroni-tests (p<.05). Ethics approval was obtained in advance.

RESULTS

In FE, one-level TDR (C5-6) moderately increased primary FE in all four segments, but only significantly at the cranial adjacent level C4-5. Additional TDR at C6-7 further increased the ROM at the target segment without much influence on the other levels. Increasing implant height at C6-7 partially counteracted the increased FE. Coupled motions were minimal in all test conditions at all levels. In LB, coupled AR was observed in all test conditions at all levels. One-level TDR decreased primary LB at the target segment C5-6 significantly, without much influence on the other levels. Extending TDR to C6-7 decreased ROM in the target segment but without gaining statistical significance. Increasing implant height at C6-7 further decreased primary LB at the target segment, still without significance. Notably, coupled AR was significantly decreased at the cranial adjacent segment C4-5 compared to the intact condition. In AR, coupled LB was observed in all test conditions at the levels C4-5, C5-6, and C6-7, while the transition level to the thoracic spine C7-T1 showed only little coupled LB. Both one-level and two-level TDR showed little influence on primary AR or coupled motions at any level. Only after increasing implant height at C6-7 was the motion of the caudally adjacent level C7-T1 significantly altered.

CONCLUSION

Evaluating primary FE, LB, and AR together with the associated coupled motions revealed widespread influence of cervical TDR not only on the motion of the treated level but also at the adjacent segments. The influence of two-level TDR is more widespread and involves more levels than one-level TDR.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The prevention of unphysiological strains due to altered kinematics after cervical fusion, which could possibly explain adjacent segment degeneration, were a driving factor in the development of TDR. These experimental findings suggest cervical TDR influences the whole cervical spine, not only the treated segment. The effect becomes more extensive, involving more levels and motion directions, after two-level than after one-level TDR.

No Difference in Two-Year Revisions Between Hybrid Fusion and Two-Level Anterior Discectomy and Fusion: A National Database Study

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective Cohort.

OBJECTIVE

This study utilized a large national database to compare two-year revision rates, in addition to complications and costs, of hybrid surgery (HS) compared to two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).

METHODS

This study used the PearlDiver Mariner dataset selecting for patients aged 18 and older who had at least 90-day active longitudinal follow-up who underwent two-level ACDF or two-level Hybrid surgery (single level ACDF and single level CDA). Patients with prior spinal trauma, infection, cancer, or posterior fusion were excluded. Primary outcomes measures were 90-day major and minor medical complications, ED visits, readmissions, as well as two-year revisions. Patients were also assessed for postoperative dysphagia, incidental durotomy, vascular injury, 90-day surgical site, and implant complications. Additionally, hospitalization and postoperative costs were evaluated.

RESULTS

There were 4570 two-level ACDF surgeries and 888 hybrid surgeries. After matching the cohorts, no statistical differences in demographics were found. There were no differences in reoperation rates at all measured time points nor 2-year complications. HS had a lower incidence of major (1.6% vs 3.1%, P = .003) and minor complications (3.0% vs 4.6%, P = .009) than ACDF. 90-day readmission was lower in the HS cohort (2.8% vs 4.2%), P = .024. HS was associated with reduced hospitalization costs -$2614 (-$3916 to -$904, P < .001). 3516 patients had ACDF, and 699 had HS with at least 2 years of follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Hybrid surgery is a safe and effective surgical treatment for cervical disease in appropriately selected patients.

The move-C cervical artificial disc can restore intact range of motion and 3-D kinematics

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

In contrast to cervical discectomy and fusion, total disc replacement (TDR) aims at preserving the motion at the treated vertebral level. Spinal motion is commonly evaluated with the range of motion (ROM). However, more qualitative information about cervical kinematics before and after TDR is still lacking.

PURPOSE

The aim of this in vitro study was to investigate the influence of cervical TDR on ROM, instantaneous centers of rotation (ICR) and three-dimensional helical axes.

STUDY DESIGN

An in vitro study with human spine specimens under pure moment loading was conducted to evaluate the kinematics of the intact cervical spine and compare it to cervical TDR.

METHODS

Six fresh frozen human cervical specimens (C4-5, median age 28 years, range 19-47 years, two female and four male) were biomechanically characterized in the intact state and after implantation of a cervical disc prosthesis (MOVE-C, NGMedical, Germany). To mimic in vivo conditions regarding temperature and humidity, water steam was used to create a warm and humid test environment with 37°C. Each specimen was quasistatically loaded with pure moments up to ±2.5 Nm in flexion/extension (FE), lateral bending (LB) and axial rotation (AR) in a universal spine tester for 3.5 cycles at 1 °/s. For each third cycle of motion the ROM was evaluated and an established method was used to determine the helical axis and COR and to project them into three planar X-rays. Statistical analysis was conducted using a Friedman-test and post hoc correction with Dunn-Bonferroni-tests (p<.05).

RESULTS

After TDR, total ROM was increased in FE from 19.1° to 20.1°, decreased in LB from 14.6° to 12.6° and decreased in AR from 17.7° to 15.5°. No statistical differences between the primary ROM in the intact condition and ROM after TDR were detected. Coupled rotation between LB and AR were also maintained. The position and orientation of the helical axes after cervical TDR was in good agreement with the results of the intact specimens in all three motion directions. The ICR in FE and AR before and after TDR closely matched, while in LB the ICR after TDR were more caudal. The intact in vitro kinematics we found also resembled in vivo results of healthy individuals.

CONCLUSION

The results of this in vitro study highlight the potential of artificial cervical disc implants to replicate the quantity as well as the quality of motion of the intact cervical spine.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Physiological motion preservation was a driving factor in the development of cervical TDR. Our results demonstrate the potential of cervical TDR to replicate in vivo kinematics in all three motion directions.

Disc prosthesis versus fusion with cage in single level cervical degenerative spine disease - A retrospective case-control patient reported outcome study

AIM

To compare the clinical outcome of single level cervical degenerative spine disease treated surgically with motion preserving anterior cervical disc arthroplasty versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).

METHODS

Patients treated with cervical disc arthroplasty at Aalborg University Hospital and ACDF at Aarhus University Hospital were matched 1:2. Primary outcome measures were Neck Disability Index (NDI), EQ-5D-3 L and Numeric rating scale (NRS) for arm- and neck pain. Data was collected by telephone interviews regarding present and retrospective data.

RESULTS

50 patients treated with cervical disc arthroplasty were matched to 100 ACDF patients covering November 2011 to December 2018. Mean improvements for NRS neck pain three-months postoperative, and NDI were significantly better in the cervical disc arthroplasty group, with intergroup differences of 1.56 (p = 0.02) and 5.01 (p = 0.01) respectively. A subgroup analysis of the half of the cohort with the longest follow-up (mean 7.6 years) showed, in favour of cervical disc arthroplasty, mean improvements of NDI: 8.80 (p = 0.00), EQ5D: - 0.19 (p = 0.04), NRS neck three months follow-up: 3.70 (p = 0.00) and long follow-up: 2.54 (p = 0.01) and NRS arm three months follow-up: 2.02 (p = 0.01). Radiologic examination indicated preserved mobility in 80% of the implanted protheses at 24-month post-surgical follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Surgical treatment of one level degenerative cervical spine disease with cervical disc arthroplasty or anterior cervical discectomy and fusion has a similar good clinical outcome after a mean follow-up of 5.6 years. However, cervical disc arthroplasty displayed long-term superiority in the half of the cohort with the longest follow-up time averaging 7.6 years.

Return to sport and active military duty after cervical disc arthroplasty: A systematic review

Introduction

Cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) has been established as an effective treatment for cervical disc degeneration or herniation in the general population. Return to sport (RTS) outcomes in athletes remain unclear.

Objective

The purpose of this review was to evaluate RTS following single-level, multi-level, or hybrid CDA, with additional return to activity context provided by return to duty (RTD) outcomes in active-duty military.

Methods

Medline, Embase, and Cochrane were searched through August 2022 for studies that reported RTS/RTD after CDA in athletic or active-duty populations. Data was extracted on the following topics: surgical failures/reoperations, surgical complications, RTS/RTD, and postoperative time to RTS/RTD.

Results

Thirteen papers covering 56 athletes and 323 active-duty members were included. Athletes were 59% male with a mean age of 39.8 years and active-duty members were 84% male with a mean age of 40.9 years. Only 1 of 151 cases required reoperation and only 6 instances of surgical complications were reported. Classified as return to general sporting activity, RTS was observed in 100% of patients (n = 51/51) after an average of 10.1 weeks to training and 30.5 weeks to competition. RTD was observed in 88% of patients (n = 268/304) after an average of 11.1 weeks. Average follow-up was 53.1 months for athletes and 13.4 months for the active-duty population.

Conclusion

CDA displays excellent RTS and RTD rates in physically demanding populations at rates superior or equivalent to alternative treatments. Surgeons should consider these findings when determining the optimal cervical disc treatment approach in active patients.

Functional Range of Motion of the Cervical Spine in Cervical Fusion Patients During Activities of Daily Living

Following cervical spine fusion there is a reduction in maximum range of motion (ROM) but how this impacts activity of daily living (ADLs) and quality of life is unknown. This study's purpose is to quantify maximum and functional cervical spine ROM in patients with multi-level cervical fusion (>3 levels) compared to controls during ADLs and to correlate functional range of motion with scores from patient reported outcomes measures (PROs) including the Comparative Pain Scale (CPS), Fear Avoidance Belief Questionnaire (FABQ), and Neck Disability Index (NDI). An inertial measurement unit (IMU) system quantified ROM during ADLs in the extension/flexion, lateral bending, and axial rotation directions of motion. The reliability of this system was compared to standard optical motion tracking. Fourteen participants (8 females, age = 60.0 years (18.7) (median, (interquartile range)) with a history of multi-level cervical fusion (years post-op 0.9 (0.7)) were compared to 16 controls (13 females, age = 52.1 years (15.8)). PROs were collected for each participant. Fusion participants had significantly decreased maximum ROM in all directions of motion. Fusion participants had decreased ROM for some ADLs (backing up a car, using a phone, donning socks, negotiating stairs). CPS, FABQ, and NDI scores were significantly increased in fusion participants. Reductions in two activities (backing up a car, stair negotiation) correlated with a combination of increased PRO scores. Cervical fusion decreases maximum ROM and is correlated with increased PROs in some ADLs, however there is minimal impact on functional ROM. Investigation into velocity and acceleration may yield categorization of pathologic movement.

