We Need to Talk about Lumbar Total Disc Replacement

Management Considerations for Total Intervertebral Disc Replacement

The burden of disease regarding lumbar and cervical spine pain is a long-standing, pervasive problem within medicine that has yet to be resolved. Specifically, neck and back pain are associated with chronic pain, disability, and exorbitant health care use worldwide, which have only been exacerbated by the increase in overall life years and chronic disease. Traditionally, patients with significant pain and disability secondary to disease of either the cervical or lumbar spine are treated via fusion or discectomy. Although these interventions have proved curative in the short-term, numerous longitudinal studies evaluating the efficacy of traditional management have reported severe impairment of normal spinal range of motion, as well as postoperative complications, including neurologic injury, radiculopathy, osteolysis, subsidence, and infection, paired with less than desirable reoperation rates. Consequently, there is a call for innovation and improvement in the treatment of lumbar and cervical spine pain, which may be answered by a modern technique known as intervertebral disc arthroplasty, or total disc replacement (TDR). Thus, this review aims to describe the management strategy of TDR and to explore updated considerations for its use in practice, both to help guide clinical decision making.

Global trends and frontiers of research on total disc replacement: A bibliometric analysis

With the increased risk of complications associated with traditional spinal fusion for the treatment of degenerative disc disease, total disc replacement (TDR) has received increasing attention in recent years. Despite the rapid development of its related research fields, its research status and the hotspot analysis are still unclear. Our goal was to identify and analyze the global research trends on TDR using bibliometric tools. All TDR data were obtained from the WoSCC. The information of research field was collected, including title, author, institutions, journals, countries, references, total citations, and years of publication for further analysis. From 1993 to 2022, a total of 1167 articles and 11,348 references were included in this field. These publications are mainly from 53 countries/regions and 174 journals, led by the United States and China. According to the citation report, the US was absolutely in the leading position in this research field. The most contribution institution and author were Sichuan University and Liu H. Spine and European Spine Journal were the most active journal on TDR research, with 205 and 118 articles. Meanwhile, they were also the most frequently cited journals. The "bone loss," "cervical arthroplasty," "hybrid surgery" were the most frequently cited areas of TDR research. Meanwhile, the latest research hotspots and directions were "cervical disc arthroplasty," "7 year follow up," "heterotopic ossification." The scientific research on TDR has increased considerably in recent years. This study clarifies the current research status and future development trends in order to guide clinicians and researchers in the field of TDR. It can be inferred that cervical disc arthroplasty and bone loss will be the research focus in the future.

Spinal Injections: A Narrative Review from a Surgeon's Perspective

Spinal pain is one of most frequent complaints of the general population, which can cause decreased activities of daily living and absence from work. Among numerous therapeutic methods, spinal injection is one of the most effective treatments for spinal pain and is currently widely applied in the clinical field. In this review, spinal injection is discussed from a surgeon's perspective. Recently, although the number of spinal surgeries has been increasing, questions are arising as to whether they are necessary. The failure rate after spinal surgery is high, and its long-term outcome was reported to be similar to spinal injection. Thus, spinal surgeries should be performed conservatively. Spinal injection is largely divided into diagnostic and therapeutic blocks. Using diagnostic blocks, such as the diagnostic selective nerve root block, disc stimulation test, and diagnostic medial branch block (MBB), the precise location causing the pain can be confirmed. For therapeutic blocks, transforaminal nerve root injection, therapeutic MBB, and percutaneous epidural neuroplasty are used. When unbearable spinal pain persists despite therapeutic spinal injections, spinal surgeries can be considered. Spinal injection is usefully used to identify the precise location prior to a patient undergoing injection treatment or surgery and can reduce pain and improve quality of life, and help to avoid spinal surgery. Pain physicians should treat patients with spinal pain by properly utilizing spinal injection.

Single-Level Total Disc Replacement: Index-Level and Adjacent-Level Revision Surgery Incidence, Characteristics, and Outcomes

BACKGROUND

The literature reports that index level (IL) revision spine surgery (RSS) and adjacent level (AL) RSS are diminished in lumbar TDR compared with fusion procedures. There is a paucity of PROMs reported after RSS.

OBJECTIVE

To present the incidence of RSS at the IL and AL following single-level lumbar total disc replacement (TDR) and to document patient-related outcome measures (PROMs) associated with RSS.

METHODS

PROMs and timelines were analyzed for 32 RSS patients from a prospective cohort study of 401 patients treated with TDR for single-level degenerative disc disease. The data collected prospectively are analyzed from baseline (prior to index surgery) to latest follow-up following RSS. PROMs, including visual analog scales for back and leg, Oswestry Disability Index, and Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, were collected preoperatively; postoperatively at 3, 6, and 12 months; and annually thereafter until RSS. The time to RSS was recorded, and PROMs for RSS (IL, AL, or both) were documented, analyzed, and compared.

