Top

Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery

Published in:

01-06-2013 | Orthopaedic Surgery

Design and preliminary biomechanical analysis of artificial cervical joint complex

Authors: Yu Jian, Liu Lan-Tao, Zhao Jian-ning

Published in: Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery | Issue 6/2013

Abstract

Objective

To design an artificial cervical joint complex (ACJC) prosthesis for non-fusion reconstruction after cervical subtotal corpectomy, and to evaluate the biomechanical stability, preservation of segment movements and influence on adjacent inter-vertebral movements of this prosthesis.

Methods

The prosthesis was composed of three parts: the upper/lower joint head and the middle artificial vertebrae made of Cobalt–Chromium–Molybdenum (Co–Cr–Mo) alloy and polyethylene with a ball-and-socket joint design resembling the multi-axial movement in normal inter-vertebral spaces. Biomechanical tests of intact spine (control), Orion locking plate system and ACJC prosthesis were performed on formalin-fixed cervical spine specimens from 21 healthy cadavers to compare stability, range of motion (ROM) of the surgical segment and ROM of adjacent inter-vertebral spaces.

Results

As for stability of the whole lower cervical spine, there was no significant difference of flexion, extension, lateral bending and torsion between intact spine group and ACJC prosthesis group. As for segment movements, difference in flexion, lateral bending or torsion between ACJC prosthesis group and control group was not statistically significant, while ACJC prosthesis group showed an increase in extension (P < 0.05) compared to that of the control group. In addition, ACJC prosthesis group demonstrated better flexion, extension and lateral bending compared to those of Orion plating system group (P < 0.05). Difference in adjacent inter-vertebral ROM of the ACJC prosthesis group was not statistically significant compared to that of the control group.

Conclusion

After cervical subtotal corpectomy, reconstruction with ACJC prosthesis not only obtained instant stability, but also reserved segment motions effectively, without abnormal gain of mobility at adjacent inter-vertebral spaces.

Lin Q, Zhou X, Wang X et al (2012) A comparison of anterior cervical discectomy and corpectomy in patients with multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Eur Spine J 21(3):474–481PubMedCrossRef

Song KJ, Lee KB, Song JH (2012) Efficacy of multilevel anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus corpectomy and fusion for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a minimum 5-year follow-up study. Eur Spine J 21(8):1551–1557PubMedCrossRef

Tateiwa Y, Kamimura M, Itoh H et al (2003) Multilevel subtotal corpectomy and interbody fusion using a fibular bone graft for cervical myelopathy due to ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament. J Clin Neurosci 10(2):199–207PubMedCrossRef

Hackel M, Stejskal L, Kramar F (2001) Anterior cervical corpectomy in the treatment of multilevel degenerative stenoses with spondylotic myelopathy. Personal experience with therapy and a literature review. Rozhl Chir 80(4):163–169PubMed

Fujimoto K, Kawai S, Tanaka Y et al (1996) Cervical ventral epithelial cyst treated by anterior corpectomy—case report. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo) 36(5):321–325CrossRef

Ishihara H, Kanamori M, Kawaguchi Y et al (2004) Adjacent segment disease after anterior cervical interbody fusion. Spine J 4(6):624–628PubMedCrossRef

Goffin J, Geusens E, Vantomme N et al (2004) Long-term follow-up after interbody fusion of the cervical spine. J Spinal Disord Tech 17(2):79–85PubMedCrossRef

Seo M, Choi D (2008) Adjacent segment disease after fusion for cervical spondylosis; myth or reality. Br J Neurosurg 22(2):195–199PubMedCrossRef

An C, Guo J, Yuan Q (2008) Clinical observation to adjacent-segment disease after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi 22(4):390–393PubMed

10.

Eck JC, Humphreys SC, Hodges SD (1999) Adjacent-segment degeneration after lumbar fusion: a review of clinical, biomechanical, and radiologic studies. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ) 28(6):336–340

11.

Hoogendoorn RJ, Helder MN, Wuisman PI et al (2008) Adjacent segment degeneration: observations in a goat spinal fusion study. Spine 33(12):1337–1343PubMedCrossRef

12.

Levin DA, Hale JJ, Bendo JA (2007) Adjacent segment degeneration following spinal fusion for degenerative disc disease. Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis 65(1):29–36PubMed

13.

Schizas C, Duff JM, Tessitore E et al (2009) Non fusion techniques in spinal surgery. Rev Med Suisse 5(230):2574–2577PubMed

14.

Riew KD, Rhee JM (2002) The use of titanium mesh cages in the cervical spine. Clin Orthop 394:47–54PubMedCrossRef

15.

Fountas KN, Kapsalaki EZ, Nikolakakos LG et al (2007) Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion associate complications. Spine 32(21):2310–2317PubMedCrossRef

16.

Bertagnoli R, Yue JJ, Pfeiffer F et al (2005) Early results after ProDisc-C cervical disc replacement. J Neurosurg Spine 2:403–410PubMedCrossRef

17.

Chang UK, Kim DH, Lee MC (2007) Changes in adjacent-level disc pressure and facet joint force after cervical arthroplasty compared with cervical discectomy and fusion. J Neurosurg Spine 7(1):33–39PubMedCrossRef

18.