Segmental range of motion after cervical total disc arthroplasty at long-term follow-up: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

As an alternative procedure to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, total disc arthroplasty (TDA) facilitates direct neural decompression and disc height restoration while also preserving cervical spine kinematics. To date, few studies have reported long-term functional outcomes after TDA. This paper reports the results of a systematic review and meta-analysis that investigated how segmental range of motion (ROM) at the operative level is maintained with long-term follow-up.

METHODS

PubMed and MEDLINE were queried for all published studies pertaining to cervical TDA. The methodology for screening adhered strictly to the PRISMA guidelines. All English-language prospective studies that reported ROM preoperatively, 1 year postoperatively, and/or at long-term follow-up of 5 years or more were included. A meta-analysis was performed using Cochran's Q and I2 to test data for statistical heterogeneity, in which case a random-effects model was used. The mean differences (MDs) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were reported.

RESULTS

Of the 12 studies that met the inclusion criteria, 8 reported the long-term outcomes of 944 patients with an average (range) follow-up of 99.86 (60-142) months and were included in the meta-analysis. There was no difference between preoperative segmental ROM and segmental ROM at 1-year follow-up (MD 0.91°, 95% CI -1.25° to 3.07°, p = 0.410). After the exclusion of 1 study from the comparison between preoperative and 1-year ROM owing to significant statistical heterogeneity according to the sensitivity analysis, ROM significantly improved at 1 year postoperatively (MD 1.92°, 95% CI 1.04°-2.79°, p < 0.001). However, at longer-term follow-up, the authors again found no difference with preoperative segmental ROM, and no study was excluded on the basis of the results of further sensitivity analysis (MD -0.22°, 95% CI -1.69° to -1.23°, p = 0.760). In contrast, there was a significant decrease in ROM from 1 year postoperatively to final long-term follow-up (MD -0.77°, 95% CI -1.29° to -0.24°, p = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

Segmental ROM was found to initially improve beyond preoperative values for as long as 1 year postoperatively, but then ROM deteriorated back to values consistent with preoperative motion at long-term follow-up. Although additional studies with further longitudinal follow-up are needed, these findings further support the notion that cervical TDA may successfully maintain physiological spinal kinematics over the long term.

Longitudinal assessment of segmental motion of the cervical spine following total disc arthroplasty: a comparative analysis of devices

OBJECTIVE

Total disc arthroplasty (TDA) has been shown to be an effective and safe treatment for cervical degenerative disc disease at short- and midterm follow-up. However, there remains a paucity of literature reporting the differences between individual prosthesis designs with regard to device performance. In this study, the authors evaluated the long-term maintenance of segmental range of motion (ROM) at the operative cervical level across a diverse range of TDA devices.

METHODS

In this study, the authors retrospectively evaluated all consecutive patients who underwent 1- or 2-level cervical TDA between 2005 and 2020 at a single institution. Patients with a minimum of 6 months of follow-up and lateral flexion/extension radiographs preoperatively, 2 months postoperatively, and at final follow-up were included. Radiographic measurements included static segmental lordosis, segmental range of motion (ROM) on flexion/extension, global cervical (C2-7) ROM on flexion/extension, and disc space height. The paired t-test was used to evaluate improvement in radiographic parameters. Subanalysis between devices was performed using one-way ANCOVA. Significance was determined at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

A total of 85 patients (100 discs) were included, with a mean patient age of 46.01 ± 8.82 years and follow-up of 43.56 ± 39.36 months. Implantations included 22 (22.00%) M6-C, 51 (51.00%) Mobi-C, 14 (14.00%) PCM, and 13 (13.00%) ProDisc-C devices. There were no differences in baseline radiographic parameters between groups. At 2 months postoperatively, PCM provided significantly less segmental lordosis (p = 0.037) and segmental ROM (p = 0.039). At final follow-up, segmental ROM with both the PCM and ProDisc-C devices was significantly less than that with the M6-C and Mobi-C devices (p = 0.015). From preoperatively to 2 months postoperatively, PCM implantation led to a significant loss of lordosis (p < 0.001) and segmental ROM (p = 0.005) relative to the other devices. Moreover, a significantly greater decline in segmental ROM from 2 months postoperatively to final follow-up was seen with ProDisc-C, while segmental ROM increased significantly over time with Mobi-C (p = 0.049).

CONCLUSIONS

Analysis by TDA device brand demonstrated that motion preservation differs depending on disc design. Certain devices, including M6-C and Mobi-C, improve ROM on flexion/extension from preoperatively to postoperatively and continue to increase slightly at final follow-up. On the other hand, devices such as PCM and ProDisc-C contributed to greater segmental stiffness, with a gradual decline in ROM seen with ProDisc-C. Further studies are needed to understand how much segmental ROM is ideal after TDA for preservation of physiological cervical kinematics.

Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Surgical Treatments in Patients With Pure Cervical Radiculopathy

BACKGROUND

Traditionally paired meta-analysis revealed inconsistencies in the safety and effectiveness of surgical interventions. We conducted a network meta-analysis to assess various treatments' clinical efficacy and safety for pure cervical radiculopathy.

METHODS

The Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different treatment options for patients with pure cervical radiculopathy from inception until October 23, 2021. The primary outcomes were postoperative success rates, postoperative complication rates, and postoperative reoperation rates. The pooled data were subjected to a random-effects consistency model. The protocol was published in PROSPERO (CRD42021284819).

RESULTS

This study included 23 RCTs (n = 1,844) that evaluated various treatments for patients with pure cervical radiculopathy. There were no statistical differences between treatments in the consistency model in terms of major clinical effectiveness and safety outcomes. Postoperative success rates were higher for anterior cervical foraminotomy (ACF: probability 38%), posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF: 24%), and anterior cervical discectomy with fusion and additional plating (ACDFP: 21%). Postoperative complication rates ranked from high to low as follows: cervical disc replacement (CDR: probability 32%), physiotherapy (25%), ACF (25%). Autologous bone graft (ABG) had better relief from arm pain (probability 71%) and neck disability (71%). Among the seven surgical interventions with a statistical difference, anterior cervical discectomy with allograft bone graft plus plating (ABGP) had the shortest surgery time.

CONCLUSIONS

According to current results, all surgical interventions can achieve satisfactory results, and there are no statistically significant differences. As a result, based on their strengths and patient-related factors, surgeons can exercise discretion in determining the appropriate surgical intervention for pure cervical radiculopathy.Systematic Review Registration: CRD42021284819.

Effects of experimental pain on the cervical spine reposition errors

BACKGROUND

Healthy subjects showed normal variance of cervical spine reposition errors of approximately 2 degrees. Effects of experimental pain on cervical spine reposition errors were unknown; thus, the purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of experimental pain on cervical spine reposition errors.

METHODS

A repeated measured study design was applied. Thirty healthy subjects (12 males) were recruited. Reposition errors were extracted from upright cervical positions before and after cervical flexion movement in healthy subjects before and during experimental neck pain. Cervical spine reposition errors were calculated based on anatomical landmarks of each cervical joint. Reposition errors were extracted in degrees as constant errors and absolute errors for further statistical analysis. Repeated measures analysis of variance (RM-ANOVA) was applied to analyse experimental pain effects on either constant errors or absolute errors of different cervical joints.

RESULTS

The cervical spine showed non-significant difference in reposition errors regarding the constant errors (P>0.05) while larger reposition errors regarding the absolute errors during experimental pain compared to before experimental pain (P<0.001). In addition, the pain level joint (C4/C5) and its adjacent joints (C3/C4 and C5/C6) indicated larger reposition errors regarding absolute errors (P=0.035, P=0.329 and P=0.103, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

This study firstly investigated the cervical spine reposition errors in experimental neck pain and further found the joints adjacent to the pain level showed larger errors compared to the distant joints regarding absolute errors. It may imply that the larger reposition errors in specific cervical joint indicate probable injury or pain existed adjacent to the joints.

Economics of Cervical Disc Replacement

BACKGROUND

Although extensive reports of clinical outcome after cervical disc replacement (CDR) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion exist, few reviews of the cost-effectiveness research in cervical spine surgery exist. The purpose of this study was to review the concepts of cost-effectiveness research, the various approaches to cost-effectiveness studies in the context of cervical spine surgery, and some of the literature results.

METHODS

Review article describing cost-effectiveness research concepts, methodology, and results. The article reviews the concept of value, cost, utility, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, and recent research.

RESULTS

Mixed data on cost-effectiveness of CDR compared with fusion exist. Notably, several studies performed within the last 5 years that use prospectively collected utility scores, costs, and adverse event calculations demonstrate a significant cost savings associated with CDR compared with fusion.

CONCLUSIONS

The recent literature confirms that, in properly selected patients, CDR is more effective and less costly over a 7-year time horizon for patients with symptomatic degenerative disc disease. The primary driver of the differential in cost effectiveness is the difference in secondary surgery rates.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 5 CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In properly selected patients, CDR is more effective and less costly over a 7-year time horizon for patients with symptomatic degenerative disc disease.

Recurrent neck pain patients exhibit altered joint motion pattern during cervical flexion and extension movements

BACKGROUND

Impaired sensorimotor ability has been demonstrated in recurrent neck pain patients. It is however not clear if cervical joint motion and pressure pain sensitivity in recurrent neck pain patients are different from asymptomatic controls.

METHODS

Cervical flexion and extension motions were examined by video-fluoroscopy and pressure pain thresholds were assessed bilaterally over C2/C3, C5/C6 facet joints and right tibialis anterior in eighteen recurrent neck pain patients and eighteen healthy subjects. Individual joint motion was analyzed by dividing fluoroscopic videos into 10 epochs. The motion opposite to the primary direction (anti-directional motion) and motion along with the primary direction (pro-directional motion) of each joint were extracted across epochs. Total joint motion was the sum of anti-directional and pro-directional motions. Joint motion variability was represented by the variance of joint motions across epochs.

