Top

European Spine Journal

Published in:

01-10-2013 | Original Article

Parameters influencing the outcome after total disc replacement at the lumbosacral junction. Part 2: distraction and posterior translation lead to clinical failure after a mean follow-up of 5 years

Authors: Patrick Strube, Eike K. Hoff, Hendrik Schmidt, Marcel Dreischarf, Antonius Rohlmann, Michael Putzier

Published in: European Spine Journal | Issue 10/2013

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of the second part of the study was to investigate the influence of parameters that lead to increased facet joint contact or capsule tensile forces (disc height, lordosis, and sagittal misalignment) on the clinical outcome after total disc replacement (TDR) at the lumbosacral junction.

Methods

A total of 40 patients of a prospective cohort study who received TDR because of degenerative disc disease or osteochondrosis L5/S1 were invited to an additional follow-up for clinical (ODI and VAS for overall, back, and leg pain) and radiographic analysis (a change in disc height, lordosis, or sagittal vertebral misalignment compared with the preoperative state). Based on the final ODI, patients were retrospectively distributed into groups N (normal: <25 %) or F (failure ≥25 %) for radiographic parameter comparison. A correlation analysis was performed between the clinical and radiological results.

Results

A total of 34 patients were available at a mean follow-up of 59.5 months. Both groups (N = 24; F = 10 patients) presented a significant improvement in overall pain, back pain, and ODI over time. At the final follow-up, higher clinical scores correlated with a larger disc height, increased lordosis, and posterior translation of the superior vertebra, which was also reflected by significant differences in these parameters in the group comparison.

Conclusions

Parameters associated with increased facet joint capsule tensile forces lead to an inferior clinical outcome at mid-term follow-up. When performing TDR, we therefore suggest avoiding iatrogenic posterior translation and overdistraction (and consecutive lordosis).

Blumenthal S, McAfee PC, Guyer RD, Hochschuler SH, Geisler FH, Holt RT, Garcia R Jr, Regan JJ, Ohnmeiss DD (2005) A prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemptions study of lumbar total disc replacement with the CHARITE artificial disc versus lumbar fusion part I: evaluation of clinical outcomes. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30(14):1565–1575 (discussion E1387–1591)CrossRef

Delamarter R, Zigler JE, Balderston RA, Cammisa FP, Goldstein JA, Spivak JM (2011) Prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of the ProDisc-L total disc replacement compared with circumferential arthrodesis for the treatment of two-level lumbar degenerative disc disease: results at twenty-four months. J Bone Joint Surg Am 93(8):705–715PubMedCrossRef

Gillet P (2003) The fate of the adjacent motion segments after lumbar fusion. J Spinal Disord Tech 16(4):338–345PubMedCrossRef

Gornet MF, Burkus JK, Dryer RF, Peloza JH (2011) Lumbar disc arthroplasty with MAVERICK disc versus stand-alone interbody fusion: a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter investigational device exemption trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 36(25):E1600–E1611CrossRef

Guyer RD, McAfee PC, Banco RJ, Bitan FD, Cappuccino A, Geisler FH, Hochschuler SH, Holt RT, Jenis LG, Majd ME, Regan JJ, Tromanhauser SG, Wong DC, Blumenthal SL (2009) Prospective, randomized, multicenter Food And Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of lumbar total disc replacement with the CHARITE artificial disc versus lumbar fusion: five-year follow-up. Spine J 9(5):374–386PubMedCrossRef

Ha KY, Lee JS, Kim KW (2008) Degeneration of sacroiliac joint after instrumented lumbar or lumbosacral fusion: a prospective cohort study over five-year follow-up. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 33(11):1192–1198CrossRef

Kumar MN, Jacquot F, Hall H (2001) Long-term follow-up of functional outcomes and radiographic changes at adjacent levels following lumbar spine fusion for degenerative disc disease. Eur Spine J 10(4):309–313PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral

McAfee PC, Cunningham B, Holsapple G, Adams K, Blumenthal S, Guyer RD, Dmietriev A, Maxwell JH, Regan JJ, Isaza J (2005) A prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of lumbar total disc replacement with the CHARITE artificial disc versus lumbar fusion: part II: evaluation of radiographic outcomes and correlation of surgical technique accuracy with clinical outcomes. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30(14):1576–1583 (discussion E1388–1590)CrossRef

Park P, Garton HJ, Gala VC, Hoff JT, McGillicuddy JE (2004) Adjacent segment disease after lumbar or lumbosacral fusion: review of the literature. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 29(17):1938–1944CrossRef

10.