RESULTS

The median time to RSS in the IL cohort was 35 months (interquartile range [IQR] = 9-51 months). The median time to RSS cohort was 70 months (IQR = 41.3-105.3 months). Timepoints facilitate PROM discussion for RSS. Patients in both groups achieved thresholds for the minimum clinically important difference for pain and disability scores. The small sample size in each group contributed to the variability demonstrated by the 95% CIs, thereby cautioning definitive conclusions.

CONCLUSIONS

This study reveals that statistically significant and modest clinical improvements in PROMs can be achieved in RSS for lumbar TDR at IL and AL. The surgical approach and technique are reflective of the pathology and suggest that anterior RSS for AL degeneration and posterior RSS for IL pathology yield similar results.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Statistical and clinical improvements can be achieved in IL-RSS and AL-RSS following single level TDR. It is essential for clinicians to understand and verify the underlying IL and/or AL pathology to select an appropriate management strategy and to facilitate balanced informed discussions with patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4

New Hope for Treating Intervertebral Disc Degeneration: Microsphere-Based Delivery System

Intervertebral disc (IVD) degeneration (IVDD) has been considered the dominant factor in low back pain (LBP), and its etiological mechanisms are complex and not yet fully elucidated. To date, the treatment of IVDD has mainly focused on relieving clinical symptoms and cannot fundamentally solve the problem. Recently, a novel microsphere-based therapeutic strategy has held promise for IVD regeneration and has yielded encouraging results with in vitro experiments and animal models. With excellent injectability, biocompatibility, and biodegradability, this microsphere carrier allows for targeted delivery and controlled release of drugs, gene regulatory sequences, and other bioactive substances and supports cell implantation and directed differentiation, aiming to improve the disease state of IVD at the source. This review discusses the possible mechanisms of IVDD and the limitations of current therapies, focusing on the application of microsphere delivery systems in IVDD, including targeted delivery of active substances and drugs, cellular therapy, and gene therapy, and attempts to provide a new understanding for the treatment of IVDD.

Comparative biomechanical analysis of rigid vs. flexible fixation devices for the lumbar spine: A geometrically patient-specific poroelastic finite element study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), or the narrowing of the spinal canal, continues to be the leading preoperative diagnosis for adults older than 65 years who undergo spine surgery. Although the treatment of LSS depends on its severity, the optimal surgical technique towards decreasing the risk of adjacent segment disease (ASD) remains elusive. This study aimed to comparatively analyze spinal biomechanics with rigid and flexible fixation devices (i.e., rigid and dynamic posterolateral fusion (PLF) and interspinous process (ISP) devices) during daily activities.

METHODS

Using a validated parametric poroelastic finite element modeling approach, 8 subject-specific pre-operative models were developed, and their validity was evaluated. Parametric FE models of the lumbar spines were then regenerated based on post-operation images for (A) rigid PLF (B) dynamic PLF (C) rigid ISP device (Coflex) and (D) flexible ISP device (DIAM) at L4-L5 level. Biomechanical responses for instrumented and adjacent intervertebral discs (IVDs) were analyzed and compared subject to static and cyclic loading.

RESULTS

The preoperative models were well comparable with previous works in literature. The postoperative results for the PLF and Coflex rigid systems, demonstrated greater ROM; higher values of stress and strain in the AF region; and increased disc height and fluid loss at the adjacent levels, as compared with the pre-op models and the post-op results of the flexible systems (i.e., dynamic PLF and DIAM). The calculated forces on the facet joint were of smaller magnitude for the ISP devices as compared to the PLF, particularly during extension.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that the dynamic PLF construct and DIAM implants could be effective to maintain the natural poroelastic characteristics of adjacent IVDs, which could be beneficial for enhancing long-term clinical outcomes. FEM provides clinicians with an invaluable patient-specific quantitative tool for informed surgical planning and discerning follow-up management.

Lumbar Total Disc Replacement: Current Usage

Low back pain is the leading cause of disability worldwide in industrialized nations. The pathology underlying chronic low back pain is associated with numerous factors. Lumbar degenerative disc disease is a potential major source of low back pain. There are numerous treatment modalities and options. Nonsurgical treatment options exist in the form of pain management through a combination of anti-inflammatory medications and steroid injections, physical therapy and lifestyle modifications. This article reviews the history and current trends in use for lumbar toral disc arthroplasty for degenerative disc disease treatment. Furthermore, indications, contraindications, and complications management are discussed.

Biomechanical Investigation Between Rigid and Semirigid Posterolateral Fixation During Daily Activities: Geometrically Parametric Poroelastic Finite Element Analyses