FINDINGS

Compared to controls, recurrent neck pain patients showed: 1) decreased anti-directional motion at C2/C3 and C3/C4 (P < 0.05) and increased anti-directional motion at C5/C6 and C6/C7 (P < 0.05) during extension motion. 2) Increased overall anti-direction motion during flexion motion (P < 0.05). 3) Lower joint motion variability at C3/C4 during extension motion (P < 0.05).

INTERPRETATION

Recurrent neck pain patients showed a redistribution of anti-directional motion between the middle cervical spine and the lower cervical spine during cervical extension and increased overall anti-directional motion during cervical flexion compared with healthy controls. The anti-directional motion was more sensitive to neck pain compared to other cervical joint motion parameters in the present study.

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.

[Effectiveness evaluation of Prodisc-C prosthesis for more than 10 years follow-up after total cervical disc replacement]

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate long-term radiographic and clinical effectiveness of total cervical disc replacement (TDR) with Prodisc-C prosthesis at a minimum of 10 years follow-up.

METHODS

The clinical data of 118 patients with cervical disc degeneration disease (CDDD) treated with TDR by using Prodisc-C prosthesis between December 2005 and April 2008 were retrospectively analyzed. There were 66 males and 52 females, with the age of 25-62 years (mean, 46.8 years). There were 38 cases of cervical spondylotic radiculopathy, 28 cases of cervical spondylotic myelopathy, and 52 cases of mixed cervical spondylotic myelopathy. The operative segments were C 3-7, including 90 cases of single segment, 20 cases of continuous double segments, and 8 cases of continuous three segments. A total of 154 Prodisc-C prostheses were used during the operation. The clinical effectiveness was evaluated by pain visual analogue scale (VAS) score, neck disability index (NDI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, and Odom grade before and after operation. Imaging evaluation indicators included range of motion (ROM), sagittal lordosis angle, intervertebral disc height (IDH), and prosthesis displacement, subsidence, loosening, locking, and heterotopic ossification (HO), adjacent segment degeneration (ASD), and other complications. Patients were grouped according to whether HO or ASD occurred or not, the ROM of surgical segment was compared.

RESULTS

All patients were followed up 121-150 months (mean, 135.8 months). No revision operation was performed during the follow-up period. The VAS, NDI, JOA scores and Odom grades were significantly improved at 1 week after operation and last follow-up when compared with preoperative ones ( P<0.05); VAS and NDI scores were further improved at last follow-up than those at 1 week after operation ( P<0.05); there was no significant difference in JOA scores and improvement rates between at 1 week after operation and at last follow-up ( P>0.05). The ROM of the whole cervical spine and the operative segment decreased at 1 week and 10 years after operation when compared with preoperative ones ( P<0.05), but there was no significant difference in the other time points ( P>0.05); there was no significant difference in the ROM between the upper adjacent segment (UAS) and the lower adjacent segment (LAS) at each time point after operation ( P>0.05). There was no significant difference in sagittal lordosis angle of cervical spine before and after operation ( P>0.05); the sagittal lordosis angle of operative segment increased significantly at 1 week, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years after operation ( P<0.05). The IDH of operative segment was significantly improved at each time point after operation ( P<0.05), but there was no significant difference in IDH between UAS and LAS at each time point after operation ( P>0.05). No prosthesis displacement, subsidence, or loosening occurred at each time point after operation. There was no significant difference of the prosthetic displacement and subsidence distance between all time points after 6 months after operation ( P>0.05). At last follow-up, the incidence of prosthetic locking/fusion was 10.4%, showing no significant difference when compared with 6 months (1.9%) ( P<0.05). The incidence of upper ASD and lower ASD was 1.3% and 2.6% respectively at 1 week after operation. The incidence of upper ASD and lower ASD increased gradually with time prolonging, and there were significant differences between different time points ( P<0.05). The ROM of operative segment in ASD group was lower than that in non-ASD group at each time point after operation, but there was no significant difference ( P>0.05). HO appeared in 58.4% of the segments at 6 months after operation, and the incidence of HO increased significantly with time, which was significantly different from that at 6 months after operation ( P<0.05). The ROM of operative segments in HO group was significantly lower than that in non-HO group at 6 months, 2 years, 5 years, and 10 years after operation ( P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

TDR has little effect on adjacent segments, although there are some imaging complications, it has no significant effect on the improvement of overall clinical effectiveness. Prodisc-C prosthesis can provide long-term, safe, and definite clinical effectiveness in the treatment of CDDD.

Cervical Disk Arthroplasty

Anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion has been and remains the benchmark surgical management of cervical degenerative disk disease. However, an increased use of cervical disk arthroplasty (CDA) has been found in the past few years. The purported benefits of CDA included preserved motion, less adjacent-level degeneration, and less morbidity. Short-term results from randomized control trials clearly showed noninferiority of CDA compared with fusion. With long-term comparison data becoming available, results are equivalent and superior in many metrics compared, favoring CDA. Concerns remain regarding the best way to manage CDA failures. Nonetheless, appropriate patient selection and adherence to strict surgical technique make CDA a viable treatment.

SPORTS ACTIVITY AND HIP, KNEE, SHOULDER AND INTERVERTEBRAL DISC ARTHROPLASTIES

The success of joint replacement surgery has been responsible for raising patients' expectations regarding the procedure. Many of these procedures are currently designed not only to relive the pain caused by arthrosis, but also to enable patients to achieve functional recovery and to engage in some degree of physical activity and sports. However, as physical exercise causes an increase in forces exercised through the articular prosthesis, it can be an important risk factor for its early failure. Scientific literature on sports after arthroplasty is limited to small-scale retrospective studies with short-term follow-up, which are mostly insufficient to evaluate articular prosthesis durability. This article presents a review of the literature on sports in the context of hip, knee, shoulder and intervertebral disc arthroplasty, and puts forward general recommendations based on the current scientific evidence. Systematic Review, Level of Evidence III.

Adjacent segment degeneration or disease after cervical total disc replacement: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) has been widely used in cervical spondylosis, but adjacent segment degeneration/disease (ASD) was inevitable. Cervical total disc replacement (TDR) could reduce the stress of adjacent segments and retard ASD in theory, but the superiority has not been determined yet. This analysis aimed that whether TDR was superior to ACDF for decreasing adjacent segment degeneration (ASDeg) and adjacent segment disease (ASDis).

METHODS

A meta-analysis was performed according to the guidelines of the Cochrane Collaboration with PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and CBM (China Biological Medicine) databases. It included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that reported ASDeg, ASDis, and reoperation on adjacent segments after TDR and ACDF. Two investigators independently selected trials, assessed methodological quality, and evaluated the quality of this meta-analysis using the grades of recommendation, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) approach.

RESULTS

Eleven studies with 2632 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The overall rate of ASD in TDR group was lower than ACDF group (OR = 0.6; 95% CI [0.38, 0.73]; P < 0.00001). Both the incidence of ASDeg and the reoperation rate were statistically lower in the TDR group than in the ACDF group (OR = 0.58, P < 0.00001; OR = 0.52, P = 0.01, respectively). Subgroup analysis was performed according to the follow-up time and trial site; the rate of ASDeg was lower in patients underwent TDR no matter the follow-up time, and TDR tended to increase the superiority across time. The rate of ASDeg was also lower with TDR both in the USA and China (P < 0.0001, P = 0.03, respectively). But the cost-effectiveness result might be prone to neither of the two surgery approaches. According to GRADE, the overall quality of this meta-analysis was moderate.

CONCLUSIONS

TDR decreased the rates of ASDeg and reoperation compared with that of ACDF, and the superiority may become more apparent over time. We cautiously and slightly suggest adopting TDR according to the GRADE but may not believe it excessively.

Prediction of in vivo lower cervical spinal loading using musculoskeletal multi-body dynamics model during the head flexion/extension, lateral bending and axial rotation

Cervical spine diseases lead to a heavy economic burden to the individuals and societies. Moreover, frequent post-operative complications mean a higher risk of neck pain and revision. At present, controversy still exists for the etiology of spinal diseases and their associated complications. Knowledge of in vivo cervical spinal loading pattern is proposed to be the key to answer these questions. However, direct acquisition of in vivo cervical spinal loading remains challenging. In this study, a previously developed cervical spine musculoskeletal multi-body dynamics model was utilized for spinal loading prediction. The in vivo dynamic segmental contributions to head motion and the out-of-plane coupled motion were both taken into account. First, model validation and sensitivity analysis of different segmental contributions to head motion were performed. For model validation, the predicted intervertebral disk compressive forces were converted into the intradiskal pressures and compared with the published experimental measurements. Significant correlations were found between the predicted values and the experimental results. Thus, the reliability and capability of the cervical spine model was ensured. Meanwhile, the sensitivity analysis indicated that cervical spinal loading is sensitive to different segmental contributions to head motion. Second, the compressive, shear and facet joint forces at C3–C6 disk levels were predicted, during the head flexion/extension, lateral bending and axial rotation. Under the head flexion/extension movement, asymmetric loading patterns of the intervertebral disk were obtained. In comparison, symmetrical typed loading patterns were found for the head lateral bending and axial rotation movements. However, the shear forces were dramatically increased during the head excessive extension and lateral bending. Besides, a nonlinear correlation was seen between the facet joint force and the angular displacement. In conclusion, dynamic cervical spinal loading was both intervertebral disk angle-dependent and level-dependent. Cervical spine musculoskeletal multi-body dynamics model provides an attempt to comprehend the in vivo biomechanical surrounding of the human head-neck system.

Radiological follow-up after implanting cervical disc prosthesis in anterior discectomy: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to review current literature on the comparison of the radiological outcome of cervical arthroplasty with fusion after anterior discectomy for radiculopathy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane, CENTRAL, and CINAHL using a sensitive search string combination. Studies were selected by predefined selection criteria (patients exclusively suffering from cervical radiculopathy), and risk of bias was assessed using a validated Cochrane checklist adjusted for this purpose. Additionally, an overview of results of articles published in 21 meta-analyses was added, considering a group of patients with myelopathy with or without radiculopathy.

