Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Spine Journal 9/2017

Open Access 01-09-2017 | Original Article

Clinical and radiological outcome at 10 years of follow-up after total cervical disc replacement

Authors: Christoph Mehren, Franziska Heider, Christoph J. Siepe, Bernhard Zillner, Ralph Kothe, Andreas Korge, H. Michael Mayer

Published in: European Spine Journal | Issue 9/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

Previous studies have demonstrated that total cervical disc replacement (cTDR) represents a viable treatment alternative to the ‘gold standard’ anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the treatment of well-defined cervical pathologies at short- and mid-term follow-up (FU). However, the implementation and acceptance of a non-fusion philosophy is closely associated with its avoidance of adjacent segment degeneration. Proof of the functional sustainability and clinical improvement of symptoms at long-term FU is still pending. The aim of this ongoing prospective study was to investigate the clinical and radiological results of cTDR at long-term FU.

Methods

50 patients were treated surgically within a non-randomised prospective study framework with cTDR (ProDisc C™, Synthes, Paoli, PA, USA). Patients were examined preoperatively followed by routine clinical and radiological examinations at 1, 5 and 10 years after surgery, respectively. In addition to the clinical scores, conventional X-ray images of the cervical spine were taken in anteroposterior and lateral view as well as flexion/extension images. Clinical outcome scores included parameters such as the Neck Disability Index (NDI), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), arm and neck pain self-assessment questionnaires as well as subjective patient satisfaction rates. The radiological outcome variables included the range of motion (ROM) of the implanted prosthesis between maximum flexion and extension images, the occurrence of heterotopic ossifications and radiographic signs of adjacent segment degenerative changes. The reoperation rate following cTDR was recorded as a secondary outcome variable.

Results

A significant and maintained clinical improvement of all clinical outcome scores was observed after a mean FU of 10.2 years (VASarm 6.3–2.1; VASneck 6.4–1.9; NDI 21–6; p < 0.05). An increase in the incidence and the extent of heterotopic ossifications was noted during the post-operative course with a significant influence on the function of the prosthesis, which, however, did not reveal any detrimental effect on the patients’ clinical symptomatology. Prosthesis mobility declined from 9.0° preoperatively and 9.1° at 1 year FU to 7.7° and 7.6° at the five- and ten-year FU examinations, respectively. Radiological signs of adjacent segment degeneration were detected in 13/38 (35.7%), however, in only 3/38 (7.9%) patients this radiological changes were associated with clinical symptoms requiring conservative treatment. Intraoperative technical failure in two cases required interbody fusion with a cage (2/50). One patient (1/48, 2.1%) treated this motion device had revision surgery at the index level.