While spinal fusion using rigid rods remains the gold standard treatment modality for various lumbar degenerative conditions, its adverse effects, including accelerated adjacent segment disease (ASD), are well known. In order to better understand the performance of semirigid constructs using polyetheretherketone (PEEK) in fixation surgeries, the objective of this study was to analyze the biomechanical performance of PEEK versus Ti rods using a geometrically patient-specific poroelastic finite element (FE) analyses. Ten subject-specific preoperative models were developed, and the validity of the models was evaluated with previous studies. Furthermore, FE models of those lumbar spines were regenerated based on postoperation images for posterolateral fixation at the L4–L5 level. Biomechanical responses for instrumented and adjacent intervertebral discs (IVDs) were analyzed and compared subjected to static and cyclic loading. The preoperative model results were well comparable with previous FE studies. The PEEK construct demonstrated a slightly increased range of motion (ROM) at the instrumented level, but decreased ROM at adjacent levels, as compared with the Ti. However, no significant changes were detected during axial rotation. During cyclic loading, disc height loss, fluid loss, axial stress, and collagen fiber strain in the adjacent IVDs were higher for the Ti construct when compared with the intact and PEEK models. Increased ROM, experienced stress in AF, and fiber strain at adjacent levels were observed for the Ti rod group compared with the intact and PEEK rod group, which can indicate the risk of ASD for rigid fixation. Similar to the aforementioned pattern, disc height loss and fluid loss were significantly higher at adjacent levels in the Ti rod group after cycling loading which alter the fluid–solid interaction of the adjacent IVDs. This phenomenon debilitates the damping quality, which results in disc disability in absorbing stress. Such finding may suggest the advantage of using a semirigid fixation system to decrease the chance of ASD.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

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

ICR in human cadaveric specimens: An essential parameter to consider in a new lumbar disc prosthesis design

STUDY DESIGN

Biomechanical study in cadaveric specimens.

BACKGROUND

The commercially available lumbar disc prostheses do not reproduce the intact disc's Instantaneous centre of Rotation (ICR), thus inducing an overload on adjacent anatomical structures, promoting secondary degeneration.

AIM

To examine biomechanical testing of cadaveric lumbar spine specimens in order to evaluate and define the ICR of intact lumbar discs.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Twelve cold preserved fresh human cadaveric lumbosacral spine specimens were subjected to computerized tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and biomechanical testing. Kinematic studies were performed to analyse range of movements in order to determine ICR.

RESULTS

Flexoextension and lateral bending tests showed a positive linear correlation between the angle rotated and the displacement of the ICR in different axes.

DISCUSSION

ICR has not been taken into account in any of the available literature regarding lumbar disc prosthesis. Considering our results, neither the actual ball-and-socket nor the withdrawn elastomeric nucleus models fit the biomechanics of the lumbar spine, which could at least in part explain the failure rates of the implants in terms of postoperative failed back syndrome (low back pain). It is reasonable to consider then that an implant should also adapt the equations of the movement of the intact ICR of the joint to the post-surgical ICR.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first cadaveric study on the ICR of the human lumbar spine. We have shown that it is feasible to calculate and consider this parameter in order to design future prosthesis with improved clinical and biomechanical characteristics.

Biomechanics of spinal implants-a review

Spinal instrumentations have been classified as rigid fixation, total disc replacement and dynamic stabilization system for treatment of various spinal disorders. The efficacy and biomechanical suitability of any spinal implant can be measured through in vitro, in vivo experiments and numerical techniques. With the advancement in technology finite element models are making an important contribution to understand the complex structure of spinal components along with allied functionality, designing and application of spinal instrumentations at preliminary design stage. This paper aimed to review the past and recent studies to describe the biomechanical aspects of various spinal implants. The literatures were grouped and reviewed in accordance to instrumentation category and their functionality in the spinal column at respective locations.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Mobility-Preserving Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: WFNS Spine Committee Recommendations

Background

Although decompression is the basis of surgical treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), under various circumstances instrumented fusion is performed as well. The rationale for mobility-preserving operations for LSS is preventing adjacent segment disease (ASD). We review the rationale for mobility preservation in ASD and discuss related topics such as indications for fusion and the evolving role of minimally invasive approaches to lumbar spine decompression. Our focus is on systematic review and consensus discussion of mobility-preserving surgical methods as related to surgery for LSS.

Methods

Groups of spinal surgeons (members of the World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies Spine Committee) performed systematic reviews of dynamic fixation systems, including hybrid constructs, and of interspinous process devices; consensus statements were generated based on the reviews at 2 voting sessions by the committee several months apart. Additional review of background data was performed, and the results summarized in this review.

Results

Decompression is the basis of surgical treatment of LSS. Fusion is an option, especially when spondylolisthesis or instability are present, but indications remain controversial. ASD incidence reports show high variability. ASD may represent the natural progression of degenerative disease in many cases. Older age, poor sagittal balance, and multilevel fusion may be associated with more ASD. Dynamic fixation constructs are treatment options that may help prevent ASD.

Lumbar Arthroplasty: Past, Present, and Future

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

Artificial disc replacement in spine surgery

Total disc replacement (TDR) is an innovative procedure that has gained traction in spine surgery. A large amount of data in the literature report on the short-term outcomes of TDR surgery favorably. However, surgeons remain reluctant to opt for TDR surgery due to uncertainty of long-term outcomes. Recently, long term data regarding TDR surgery has become available, with some studies showing superior outcomes to fusion surgery. The goal of this review is to synthesize and clinically contextualize the recent literature on TDR surgery. This article also provides brief discussion of the biggest challenges currently facing disc arthroplasties and the ways in which they are being tackled.