RESULTS

Seven articles that compared intervertebral devices in patients with radiculopathy (excluding patients with myelopathy) were included in the study. Another 31 articles were studied as a mixed group, including patients with myelopathy and radiculopathy. Apart from three studies with low risk of bias, all other articles showed intermediate or high risk of bias. Heterotopic ossification was reported to be present in circa 10% of patients, seemingly predominant in patients with radiculopathy, with a very low level of evidence. Radiological signs of adjacent segment disease were present at baseline in 50% of patients, and there is a low level of evidence that this increased more (10%-20%) in the fusion group at long-term follow-up. However, this was only studied in the mixed study population, which is degenerative by diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

Although the cervical disc prosthesis was introduced to decrease adjacent level disease, convincing radiological evidence for this benefit is lacking. Heterotopic ossification as a complicating factor in the preservation of motion of the device is insufficiently studied. Regarding purely radiological outcomes, currently, no firm conclusion can be drawn for implanting cervical prosthesis versus performing fusion.

A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis of the Adjacent Segment Parameters in Cervical Disk Arthroplasty Versus Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

This is a meta-analysis of controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the overall condition of adjacent segment of cervical disk arthroplasty (CDA) compared with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

With the increase in CDA and ACDF, surgeons are taking more attention to adjacent segment degeneration (ASDeg) and adjacent segment disease (ASDis). There are more and more meta-analyses comparing the efficacy of CDA with ACDF, however, there are few meta-analyses referring to adjacent segment parameters, and investigators are still unable to arrive at the same conclusion.

METHODS

Several important databases were searched for controlled trials comparing CDA and ACDF before February 2016 according to PRISMA guidelines. The analysis parameters included follow-up time, operative segments, cervical range of motion (ROM), adjacent segment motion, ASDeg, ASDis and adjacent segment reoperation. The risk of bias scale and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were used to assess the papers. Subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis were used to analyze the reason for high heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Forty-one controlled trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria, including 36 English papers and 5 Chinese. The average follow-up time of all included patients was 39 months. Compared with ACDF, the rate of adjacent segment reoperation in the CDA group was significantly lower (P<0.01), and the advantage of CDA group increased with the increasing of follow-up time according to subgroup analysis. The rate of ASDeg in CDA was significantly lower than that of ACDF (P<0.01). There was no statistical difference between upper and lower ASDeg using the same surgical method (P>0.05). CDA provided a greater cervical ROM than did ACDF (P<0.01). There was a lower adjacent segment ROM and the rate of ASDis in CDA compared with ACDF (P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with ACDF, the advantages of CDA were lower ASDeg, ASDis, adjacent segment reoperation and adjacent segment motion; and higher cervical ROM. However, there was no statistical difference between upper and lower adjacent segment ROM/ASDeg using the same surgery.

Prosthesis and Hybrid Strategy Consideration for Treating Two-level Cervical Disc Degeneration in Hybrid Surgery

STUDY DESIGN

Biomechanical analysis using a validated nonlinear finite element (FE) model.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to combine the strategy of two-level hybrid surgery (HS) to explore how prostheses affect cervical biomechanics.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Few FE studies have explored differences in biomechanical behavior between combined and stand-alone structured prostheses with HS. No FE studies have considered whether the prosthesis type and hybrid strategy influence two-level HS.

METHODS

Three prostheses-Prodisc-C, PCM, and DCI-were analyzed in flexion and extension during HS at C4-C6. There were two HS constructs: anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) conducted at the C4-C5 levels and anterior cervical disc replacement (ACDR) conducted at C5-C6 levels (ACDF/ACDR); ACDR/ACDF.

RESULTS

Flexion motion at adjacent levels was greater than that of intact spine. A maximum increase of 80% was observed with PCM in the ACDF/ACDR group. Extension motion at adjacent levels for both hybrid strategies with PCM, however, was similar to that of intact spine (<10% change), whereas it increased by 14% to 32% with DCI. The strain energy-storing capability with DCI tended to be similar to that of normal discs. Facet stress at the infra-adjacent level, however, significantly increased with DCI in both groups, whereas it increased with PCM and Prodisc-C only in the ACDR/ACDF group. All prostheses produced overloads on cartilage at the arthroplasty level. Prodisc-C and PCM cores showed stress above the yield stress of ultrahigh-molecular-weight polyethylene.

CONCLUSION

Each prosthesis had advantages and disadvantages. In extension, DCI (vs. Prodisc-C and PCM) exhibited more compensation at adjacent levels in terms of motion, moments, and facet stress. The biomechanical performance of Prodisc-C was easily affected by the hybrid strategy. Thus, if only a combined-structure prosthesis is available for two-level HS (C4-C6 level), the hybrid strategy should be carefully evaluated and the ACDF/ACDR construct is recommended to avoid accelerating degeneration of adjacent segments.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

5.

Are Controversial Issues in Cervical Total Disc Replacement Resolved or Unresolved?: A Review of Literature and Recent Updates

Since the launch of cervical total disc replacement (CTDR) in the early 2000s, many clinical studies have reported better outcomes of CTDR compared to those of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. However, CTDR is still a new and innovative procedure with limited indications for clinical application in spinal surgery, particularly, for young patients presenting with soft disc herniation with radiculopathy and/or myelopathy. In addition, some controversial issues related to the assessment of clinical outcomes of CTDR remain unresolved. These issues, including surgical outcomes, adjacent segment degeneration (ASD), heterotopic ossification (HO), wear debris and tissue reaction, and multilevel total disc replacement (TDR) and hybrid surgeries are a common concern of spine surgeons and need to be resolved. Among them, the effect of CTDR on patient outcomes and ASD is theoretically and clinically important; however, this issue remains disputable. Additionally, HO, wear debris, multilevel TDR, and hybrid surgery tend to favor CTDR in terms of their effects on outcomes, but the potential of these factors for jeopardizing patients' safety postoperatively and/or to exert harmful effects on surgical outcomes in longer-term follow-up cannot be ignored. Consequently, it is too early to determine the therapeutic efficacy and cost-effectiveness of CTDR and will require considerable time and studies to provide appropriate answers regarding the same. For these reasons, CTDR requires longer-term follow-up data.

Cervical flexion and extension includes anti-directional cervical joint motion in healthy adults

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Anti-directional cervical joint motion has previously been demonstrated. However, quantitative studies of anti-directional and pro-directional cervical flexion and extension motions have not been published.

PURPOSE

This study aimed for a quantitative assessment of directional and anti-directional cervical joint motion in healthy subjects.

STUDY DESIGN

An observational study was carried out.

PATIENTS SAMPLE

Eighteen healthy subjects comprised the study sample.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Anti-directional and pro-directional cervical flexion and extension motion from each cervical joint in degrees were the outcome measures.

METHODS

Fluoroscopy videos of cervical flexion and extension motions (from neutral to end-range) were acquired from 18 healthy subjects. The videos were divided into 10% epochs of C0/C7 range of motion (ROM). The pro-directional and anti-directional motions in each 10% epoch were extracted, and the ratios of anti-directional motions with respect to the pro-directional motions (0%=no anti-directional movement) were calculated for joints and 10% epochs.

RESULTS

The flexion and extension ROM for C0/C7 were 51.9°±9.3° and 57.2°±12.2°. The anti-directional motions of flexion and extension ROM constituted 42.8%±9.7% and 41.2%±8.2% of the respective pro-directional movements. For flexion, the first three joints (C0/C1, C1/C2, C2/C3) demonstrated larger ratios compared with the last three joints (C4/C5, C5/C6, C6/C7) (p<.03). For extension, C1/C2 and C2/C3 ratios were larger compared with C0/C1, C4/C5, and C5/C6 (p<.03). Comparisons between flexion and extension motions showed larger C0/C1 ratio but smaller C5/C6 and C6/C7 ratios in extension (p<.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first report of quantified anti-directional cervical flexion and extension motion. The anti-directional motion is approximately 40% of the pro-directional motion. The results document that large proportions of anti-directional cervical flexion and extension motions were normal.

Biomechanical Evaluation of Lumbar Decompression Adjacent to Instrumented Segments

BACKGROUND

Multilevel lumbar stenosis, in which 1 level requires stabilization due to spondylolisthesis, is routinely treated with multilevel open laminectomy and fusion. We hypothesized that a minimally invasive (MI) decompression is biomechanically superior to open laminectomy and may allow decompression of the level adjacent the spondylolisthesis without additional fusion.

OBJECTIVE

To study the mechanical effect of various decompression procedures adjacent to instrumented segments in cadaver lumbar spines.

METHODS

Conditions tested were (1) L4-L5 instrumentation, (2) L3-L4 MI decompression, (3) addition of partial facetectomy at L3-L4, and (4) addition of laminectomy at L3-L4. Flexibility tests were performed for range of motion (ROM) analysis by applying nonconstraining, pure moment loading during flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. Compression flexion tests were performed for motion distribution analysis.

RESULTS

After instrumentation, MI decompression increased flexion-extension ROM at L3-L4 by 13% (P = .03) and axial rotation by 23% (P = .003). Partial facetectomy further increased axial rotation by 15% (P = .03). After laminectomy, flexion-extension ROM further increased by 12% (P = .05), a 38% increase from baseline, and axial rotation by 17% (P = .02), a 58% increase from baseline. MI decompression yielded no significant increase in segmental contribution of motion at L3-L4, in contrast to partial facetectomy and laminectomy (<.05).

CONCLUSION

MI tubular decompression is biomechanically superior to open laminectomy adjacent to instrumented segments. These results lend support to the concept that in patients in whom a multilevel MI decompression is performed, the fusion might be limited to the segments with actual instability.

ABBREVIATION

MI, minimally invasive.

The change of adjacent segment after cervical disc arthroplasty compared with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Many meta-analyses have been performed to study the efficacy of cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) compared with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF); however, there are few data referring to adjacent segment within these meta-analyses, or investigators are unable to arrive at the same conclusion in the few meta-analyses about adjacent segment. With the increased concerns surrounding adjacent segment degeneration (ASDeg) and adjacent segment disease (ASDis) after anterior cervical surgery, it is necessary to perform a comprehensive meta-analysis to analyze adjacent segment parameters.