Zigler J, Delamarter R, Spivak JM, Linovitz RJ, Danielson GO 3rd, Haider TT, Cammisa F, Zuchermann J, Balderston R, Kitchel S, Foley K, Watkins R, Bradford D, Yue J, Yuan H, Herkowitz H, Geiger D, Bendo J, Peppers T, Sachs B, Girardi F, Kropf M, Goldstein J (2007) Results of the prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of the ProDisc-L total disc replacement versus circumferential fusion for the treatment of 1-level degenerative disc disease. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32(11):1155–1162 (discussion 1163)CrossRef

11.

David T (2007) Long-term results of one-level lumbar arthroplasty: minimum 10-year follow-up of the CHARITE artificial disc in 106 patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32(6):661–666CrossRef

12.

Lemaire JP, Carrier H, el Sariali H, Skalli W, Lavaste F (2005) Clinical and radiological outcomes with the Charite artificial disc: a 10-year minimum follow-up. J Spinal Disord Tech 18(4):353–359PubMedCrossRef

13.

Tropiano P, Huang RC, Girardi FP, Cammisa FP Jr, Marnay T (2005) Lumbar total disc replacement. Seven to eleven-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87(3):490–496PubMedCrossRef

14.

Chin KR (2007) Epidemiology of indications and contraindications to total disc replacement in an academic practice. Spine J 7(4):392–398PubMedCrossRef

15.

Huang RC, Lim MR, Girardi FP, Cammisa FP Jr (2004) The prevalence of contraindications to total disc replacement in a cohort of lumbar surgical patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 29(22):2538–2541CrossRef

16.

McAfee PC (2004) The indications for lumbar and cervical disc replacement. Spine J 4(6 Suppl):177S–181SPubMedCrossRef

17.

Wong DA, Annesser B, Birney T, Lamond R, Kumar A, Johnson S, Jatana S, Ghiselli G (2007) Incidence of contraindications to total disc arthroplasty: a retrospective review of 100 consecutive fusion patients with a specific analysis of facet arthrosis. Spine J 7(1):5–11PubMedCrossRef

18.

Le Huec JC, Basso Y, Aunoble S, Friesem T, Bruno MB (2005) Influence of facet and posterior muscle degeneration on clinical results of lumbar total disc replacement: two-year follow-up. J Spinal Disord Tech 18(3):219–223PubMed

19.

Lemaire JP, Skalli W, Lavaste F, Templier A, Mendes F, Diop A, Sauty V, Laloux E (1997) Intervertebral disc prosthesis. Results and prospects for the year 2000. Clin Orthop Relat Res 337:64–76PubMedCrossRef

20.

Park CK, Ryu KS, Jee WH (2008) Degenerative changes of discs and facet joints in lumbar total disc replacement using ProDisc II: minimum two-year follow-up. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 33(16):1755–1761CrossRef

21.

Shim CS, Lee SH, Shin HD, Kang HS, Choi WC, Jung B, Choi G, Ahn Y, Lee S, Lee HY (2007) CHARITE versus ProDisc: a comparative study of a minimum 3-year follow-up. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32(9):1012–1018CrossRef

22.

Siepe CJ, Korge A, Grochulla F, Mehren C, Mayer HM (2008) Analysis of post-operative pain patterns following total lumbar disc replacement: results from fluoroscopically guided spine infiltrations. Eur Spine J 17(1):44–56PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral

23.

Siepe CJ, Zelenkov P, Sauri-Barraza JC, Szeimies U, Grubinger T, Tepass A, Stabler A, Mayer MH (2010) The fate of facet joint and adjacent level disc degeneration following total lumbar disc replacement: a prospective clinical, X-ray, and magnetic resonance imaging investigation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35(22):1991–2003CrossRef

24.

Roussouly P, Gollogly S, Berthonnaud E, Dimnet J (2005) Classification of the normal variation in the sagittal alignment of the human lumbar spine and pelvis in the standing position. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30(3):346–353CrossRef

25.