Rabin D, Bertagnoli R, Wharton N et al (2009) Sagittal balance influences range of motion: an in vivo study with the ProDisc-C. Spine J 9(2):128–133PubMedCrossRef

19.

Sasso RC, Best NM (2008) Cervical kinematics after fusion and Bryan disc arthroplasty. J Spinal Disord Tech 21(1):19–22PubMedCrossRef

20.

Pickett GE, Mitsis DK, Sekhon LH et al (2004) Effects of a cervical disc prosthesis on segmental and cervical spine alignment. Neurosurg Focus 17(3):E5PubMedCrossRef

21.

Quan GM, Vital JM, Hansen S et al (2011) Eight-year clinical and radiological follow-up of the Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty. Spine 36(8):639–646PubMedCrossRef

22.

Cardoso MJ, Rosner MK et al (2010) Multilevel cervical arthroplasty with artificial disc replacement. Neurosurg Focus 28(5):1–6CrossRef

23.

Porchet F, Metcalf NH (2004) Clinical outcomes with the Prestige II cervical disc: preliminary results from a prospective randomized clinical trial. Neurosurg Focus 17(3):E6PubMedCrossRef

24.

Duggal N, Bertagnoli R, Rabin D et al (2011) ProDisc-C: an in vivo kinematic study. J Spinal Disord Tech 24(5):334–339PubMedCrossRef

25.

Chen Y, Chen D, Guo Y et al (2008) Subsidence of titanium mesh cage. A study based on 300 cases. J Spinal Disord Tech 21(7):489–492PubMedCrossRef

26.

Chen JF, Lee ST, Wu CT (2010) A hollow cylindrical PMMA strut for cervical spine reconstruction after cervical multilevel corpectomy. J Spinal Disord Tech 23(5):321–327PubMedCrossRef

27.

Zhao Z, Jiang D, Ou Y et al (2012) A hollow cylindrical nano-hydroxyapatite/polyamide composite strut for cervical reconstruction after cervical corpectomy. J Clin Neurosci 19(4):536–540PubMedCrossRef

28.

Uchida K, Kobayashi S, Nakajima H et al (2006) Anterior expandable strut cage replacement for osteoporotic thoracolumbar vertebral collapse. J Neurosurg Spine 4(6):454–462PubMedCrossRef

29.

Alfieri A, Gazzeri R, Neroni M et al (2011) Anterior expandable cylindrical cage reconstruction after cervical spinal metastasis resection. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 113(10):914–917PubMedCrossRef

30.

Kandziora F, Schnake KJ, Klostermann CK et al (2004) Vertebral body replacement in spine surgery. Unfallchirurg 107(5):354–371PubMedCrossRef

31.

Sharma M, Langrana NA, Rodriguez J (1995) Role of ligaments and facets in lumbar spinal stability. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 20(8):887–900CrossRef

32.

Ng HW, Teo EC, Lee KK et al (2003) Finite element analysis of cervical spinal instability under physiologic loading. J Spinal Disord Tech 16(1):55–65PubMedCrossRef

33.

Panjabi MM (1992) The stabilizing system of the spine. Part II. Neutral zone and instability hypothesis. J Spinal Disord 5(4):390–396 discussion 397PubMedCrossRef

34.

Dmitriev AE, Cunningham BW, Hu N et al (2005) Adjacent level intradiscal pressure and segmental kinematics following a cervical total disc arthroplasty: an in vitro human cadaveric model. Spine 30(10):1165–1172PubMedCrossRef

35.

Rollinghoff M, Zarghooni K, Groos D et al (2011) Multilevel spinal fusion in the aged: not a panacea. Acta Orthop Belg 77(1):97–102PubMed

36.

Coric D, Nunley PD, Guyer RD et al (2011) Prospective, randomized, multicenter study of cervical arthroplasty: 269 patients from the Kineflex|C artificial disc investigational device exemption study with a minimum 2-year follow-up. J Neurosurg Spine 15(4):348–358PubMedCrossRef

37.

Rohl K, Rohrich F (2009) Artificial disc versus spinal fusion in the treatment of cervical spine degenerations in tetraplegics: a comparison of clinical results. Spinal Cord 47(9):705–708PubMedCrossRef

38.

Rhee JM (2010) Cervical arthroplasty: a success, failure, or both? Spine 10(8):731–732CrossRef

Title: Design and preliminary biomechanical analysis of artificial cervical joint complex
Authors: Yu Jian
Liu Lan-Tao
Zhao Jian-ning
Publication date: 01-06-2013
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery / Issue 6/2013
Print ISSN: 0936-8051
Electronic ISSN: 1434-3916
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-013-1717-6

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Design and preliminary biomechanical analysis of artificial cervical joint complex

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 6/2013

The use of a structural free iliac crest autograft for the treatment of acetabular fractures

Revision total hip replacement with a cemented long femoral component: minimum 9-year follow-up results

A case of supracondylar humerus fracture with vascular impairment. Open it up?

Technique of anatomical footprint reconstruction of the ACL with oval tunnels and medial portal aimers

Thoracolumbar spinal tuberculosis with psoas abscesses treated by one-stage posterior transforaminal lumbar debridement, interbody fusion, posterior instrumentation, and postural drainage

Coronal plane fractures of the distal humerus involving the capitellum and trochlea treated with open reduction internal fixation