PURPOSE

To perform a comprehensive meta-analysis to elaborate adjacent segment motion, degeneration, disease, and reoperation of CDA compared with ACDF.

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for RCTs comparing CDA and ACDF before May 2016. The analysis parameters included follow-up time, operative segments, adjacent segment motion, ASDeg, ASDis, and adjacent segment reoperation. The risk of bias scale was used to assess the papers. Subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis were used to analyze the reason for high heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine RCTs fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Compared with ACDF, the rate of adjacent segment reoperation in the CDA group was significantly lower (p<.01), and the advantage of that group in reducing adjacent segment reoperation increases with increasing follow-up time by subgroup analysis. There was no statistically significant difference in ASDeg between CDA and ACDF within the 24-month follow-up period; however, the rate of ASDeg in CDA was significantly lower than that of ACDF with the increase in follow-up time (p<.01). There was no statistically significant difference in ASDis between CDA and ACDF (p>.05). Cervical disc arthroplasty provided a lower adjacent segment range of motion (ROM) than did ACDF, but the difference was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with ACDF, the advantages of CDA were lower ASDeg and adjacent segment reoperation. However, there was no statistically significant difference in ASDis and adjacent segment ROM.

Artificial Cervical Disk Replacement for the Treatment of Adjacent Segment Disease After Anterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the outcome of artificial cervical disk replacement (ACDR) for the treatment of adjacent segment disease (ASD) after anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

ACDF is the useful procedure for degenerative cervical diseases. However, studies have reported accelerated degeneration of functional spinal units adjacent to the fusion site after ACDF.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 2004 and January 2011, 32 inpatients (18 male, 14 female; age, 38-61 y; mean, 48 y) underwent ACDR for the treatment of ASD after previous ACDF (single-level: n=12; 2-level: n=15; 3-level: n=5). In 22 patients, ASD occurred above the fusion site, and in 10 it occurred below the site. After ACDR, the patients were followed up for 30-62 months (mean, 49 mo). Before and after ACDR, patients were evaluated using the pain visual analog scale (VAS), the Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score, and neck disability index (NDI). In addition, the range of motion (ROM) of the replaced and adjacent unfused segments was measured by flexion/extension lateral radiography. Periprosthetic heterotopic ossification was detected using McAfee's classification. Degeneration of the adjacent unfused segment was evaluated using Goffin scale.

RESULTS

All patients had successful surgery. Before ACDR, neck VAS, upper-limb VAS, JOA score, and NDI were 7.2±1.8, 6.9±1.1, 9.8±2.5, and 40.5±4.8, respectively. At the last follow-up, they were 1.2±0.3, 0.9±0.3, 14.5±1.1, and 9.0±2.5, respectively. Compared with presurgery, the improvements in VAS, JOA score, and NDI at the final follow-up were statistically significant (all P<0.05). During follow-up, prosthesis positioning was satisfactory without migration or downward movement. Preoperatively, the ROMs of the replaced and adjacent segments were 8.7±2.6 and 7.6±3.0, respectively. At the last follow-up, they were 8.5±2.2 and 7.2±2.6, respectively (both P>0.05). At the last follow-up, 2 patients had grade II heterotopic ossification; 3 patients had aggravated degeneration (vs. preoperative status) of the adjacent unfused segment. However, the reduction in Goffin grade was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Our follow-up shows that ACDR is an effective treatment for post-ACDF ASD. It can maintain the ROMs of the replaced segment as well as the adjacent unfused segment.

A Prospective Study of Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of Zero-Profile Cage Screw Implants for Single-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: Is Segmental Lordosis Maintained at 2 Years?

Study Design

Prospective cohort study.

Purpose

To study clinicoradiological parameters of zero-profile cage screw used for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).

Overview of Literature

Radiological parameters of various implants used for ACDF are available, but those for zero-profile cage are sparse.

Methods

Patients with unilateral intractable brachialgia due to single-level cervical disc prolapse between April 1, 2011 and March 31, 2014 were included. Clinical assessment included arm and neck pain using visual analogue score (VAS) and neck disability index (NDI) scores. Radiological assessment included motion segment height, adjacent disc height (upper and lower), segmental and cervical lordosis, implant subsidence, and pseudoarthrosis. Follow-ups were scheduled at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months.

Results

Thirty-four patients (26 males, 8 females) aged 30–50 years (mean, 42.2) showed excellent clinical improvement based on VAS scores (7.4–0 for arm and 2.0–0.6 for neck pains). Postoperative disc height improved by 11.33% (p<0.001), but at 2 years, the score deteriorated by 7.03% (p<0.001). Difference in the adjacent segment disc height at 2 years was 0.08% (p=0.8) in upper and 0.16% (p<0.001) in lower disc spaces. Average segmental lordosis achieved was 5.59° (p<0.001) from a preoperative kyphosis of 0.88°; at 2 years, an average loss of 7.05° (p<0.001) occurred, resulting in an average segmental kyphosis of 1.38°. Cervical lordosis improved from 11.59° to 14.88° (p=0.164), and at 2 years, it progressively improved to 22.59° (p<0.001). Three patients showed bone formation and two mild protrusion of the implant at 2 years without pseudoarthrosis/implant failure.

Conclusions

The zero-profile cage screw device provides good fusion and cervical lordosis but is incapable of maintaining the segmental lordosis achieved up to a 2-year follow-up. We also recommend caution when using it in patients with small vertebrae.

Cervical disc replacement surgery: biomechanical properties, postoperative motion, and postoperative activity levels

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) is an evolving technique used in the treatment of cervical disc disease. To remain up to date on studies regarding its efficacy, we sought to answer three questions: What do biomechanical studies demonstrate in regard to the kinematics of CDA? How does CDA affect cervical motion? What are the postoperative activity levels of patients after cervical disc arthroplasty?

RECENT FINDINGS

1) In regard to biomechanics, recent data suggests that CDA maintains motion while possibly altering facet biomechanics. 2) Radiographic data indicates a reliable maintenance of motion in the short and medium term. 3) Postoperative activity levels are assessed with clinical outcome data which demonstrate reliable improvement in pain and function. The data reviewed here establishes CDA as an efficacious treatment in the relief of symptoms from CDD. It is important to note however that an evaluation of CDA would benefit from more robust data, specifically in regards to long-term clinical outcomes.

Cervical spine reposition errors after cervical flexion and extension

BACKGROUND

Upright head and neck position has been frequently applied as baseline for diagnosis of neck problems. However, the variance of the position after cervical motions has never been demonstrated. Thus, it is unclear if the baseline position varies evenly across the cervical joints. The purpose was to assess reposition errors of upright cervical spine.

METHODS

Cervical reposition errors were measured in twenty healthy subjects (6 females) using video-fluoroscopy. Two flexion movements were performed with a 20 s interval, the same was repeated for extension, with an interval of 5 min between flexion and extension movements. Cervical joint positions were assessed with anatomical landmarks and external markers in a Matlab program. Reposition errors were extracted in degrees (initial position minus reposition) as constant errors (CEs) and absolute errors (AEs).

RESULTS

Twelve of twenty-eight CEs (7 joints times 4 repositions) exceeded the minimal detectable change (MDC), while all AEs exceeded the MDC. Averaged AEs across the cervical joints were larger after 5 min' intervals compared to 20 s intervals (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to demonstrate single joint reposition errors of the cervical spine. The cervical spine returns to the upright positions with a 2° average absolute difference after cervical flexion and extension movements in healthy adults.

Three-dimensional intervertebral range of motion in the cervical spine: Does the method of calculation matter?

Intervertebral range of motion (ROM) is commonly calculated using ordered rotations or projection angles. Ordered rotations are sequence-dependent, and projection angles are dependent upon on which orientation vectors are projected. This study assessed the effect of calculation method on intervertebral ROM in the subaxial cervical spine (C3-C7) during in vivo dynamic, three-dimensional, functional movement. Biplane radiographs were collected at 30 images per second while 29 participants performed full ROM flexion/extension, axial rotation and lateral bending movements of their cervical spine. In vivo bone motion was tracked with sub-millimeter accuracy using a validated volumetric model-based tracking technique. Intervertebral rotations were calculated using six Cardan angle sequences and two projection angle combinations. Within-subject comparisons revealed significant differences in intervertebral ROM among calculation methods (all p<0.002). Group mean ROM differences were small, but significantly different among calculation methods (p<0.001). A resampling technique demonstrated that as group size increases, the differences between calculation methods decreases substantially. It is concluded that the method used to calculate intervertebral rotations of the sub-axial cervical spine can significantly affect within-subject and between group comparisons of intervertebral ROM.

Treatment of Single-Level Cervical Spondylosis: Cervical Disk Arthroplasty Versus Anterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion

A meta-analysis was performed to compare cervical arthroplasty with anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion for single-level cervical spondylosis. A comprehensive search was conducted with PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from January 1, 2000, to April 30, 2015. Random-effects models were used for heterogeneous data. Fixed-effects models were used for pooled nonheterogeneous data. Mean difference or standard mean difference was used for continuous outcomes, and odds ratio, risk ratio, or risk difference was used for dichotomous outcomes. [Orthopedics. 2017; 40(1):e23-e34.].

Cervical Disk Arthroplasty Versus Anterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion for the Treatment of 2-Level Cervical Spondylopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the safety and efficacy of cervical disk arthroplasty (CDA) compared with anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) for the treatment of 2-level cervical spondylopathy.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

CDA has emerged as a potential alternative to ACDF in patients with cervical disk degeneration. But there are no published systematic reviews and meta-analyses comparing CDA with ACDF for the treatment of 2-level cervical spondylopathy.

METHODS

The Pubmed, Embase, Web of science, Scopus, and Cochrane library databases were searched comparing CDA to ACDF in patients with 2-level cervical spondylopathy. Outcome measures were neck disability index, visual analog scale (VAS) of arm and neck pain, range of movement (ROM) at C2-C7, functional segment unit ROM, ROM at the operated level, and incidence of radiologic changes at adjacent levels approximately 2 years after surgery, as well as operating time and incidence of surgery-related complications. Mean difference (MD), odds ratios (OR), and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated.