Conclusion

Cervical total disc replacement with ProDisc C demonstrated a significant and maintained improvement of all clinical outcome parameters at a follow-up of ≥10 years. The present long-term data reveal that with an exceptionally low implant-related reoperation rate and low symptomatic adjacent segment degeneration rate, cTDR may be regarded as a safe and viable treatment option.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Delamarter RB, Zigler J (2012) Five-year reoperation rates, cervical total disc replacement versus fusion, results of a prospective randomized clinical trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 38:1. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182797592 Delamarter RB, Zigler J (2012) Five-year reoperation rates, cervical total disc replacement versus fusion, results of a prospective randomized clinical trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 38:1. doi:10.​1097/​BRS.​0b013e3182797592​
2.
go back to reference Burkus JK, Haid RW, Traynelis VC, Mummaneni PV (2010) Long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes of cervical disc replacement with the Prestige disc: results from a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial. J Neurosurg Spine 13:308–318. doi:10.3171/2010.3.SPINE09513 CrossRefPubMed Burkus JK, Haid RW, Traynelis VC, Mummaneni PV (2010) Long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes of cervical disc replacement with the Prestige disc: results from a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial. J Neurosurg Spine 13:308–318. doi:10.​3171/​2010.​3.​SPINE09513 CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Loumeau TP, Darden BV, Kesman TJ et al (2016) A RCT comparing 7-year clinical outcomes of one level symptomatic cervical disc disease (SCDD) following ProDisc-C total disc arthroplasty (TDA) versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Eur spine J Off Publ Eur Spine Soc Eur Spinal Deform Soc Eur Sect Cerv Spine Res Soc. doi:10.1007/s00586-016-4431-6 Loumeau TP, Darden BV, Kesman TJ et al (2016) A RCT comparing 7-year clinical outcomes of one level symptomatic cervical disc disease (SCDD) following ProDisc-C total disc arthroplasty (TDA) versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Eur spine J Off Publ Eur Spine Soc Eur Spinal Deform Soc Eur Sect Cerv Spine Res Soc. doi:10.​1007/​s00586-016-4431-6
4.
go back to reference Phillips FM, Geisler FH, Gilder KM et al (2015) Long-term outcomes of the US FDA IDE prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial comparing PCM cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 40:674–683. doi:10.1097/BRS.0000000000000869 CrossRef Phillips FM, Geisler FH, Gilder KM et al (2015) Long-term outcomes of the US FDA IDE prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial comparing PCM cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 40:674–683. doi:10.​1097/​BRS.​0000000000000869​ CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Davis RJ, Kim KD, Hisey MS et al (2013) Cervical total disc replacement with the Mobi-C cervical artificial disc compared with anterior discectomy and fusion for treatment of 2-level symptomatic degenerative disc disease: a prospective, randomized, controlled multicenter clinical trial. J Neurosurg Spine 19:532–545. doi:10.3171/2013.6.SPINE12527 CrossRefPubMed Davis RJ, Kim KD, Hisey MS et al (2013) Cervical total disc replacement with the Mobi-C cervical artificial disc compared with anterior discectomy and fusion for treatment of 2-level symptomatic degenerative disc disease: a prospective, randomized, controlled multicenter clinical trial. J Neurosurg Spine 19:532–545. doi:10.​3171/​2013.​6.​SPINE12527 CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Coric D, Kim PK, Clemente JD et al (2013) Prospective randomized study of cervical arthroplasty and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with long-term follow-up: results in 74 patients from a single site. J Neurosurg Spine 18:36–42. doi:10.3171/2012.9.SPINE12555 CrossRefPubMed Coric D, Kim PK, Clemente JD et al (2013) Prospective randomized study of cervical arthroplasty and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with long-term follow-up: results in 74 patients from a single site. J Neurosurg Spine 18:36–42. doi:10.​3171/​2012.​9.​SPINE12555 CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Davis RJ, Nunley PD, Kim KD et al (2015) Two-level total disc replacement with Mobi-C cervical artificial disc versus anterior discectomy and fusion: a prospective, randomized, controlled multicenter clinical trial with 4-year follow-up results. J Neurosurg Spine 22:15–25. doi:10.3171/2014.7.SPINE13953.Disclosure CrossRefPubMed Davis RJ, Nunley PD, Kim KD et al (2015) Two-level total disc replacement with Mobi-C cervical artificial disc versus anterior discectomy and fusion: a prospective, randomized, controlled multicenter clinical trial with 4-year follow-up results. J Neurosurg Spine 22:15–25. doi:10.​3171/​2014.​7.​SPINE13953.​Disclosure CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Vaccaro A, Beutler W, Peppelman W et al (2013) Clinical outcomes with selectively constrained SECURE-C cervical disc arthroplasty: two-year results from a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter investigational device exemption study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 38:2227–2239. doi:10.1097/BRS.0000000000000031 CrossRef Vaccaro A, Beutler W, Peppelman W et al (2013) Clinical outcomes with selectively constrained SECURE-C cervical disc arthroplasty: two-year results from a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter investigational device exemption study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 38:2227–2239. doi:10.