RESULTS

Six studies involving 646 patients were included. There were no significant differences in neck disability index (MD, -1.53; 95% CI -3.80 to 0.73), VAS neck pain (MD, -0.19; 95% CI -0.71 to 0.33), and VAS arm pain (MD, -0.23; 95% CI -0.61 to 0.16) between 2-level CDA and 2-level ACDF cases. ROM at C2-C7 (MD, 15.82; 95% CI, 10.66-20.99), functional segment unit ROM (MD, 8.58; 95% CI, 7.93-9.23), and ROM at the operated level (MD, 9.54; 95% CI, 7.73-11.35) were greater, but the incidence of radiologic changes at adjacent levels (OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.13-0.67) were lower, in 2-level CDA cases. In 2-level CDA cases, the operating time was longer (MD, 57.41; 95% CI, 24.67-90.14), but surgery-related complications rates (OR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.30-0.74) was lower.

CONCLUSIONS

CDA may be a safe and effective alternative to ACDF for the treatment of 2-level cervical degenerative disease.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II.

Anterior cervical disc arthroplasty (ACDA) versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF): a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Surgical approaches are usually required in cases of severe cervical disc disease. The traditional method of anterior cervical disc fusion (ACDF) has been associated with reduced local mobility and increased occurrence of adjacent segment disease. The newer method of anterior cervical disc arthroplasty (ACDA) relies upon artificial discs of various products. Current literature is inconsistent in the comparative performance of these methods with regards to clinical, radiological and patient outcomes.

METHODS

Electronic databases, including OVID Medline, PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, were comprehensively searched to retrieve studies comparing the treatment outcomes of ACDF and ACDA. Baseline characteristics and outcome data were extracted from eligible articles.

RESULTS

Two hundred and fifty five articles were identified through the database searches, and after screening 28 studies were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. A total of 4,070 patients were included (2156 ACDA, 1914 ACDF). There was no significant difference between the two groups in operation time, blood loss during operation, long-term all-complication rate and reoperation rate at the level of injury. The ACDA group had significantly better neurological outcomes, as well as a significantly lower rate of adjacent segment diseases.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with ACDF, the ACDA procedure is associated with improved reoperation rate and reduction in neurological deficits amongst previously demonstrated benefits. There is heterogeneity in ACDA devices; future studies are required to investigate the impact of this technique on treatment outcomes.

Five-year clinical results of cervical total disc replacement compared with anterior discectomy and fusion for treatment of 2-level symptomatic degenerative disc disease: a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter investigational device exemption clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to report the outcome of a study of 2-level cervical total disc replacement (Mobi-C) versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Although the long-term outcome of single-level disc replacement has been extensively described, there have not been previous reports of the 5-year outcome of 2-level cervical disc replacement.

METHODS

This study reports the 5-year results of a prospective, randomized US FDA investigational device exemption (IDE) study conducted at 24 centers in patients with 2-level, contiguous, cervical spondylosis. Clinical outcomes at up to 60 months were evaluated, including validated outcome measures, incidence of reoperation, and adverse events. The complete study data and methodology were critically reviewed by 3 independent surgeon authors without affiliation with the IDE study or financial or institutional bias toward the study sponsor.

RESULTS

A total of 225 patients received the Mobi-C cervical total disc replacement device and 105 patients received ACDF. The Mobi-C and ACDF follow-up rates were 90.7% and 86.7%, respectively (p = 0.39), at 60 months. There was significant improvement in all outcome scores relative to baseline at all time points. The Mobi-C patients had significantly more improvement than ACDF patients in terms of Neck Disability Index score, SF-12 Physical Component Summary, and overall satisfaction with treatment at 60 months. The reoperation rate was significantly lower with Mobi-C (4%) versus ACDF (16%). There were no significant differences in the adverse event rate between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Both cervical total disc replacement and ACDF significantly improved general and disease-specific measures compared with baseline. However, there was significantly greater improvement in general and disease-specific outcome measures and a lower rate of reoperation in the 2-level disc replacement patients versus ACDF control patients.

Clinical trial registration no. NCT00389597 (clinicaltrials.gov)

Seven-year cost-effectiveness of ProDisc-C total disc replacement: results from investigational device exemption and post-approval studies

OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to evaluate the 7-year cost-effectiveness of cervical total disc replacement (CTDR) versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for the treatment of patients with single-level symptomatic degenerative disc disease. A change in the spending trajectory for spine care is to be achieved, in part, through the selection of interventions that have been proven effective yet cost less than other options. This analysis complements and builds upon findings from other cost-effectiveness evaluations of CTDR through the use of long-term, patient-level data from a randomized study. METHODS This was a 7-year health economic evaluation comparing CTDR versus ACDF from the US commercial payer perspective. Prospectively collected health care resource utilization and treatment effects (quality-adjusted life years [QALYs]) were obtained from individual patient-level adverse event reports and SF-36 data, respectively, from the randomized, multicenter ProDisc-C total disc replacement investigational device exemption (IDE) study and post-approval study. Statistical distributions for unit costs were derived from a commercial claims database and applied using Monte Carlo simulation. Patient-level costs and effects were modeled via multivariate probabilistic analysis. Confidence intervals for 7-year costs, effects, and net monetary benefit (NMB) were obtained using the nonparametric percentile method from results of 10,000 bootstrap simulations. The robustness of results was assessed through scenario analysis and within a parametric regression model controlling for baseline variables. RESULTS Seven-year follow-up data were available for more than 70% of the 209 randomized patients. In the base-case analysis, CTDR resulted in mean per-patient cost savings of $12,789 (95% CI $5362-$20,856) and per-patient QALY gains of 0.16 (95% CI -0.073 to 0.39) compared with ACDF over 7 years. CTDR was more effective and less costly in 90.8% of probabilistic simulations. CTDR was cost-effective in 99.8% of sensitivity analysis simulations and generated a mean incremental NMB of $20,679 (95% CI $6053-$35,377) per patient at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY. CONCLUSIONS Based on this modeling evaluation, CTDR was found to be more effective and less costly over a 7-year time horizon for patients with single-level symptomatic degenerative disc disease. These results are robust across a range of scenarios and perspectives and are intended to support value-based decision making.

Subsequent surgery rates after cervical total disc replacement using a Mobi-C Cervical Disc Prosthesis versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a prospective randomized clinical trial with 5-year follow-up

OBJECTIVE Cervical total disc replacement (TDR) has been shown in a number of prospective clinical studies to be a viable treatment alternative to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for the treatment of symptomatic degenerative disc disease. In addition to preserving motion, evidence suggests that cervical TDR may result in a lower incidence of subsequent surgical intervention than treatment with fusion. The goal of this study was to evaluate subsequent surgery rates up to 5 years in patients treated with TDR or ACDF at 1 or 2 contiguous levels between C-3 and C-7. METHODS This was a prospective, multicenter, randomized, unblinded clinical trial. Patients with symptomatic degenerative disc disease were enrolled to receive 1- or 2-level treatment with either TDR as the investigational device or ACDF as the control treatment. There were 260 patients in the 1-level study (179 TDR and 81 ACDF patients) and 339 patients in the 2-level study (234 TDR and 105 ACDF patients). RESULTS At 5 years, the occurrence of subsequent surgical intervention was significantly higher among ACDF patients for 1-level (TDR, 4.5% [8/179]; ACDF, 17.3% [14/81]; p = 0.0012) and 2-level (TDR, 7.3% [17/234]; ACDF, 21.0% [22/105], p = 0.0007) treatment. The TDR group demonstrated significantly fewer index- and adjacent-level subsequent surgeries in both the 1- and 2-level cohorts. CONCLUSIONS Five-year results showed treatment with cervical TDR to result in a significantly lower rate of subsequent surgical intervention than treatment with ACDF for both 1 and 2 levels of treatment. Clinical trial registration no.: NCT00389597 ( clinicaltrials.gov ).

Narrative review of the in vivo mechanics of the cervical spine after anterior arthrodesis as revealed by dynamic biplane radiography

Arthrodesis is the standard of care for numerous pathologic conditions of the cervical spine and is performed over 150,000 times annually in the United States. The primary long-term concern after this surgery is adjacent segment disease (ASD), defined as new clinical symptoms adjacent to a previous fusion. The incidence of adjacent segment disease is approximately 3% per year, meaning that within 10 years of the initial surgery, approximately 25% of cervical arthrodesis patients require a second procedure to address symptomatic adjacent segment degeneration. Despite the high incidence of ASD, until recently, there was little data available to characterize in vivo adjacent segment mechanics during dynamic motion. This manuscript reviews recent advances in our knowledge of adjacent segment mechanics after cervical arthrodesis that have been facilitated by the use of dynamic biplane radiography. The primary observations from these studies are that current in vitro test paradigms often fail to replicate in vivo spine mechanics before and after arthrodesis, that intervertebral mechanics vary among cervical motion segments, and that joint arthrokinematics (i.e., the interactions between adjacent vertebrae) are superior to traditional kinematics measurements for identifying altered adjacent segment mechanics after arthrodesis. Future research challenges are identified, including improving the biofidelity of in vitro tests, determining the natural history of in vivo spine mechanics, conducting prospective longitudinal studies on adjacent segment kinematics and arthrokinematics after single and multiple-level arthrodesis, and creating subject-specific computational models to accurately estimate muscle forces and tissue loading in the spine during dynamic activities.

Cervical motion segment contributions to head motion during flexion\extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Cervical spine segmental contributions to motion may reveal movement abnormalities associated with whiplash, disc herniation, disc arthroplasty, or fusion.

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to determine the cervical spine segmental contributions to head flexion\extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation during dynamic motion in young, healthy individuals.

STUDY DESIGN

The study design was a descriptive control study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Twenty-nine young (20-35 years of age) healthy individuals comprised the patient sample.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Physiologic measures of contributions from each cervical motion segment to the primary head rotation were the outcome measures for this study.

METHODS

Twenty-nine healthy participants performed full range of motion (ROM) flexion\extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation while biplane radiographs were collected at 30 images per second. Surface-based markers were used to determine head kinematics for each movement, and a validated volumetric model-based tracking technique was used to determine intervertebral kinematics. Contributions from each cervical motion segment to the primary head rotation were determined continuously during each of the three head movements. This study was funded by Synthes Spine (F).

RESULTS

For each head movement, motion segments in the lower cervical spine increased their contributions to head motion near the end of the ROM. Cervical motion segment contributions to left and right lateral bending were mirror images of each other, as were contributions to left and right axial rotation. However, cervical motion segment contributions to flexion were not mirror images of the contributions to extension.

CONCLUSIONS

Cervical motion segment contributions to head motion change over the full ROM and cannot be accurately characterized solely from endpoint data. The continuously changing segmental contributions suggest that the compressive and shear loads applied to each motion segment also change over the ROM. The clinical implication of increased contributions from the inferior motions segments near the end ROM is that the clinician may advise the patient to avoid end ROM positions to lessen the demand on the discs of inferior motion segments.

ProDisc-C Total Disc Replacement Versus Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion for Single-Level Symptomatic Cervical Disc Disease: Seven-Year Follow-up of the Prospective Randomized U.S. Food and Drug Administration Investigational Device Exemption Study

BACKGROUND

In patients with single-level cervical degenerative disc disease, total disc arthroplasty can relieve radicular pain and preserve functional motion between two vertebrae. We compared the efficacy and safety of cervical total disc arthroplasty with that of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for the treatment of single-level cervical degenerative disc disease between C3-C4 and C6-C7.

METHODS

Two hundred and nine patients at thirteen sites were randomly treated with either total disc arthroplasty with ProDisc-C (n = 103) or with ACDF (n = 106). Patients were assessed preoperatively; at six weeks and three, six, twelve, eighteen, and twenty-four months postoperatively; and then annually until seven years postoperatively. Outcome measures included the Neck Disability Index (NDI), the Short Form-36 (SF-36), postoperative neurologic parameters, secondary surgical procedures, adverse events, neck and arm pain, and satisfaction scores.

RESULTS

At seven years, the overall follow-up rate was 92% (152 of 165). There were no significant differences in demographic factors, follow-up rate, or patient-reported outcomes between groups. Both procedures were effective in reducing neck and arm pain and improving and maintaining function and health-related quality of life. Neurologic status was improved or maintained in 88% and 89% of the patients in the ProDisc-C and ACDF groups, respectively. After seven years of follow-up, thirty secondary surgical procedures had been performed in nineteen (18%) of 106 patients in the ACDF group compared with seven secondary surgical procedures in seven (7%) of 103 patients in the ProDisc-C group (p = 0.0099). There were no significant differences in the rates of any device-related adverse events between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Total disc arthroplasty with ProDisc-C is a safe and effective surgical treatment of single-level symptomatic cervical degenerative disc disease. Clinical outcomes after total disc arthroplasty with ProDisc-C were similar to those after ACDF. Patients treated with ProDisc-C had a lower probability of subsequent surgery, suggesting that total disc arthroplasty provides durable results and has the potential to slow the rate of adjacent-level disease.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Cervical spine alignment in disc arthroplasty: should we change our perspective?

PURPOSE

The alignment at the cervical spine has been considered a determinant of degeneration at the adjacent disc, but this issue in cervical disc replacement surgery is poorly explored and discussed in this patient population. The aim of this systematic review is to compare anterior cervical fusion and total disc replacement (TDR) in terms of preservation of the overall cervical alignment and complications.

METHODS

A systematic review of the current literature was performed, together with the evaluation of the methodological quality of all the retrieved studies.

RESULTS

In most of the retrieved studies, a tendency towards a more postoperative kyphotic alignment in TDR was reported. The reported mean complication rate was of 12.5 % (0-66.2 %). Complications associated with cervical prosthesis included heterotopic ossification, device migration, mechanical instability, failure, implant removal, reoperations and revision.

CONCLUSIONS

Even though cervical disc arthroplasty leads to similar outcomes compared to arthrodesis in the middle term follow-up, no evidence of superiority of cervical TDR is available up to date. We understand that the overall cervical alignment after TDR tends towards the loss of lordosis, but only longer follow-up can determine its influence on the clinical results.

WITHDRAWN: Arthroplasty versus fusion in single-level cervical degenerative disc disease

Background

There is ongoing debate about whether fusion or arthroplasty is superior in the treatment of single level cervical degenerative disc disease. Mainly because the intended advantage of arthroplasty over fusion, that is, the prevention of symptoms due to adjacent segment degeneration in the long term, is not confirmed yet. Until sufficient long‐term results become available, it is important to know whether results of one of the two treatments are superior to the other in the first one to two years.

Objectives

To assess the effects of arthroplasty versus fusion for radiculopathy or myelopathy, or both due to single level cervical degenerative disc disease.

Search methods

We searched the following databases for randomised controlled trials (RCTs): CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 2), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and EBMR. Additionally, we searched the System for Information on Grey Literature (SIGLE), subheading Biological and Medical Sciences, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) database on medical devices, and Clinicaltrials.gov to identify trials in progress. We also screened the reference list of all selected papers. Date of search: 25 May 2011.

Selection criteria

We included RCTs that directly compared any type of cervical fusion with any type of arthroplasty, with at least one year of follow‐up. Primary outcomes were arm pain, neck pain, neck‐related functional status, patient satisfaction, neurological outcome, and global health status. Secondary outcomes were the presence of (radiological) fusion, revision surgery at the treated level, secondary surgery on adjacent levels, segmental mobility of treated and adjacent levels, and work status.

Data collection and analysis

Study selection was performed independently by three review authors, and 'Risk of bias' assessment and data extraction were performed by two review authors. In case of missing data or insufficient information for a judgement about risk of bias, we tried to contact the study authors or the study sponsor. The data were entered into RevMan by one review author and subsequently checked by a second review author. We assessed the quality of evidence using GRADE. We analysed heterogeneity and performed sensitivity analyses for the pooled analyses.

Main results

We included nine studies (2400 participants), five of which had a low risk of bias. Eight of these studies were industry sponsored. The most important results showed low‐quality evidence for a small but significant difference in alleviation of arm pain at one to two years in favour of arthroplasty (mean difference (MD) ‐1.54; 95% confidence interval (CI) ‐2.86 to ‐0.22; 100‐point scale). A small study effect could not be ruled out for this outcome in the sensitivity analyses. This means that smaller studies (or small published subsets of larger studies) showed larger differences for this outcome, which may indicate publication bias. Also, moderate‐quality evidence showed a small difference in neck‐related functional status at one to two years in favour of arthroplasty (MD ‐2.79; 95% CI ‐4.73 to ‐0.85; 100‐point scale) and a small difference in neurological outcome in favour of arthroplasty (risk ratio (RR) 1.05; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.09). These two outcomes were robust to sensitivity analyses. For none of the primary outcomes, was a clinically relevant difference shown. Additionally, there was high‐quality evidence for a large, statistically significant difference in segmental mobility at one to two years (measured as degrees segmental range of motion) at the treated level (MD 6.90; 95% CI 5.45 to 8.35). There was low‐quality evidence that there was no statistically significant difference in secondary surgery at the adjacent levels at one to two years (RR 0.60; 95% CI 0.35 to 1.02). The latter was not robust to sensitivity analyses.

Authors' conclusions

There was a tendency for clinical results to be in favour of arthroplasty; often these were statistically significant. However, differences in effect size were invariably small and not clinically relevant for all primary outcomes. Significance was often gained or lost in the varying sensitivity analyses, probably owing to the relatively small number of studies, in combination with the small differences that were found. Given the fact that all of the included studies were not blinded, this could be due to patient or carer expectations. However, at this time both treatments can be seen as valid options with respect to results at a maximum of one to two years. Given the current absence of truly long‐term results, use of these mobile disc prostheses should still be limited to clinical trials. There was high‐quality evidence that the goal of preservation of segmental mobility in arthroplasty was met. A statistically significant effect on the incidence of secondary symptoms at adjacent levels, the primary goal of arthroplasty over fusion, was not found at one to two years. If there was a protective effect, this should become clearer over time. A future update, when studies with 'truly long‐term' results (five years or more) become available, should focus on this issue.

A herniated disc in the neck often causes radiating pain, numbness, and weakness in muscles of the neck, shoulders, arms, and hands. It may also lead to symptoms in the trunk and legs.

When there is no or insufficient relief of symptoms with non‐surgical treatment, surgery can be an option. Traditional 'fusion' surgery involves fusion of the two bones of the spine (the vertebrae) that form the disc space. Motion between these two vertebrae is then no longer possible.

It has been suggested that this may cause the adjacent parts of the spine to become more mobile, as compensation. This in turn might accelerate normal wear and tear in these parts of the spine, which could lead to new symptoms. At present this is not confirmed.

Mobile disc prostheses have been introduced in an effort to reduce the amount of new symptoms at the longer term after surgery by preserving motion between the vertebrae involved. Long‐term results are not available yet. However, it is important to know whether disc arthroplasty is at least as effective as fusion in relieving symptoms, the primary aim of surgery.

In this review we have searched for all studies in which the patient receives one of these two possible treatments at random.

We identified nine studies (2400 participants), and considered five of these to have high methodological quality. This review shows that patients who were treated with a mobile disc prosthesis had less pain radiating to the arm one to two years after surgery, and less disability owing to these complaints. However, the actual differences were very small, only between 1 and 5 points on a 100‐point scale. The overall quality of the evidence was low to moderate, which means that including new studies in future years could change these conclusions. The conclusion that mobility is in fact preserved after placement of a mobile disc prosthesis, compared to traditional 'fusion' surgery, is unlikely to change. Whether this preserved mobility will lead to fewer new symptoms in the future is uncertain based on results for the first one to two years after surgery.

Therefore, a comparison of results in the long term (five years or more) will be made when more studies with long‐term results have become available.