​1097/​BRS.​0000000000000031​ CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Hilibrand AS, Carlson GD, Palumbo MA et al (1999) Radiculopathy and myelopathy at segments adjacent to the site of a previous anterior cervical arthrodesis. J Bone Jt Surg Am 81:519–528CrossRef Hilibrand AS, Carlson GD, Palumbo MA et al (1999) Radiculopathy and myelopathy at segments adjacent to the site of a previous anterior cervical arthrodesis. J Bone Jt Surg Am 81:519–528CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Caspar W, Barbier DD, Klara PM (1989) Anterior cervical fusion and Caspar plate stabilization for cervical trauma. Neurosurgery 25:491–502CrossRefPubMed Caspar W, Barbier DD, Klara PM (1989) Anterior cervical fusion and Caspar plate stabilization for cervical trauma. Neurosurgery 25:491–502CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Hisey MS, Bae HW, Davis RJ et al (2015) Prospective, randomized comparison of cervical total disk replacement versus anterior cervical fusion. J Spinal Disord Tech 28:237–243CrossRef Hisey MS, Bae HW, Davis RJ et al (2015) Prospective, randomized comparison of cervical total disk replacement versus anterior cervical fusion. J Spinal Disord Tech 28:237–243CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Goffin J, van Loon J, Van Calenbergh F, Lipscomb B (2010) A clinical analysis of 4- and 6-year follow-up results after cervical disc replacement surgery using the Bryan cervical disc prosthesis. J Neurosurg Spine 12:261–269. doi:10.3171/2009.9.SPINE09129 CrossRefPubMed Goffin J, van Loon J, Van Calenbergh F, Lipscomb B (2010) A clinical analysis of 4- and 6-year follow-up results after cervical disc replacement surgery using the Bryan cervical disc prosthesis. J Neurosurg Spine 12:261–269. doi:10.​3171/​2009.​9.​SPINE09129 CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Jawahar A, Cavanaugh DA, Kerr EJ 3rd et al (2010) Total disc arthroplasty does not affect the incidence of adjacent segment degeneration in cervical spine: results of 93 patients in three prospective randomized clinical trials. Spine J 10:1043–1048. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2010.08.014 CrossRefPubMed Jawahar A, Cavanaugh DA, Kerr EJ 3rd et al (2010) Total disc arthroplasty does not affect the incidence of adjacent segment degeneration in cervical spine: results of 93 patients in three prospective randomized clinical trials. Spine J 10:1043–1048. doi:10.​1016/​j.​spinee.​2010.​08.​014 CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Katsuura A, Hukuda S, Saruhashi Y, Mori K (2001) Kyphotic malalignment after anterior cervical fusion is one of the factors promoting the degenerative process in adjacent intervertebral levels. Eur spine J Off Publ Eur Spine Soc Eur Spinal Deform Soc Eur Sect Cerv Spine Res Soc 10:320–324CrossRef Katsuura A, Hukuda S, Saruhashi Y, Mori K (2001) Kyphotic malalignment after anterior cervical fusion is one of the factors promoting the degenerative process in adjacent intervertebral levels. Eur spine J Off Publ Eur Spine Soc Eur Spinal Deform Soc Eur Sect Cerv Spine Res Soc 10:320–324CrossRef
34.
go back to reference Qureshi SA, McAnany S, Goz V et al (2013) Cost-effectiveness analysis: comparing single-level cervical disc replacement and single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 19:546–554. doi:10.3171/2013.8.SPINE12623 CrossRefPubMed Qureshi SA, McAnany S, Goz V et al (2013) Cost-effectiveness analysis: comparing single-level cervical disc replacement and single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 19:546–554. doi:10.​3171/​2013.​8.​SPINE12623 CrossRefPubMed
36.
go back to reference Zigler JE, Delamarter R, Murrey D et al (2012) ProDisc-C and ACDF as surgical treatment for single level cervical symptomatic degenerative disc disease. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 38:1. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e318278eb38 Zigler JE, Delamarter R, Murrey D et al (2012) ProDisc-C and ACDF as surgical treatment for single level cervical symptomatic degenerative disc disease. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 38:1. doi:10.​1097/​BRS.​0b013e318278eb38​
38.
41.
go back to reference Tu TH, Wu JC, Huang WC et al (2012) The effects of carpentry on heterotopic ossification and mobility in cervical arthroplasty: determination by computed tomography with a minimum 2-year follow-up: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 16:601–609. doi:10.3171/2012.3.spine11436 CrossRefPubMed Tu TH, Wu JC, Huang WC et al (2012) The effects of carpentry on heterotopic ossification and mobility in cervical arthroplasty: determination by computed tomography with a minimum 2-year follow-up: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 16:601–609. doi:10.​3171/​2012.​3.​spine11436 CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Clinical and radiological outcome at 10 years of follow-up after total cervical disc replacement
Authors
Christoph Mehren
Franziska Heider
Christoph J. Siepe
Bernhard Zillner
Ralph Kothe
Andreas Korge
H. Michael Mayer
Publication date
01-09-2017
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Spine Journal / Issue 9/2017
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-017-5204-6

Other articles of this Issue 9/2017

European Spine Journal 9/2017 Go to the issue