Costs of cervical disc replacement versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for treatment of single-level cervical disc disease: an analysis of the Blue Health Intelligence database for acute and long-term costs and complications

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review of prospectively collective administrative data.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine the reoperation rates, adverse event rate, as well as the direct and follow-on costs of cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) compared with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in a "real-world" population of patients with single-level symptomatic cervical disc disease.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Until very recently, there was a paucity of human clinical data to demonstrate that CDA lowers the rate of adjacent segment disease over ACDF.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, matched cohort analysis of a prospectively collected database of costs and outcomes for patients aged 18 to 60 years, who were continuously enrolled in a Blue Cross Plan contributing data to a claims database. Inclusion criteria were as follows: all patients who were treated surgically with either CDA or ACDF between January 2008 and December 2009, with single-level cervical pathology and claims reflecting at least 6 weeks of nonsurgical preoperative care without claims history of prior surgery.

RESULTS

There were 6635 ACDF patients and 327 CDA patients. There were no significant differences in the incidence of comorbidities or mean follow-up time (ACDF 25.7 mo vs. CDA 26.1 mo) between groups. By 36 months postoperatively, the reoperation rate was significantly increased in the ACDF group (10.5%) versus the CDA group (5.7%) (hazard ratio, P = 0.0214). The index surgery and 90-day global window costs were significantly lower in the CDA groups. At final follow-up, there was a statistically significant reduction in total costs paid by insurer in CDA patients (CDA $34,979 vs. ACDF $39,820).

CONCLUSION

Patients who underwent CDA for single-level degenerative disease had lower readmission rates, lower reoperation rates, and reduced index and total costs than those treated with ACDF. CDA was effective in reducing the monthly cost of care compared with ACDF.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2.

Differential segmental motion contribution of single- and two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion

PURPOSE

To determine and compare the biomechanical effects of single- and two-level anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) on the re-distribution of the segmental contribution to total cervical range of motion (ROM) in a prospective longitudinal design.

METHODS

Fifty-one patients undergoing either a single- or two-level ACDF due to cervical disc disease were recruited. Functional radiographs were taken preoperatively and then at 3, 6 and 12-month follow-ups. Global ROM of C2-C7, ROM of the treated functional spinal unit (FSU) and the superior and inferior segmental ROMs were then measured. The relative contribution from the FSU and each of the adjacent segments to total cervical ROM were compared pre- and post-operatively within and between the two groups at each of the time points.

RESULTS

Single-level ACDF patients demonstrated a significantly greater total cervical ROM at 6 and 12 months compared with the two-level ACDF group (p = 0.021 and 0.045, respectively). A significantly greater contribution from the FSU to the total ROM was found at 3 months in the two-level ACDF group (p = 0.016), but the greater contribution shifted to the superior adjacent segment at 6 and 12 months (p = 0.025 and 0.046). The two-level ACDF group did not demonstrate a significant difference at 3 months (p = 0.087), but a significant increase in contribution was found at 6 and 12 months (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Single-level ACDF maintains and restores a more physiological re-distribution of segmental contribution of ROM compared with two-level ACDF, which required longer time to achieve stable FSU immobilization and coupled with significantly increased superior segment contribution.

Minimum 4-year outcomes of cervical total disc arthroplasty versus fusion: a meta-analysis based on prospective randomized controlled trials

The prevalence of cervical disc disease is high, and the traditional surgical method of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) carries with it the disadvantages of motion loss at the operated level, and accelerated adjacent level disc degeneration. Preliminary results of the efficacy and reoperative rate comparing TDA versus ACDF have been reported; however, the long-term outcomes of TDA versus ACDF still remain a topic of debate. This review was prepared following the standard procedures set forth by the Cochrane Collaboration organization, and preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA). The only studies included were randomized controlled trials with a minimum of 4 years of follow-up data. The meta-analysis included the neck disability index (NDI), visual analog scale (VAS) of neck and arm pain, SF-36 physical component scores (SF-36 PCS), over success, neurological success, work status, implant-related complications, and secondary surgery events. Four randomized controlled trials meet the inclusion criteria. The long-term improvement of NDI, VAS of neck and arm pain, SF-36 PCS, over success, and neurological success favored the TDA group. The TDA group also had a lower incidence of secondary surgery for both the index level (RR: 0.45 [0.28, 0.72]) and adjacent level (RR: 0.53 [0.33, 0.88]). In this meta-analysis of 4 included RCTs with a minimum 4 years of follow-ups, total disc arthroplasty showed improvements over ACDF as measured by the NDI, VAS of neck and arm pain, and SF-36 PCS.

Iatrogenic contributions to cervical adjacent segment pathology: review article

BACKGROUND

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is widely accepted as a predictably excellent procedure. On the other hand, adjacent level pathology following ACDF is a well-known phenomenon which undercuts surgical outcome. However, the extent to which ACDF accelerates this phenomenon in the naturally degenerating cervical spine is still to be understood.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

To summarize the current evidence concerning adjacent segment pathology in the light of biomechanics, natural history, postoperative course, and comparison between ACDF and total disc replacement (TDR).

METHODS

This is a study of published articles. Articles were searched by the topic of adjacent disc pathology in cervical spine through Google Scholar and Pubmed. After review, 37 published articles were deemed suitable for the subject of this study.

RESULTS

Biomechanical and clinical data strongly suggest that ASP is a presentation of the iatrogenically accelerated natural aging process of cervical spine. However, power study analysis with assumption showed that current RCTs are unlikely to prove this suggestion.

CONCLUSION

Available data suggests that iatrogenic factors play a significant role in adjacent segment pathology following ACDF.

The effect of deviated center of rotation on flexion-extension range of motion after single-level cervical arthroplasty: an in vivo study

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE

To report the clinical outcomes and sagittal kinematics after cervical total disc replacement (TDR). To evaluate the in vivo effect of deviated center of rotation (COR) on flexion-extension range of motion (ROM) at the instrumented level.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

A few studies showed that the location of COR after cervical TDR deviated from its preoperative location or inherent location in healthy subjects. However, little is known about the effect of deviated COR on ROM at the instrumented level.

METHODS

A total of 24 patients who underwent C5-C6 single-level TDR with Prestige LP (Medtronic Sofamor Danek) were retrospectively included. Japanese Orthopedic Association score and visual analogue scale were used to assess the clinical outcomes. ROM and COR were measured for radiographical analysis. Patients were categorized into 2 groups according to the change of ROM for further evaluation. Group 1, characterized by decreased postoperative ROM, consisted of 16 patients; group 2, characterized by increased postoperative ROM, consisted of 8 patients.

RESULTS

Ten males and 14 females comprised the study cohort. The mean age was 45.05 years, and the mean follow-up time was 15.5 months. The Japanese Orthopedic Association score increased significantly and the neck and arm visual analogue scale decreased significantly after cervical TDR. On average, ROM was preserved after cervical TDR. The postoperative COR had a significant cranial shift from its preoperative location. The COR shift in anterior-posterior direction was larger in group 2 than that in group 1. No difference was observed in the COR shift in cranial-caudal direction between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

Single-level cervical TDR with Prestige LP obtained satisfactory clinical outcomes and partially restored the natural cervical kinematics. At instrumented level, the deviated COR had a negative correlation with the flexion-extension ROM.

Current concepts of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a review of literature

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is a safe and effective procedure for degenerative cervical spinal disease unresponsive to conservative management and its outstanding results have been reported. To increase fusion rates and decrease complications, numerous graft materials, cage, anterior plating and total disc replacement have been developed, and better results were reported from those, but still there are areas that have not been established. Therefore, we are going to analyze the treatment outcome with the various procedure through the literature review and determine the efficacy of ACDF.

Comparison of cervical kinematics between patients with cervical artificial disc replacement and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for cervical disc herniation

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Although anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is an effective treatment option for patients with cervical disc herniation, it limits cervical range of motion, which sometimes causes discomfort and leads to biomechanical stress at neighboring segments. In contrast, cervical artificial disc replacement (ADR) is supposed to preserve normal cervical range of motion than ACDF. A biomechanical measurement is necessary to identify the advantages and clinical implications of ADR. However, literature is scarce about this topic and in those available studies, authors used the static radiological method, which cannot identify three-dimensional motion and coupled movement during motion of one axis.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical parameters and cervical motion by three-dimensional motion analysis between ACDF and ADR and to investigate the ability of ADR to maintain cervical kinematics.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a prospective case control study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Patients who underwent ADR or ACDF for the treatment of single-level cervical disc herniation.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Visual analog scale (VAS), Korean version of Neck Disability Index (NDI, %), and three-dimensional motion analysis were used.

METHODS

The patients were evaluated by VAS and the Korean version of the NDI (%) to assess pain degree and functional status. Cervical motions were assessed by three-dimensional motion analysis in terms of sagittal, coronal, and horizontal planes. Markers of 2.5 cm in diameter were attached at frontal polar (Fpz), center (Cz), and occipital (Oz) of 10-20 system of electroencephalography, C7 spinous process, and both acromions. These evaluations were performed preoperatively and 1 month and 6 months after surgery.

RESULTS

The ACDF and ADR groups revealed no significant difference in VAS, NDI (%), and cervical range of motion preoperatively. After surgery, both groups showed no significant difference in VAS and NDI (%). In motion analysis, significantly more range of motion was retained in flexion and extension in the ADR group than the ACDF group at 1 month and 6 months. There was no significant difference in lateral tilt and rotation angle. In terms of coupled motion, ADR group exhibited significantly more preserved sagittal plane motion during right and left rotation and also showed significantly more preserved right lateral bending angle during right rotation than ACDF group at 1 month and 6 months. There was no significant difference in other coupled motions.

CONCLUSION

Three-dimensional motion analysis could provide useful information in an objective and quantitative way about cervical motion after surgery. In addition, it allowed us to measure not only main motion but also coupled motion in three planes. ADR demonstrated better retained cervical motion mainly in sagittal plane (flexion and extension) and better preserved coupled sagittal and coronal motion during transverse plane motion than ACDF. ADR had the advantage in that it had the ability to preserve more cervical motions after surgery than ACDF.