Strube P, Hoff EK, Perka CF, Gross C, Putzier M (2012) Influence of the type of the sagittal profile on clinical results of lumbar total disc replacement after a mean follow-up of 39 months. J Spinal Disord Tech [Epub ahead of print]

26.

Siepe CJ, Hitzl W, Meschede P, Sharma AK, Khattab MF, Mayer MH (2009) Interdependence between disc space height, range of motion and clinical outcome in total lumbar disc replacement. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34(9):904–916CrossRef

27.

Rohlmann A, Lauterborn S, Dreischarf M, Schmidt H, Putzier M, Strube P, Zander T (2013) Parameters influencing the outcome after total disc replacement at the lumbosacral junction. Part 1: misalignment of the vertebrae adjacent to a total disc replacement affects the facet joint and facet capsule forces in a probabilistic finite element analysis. Eur Spine J [Epub ahead of print]

28.

Pfirrmann CW, Resnick D (2001) Schmorl nodes of the thoracic and lumbar spine: radiographic-pathologic study of prevalence, characterization, and correlation with degenerative changes of 1,650 spinal levels in 100 cadavers. Radiology 219(2):368–374PubMedCrossRef

29.

Modic MT, Steinberg PM, Ross JS, Masaryk TJ, Carter JR (1988) Degenerative disk disease: assessment of changes in vertebral body marrow with MR imaging. Radiology 166(1 Pt 1):193–199PubMedCrossRef

30.

Fujiwara A, Tamai K, Yamato M, An HS, Yoshida H, Saotome K, Kurihashi A (1999) The relationship between facet joint osteoarthritis and disc degeneration of the lumbar spine: an MRI study. Eur Spine J 8(5):396–401PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral

31.

Meyerding HW (1956) Spondylolisthesis; surgical fusion of lumbosacral portion of spinal column and interarticular facets; use of autogenous bone grafts for relief of disabling backache. J Int Coll Surg 26(5 Part 1):566–591PubMed

32.

Gerbershagen HU, Lindena G, Korb J, Kramer S (2002) Health-related quality of life in patients with chronic pain. Schmerz (Berlin, Germany) 16(4):271–284CrossRef

33.

Fairbank JC, Couper J, Davies JB, O’Brien JP (1980) The Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire. Physiotherapy 66(8):271–273PubMed

34.

Hagg O, Fritzell P, Nordwall A (2003) The clinical importance of changes in outcome scores after treatment for chronic low back pain. Eur Spine J 12(1):12–20PubMed

35.

Mannion AF, Junge A, Fairbank JC, Dvorak J, Grob D (2006) Development of a German version of the Oswestry Disability Index. Part 1: cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity. Eur Spine J 15(1):55–65PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral

36.

Kafchitsas K, Kokkinakis M, Habermann B, Rauschmann M (2010) Effect of lumbar disc replacement on the height of the disc space and the geometry of the facet joints: a cadaver study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 92(4):595–601PubMedCrossRef

37.

Liu J, Ebraheim NA, Haman SP, Shafiq Q, Karkare N, Biyani A, Goel VK, Woldenberg L (2006) Effect of the increase in the height of lumbar disc space on facet joint articulation area in sagittal plane. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 31(7):E198–E202CrossRef

38.

Rauschning W (1987) Normal and pathologic anatomy of the lumbar root canals. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 12(10):1008–1019CrossRef

39.

Lee CS, Chung SS, Oh SK, You JW (2011) Significance of angular mismatch between vertebral endplate and prosthetic endplate in lumbar total disc replacement. J Spinal Disord Tech 24(3):183–188PubMedCrossRef

40.

Tournier C, Aunoble S, Le Huec JC, Lemaire JP, Tropiano P, Lafage V, Skalli W (2007) Total disc arthroplasty: consequences for sagittal balance and lumbar spine movement. Eur Spine J 16(3):411–421PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral

41.

Bertagnoli R, Kumar S (2002) Indications for full prosthetic disc arthroplasty: a correlation of clinical outcome against a variety of indications. Eur Spine J 11(Suppl 2):S131–S136PubMedPubMedCentral

42.

Siepe CJ, Heider F, Haas E, Hitzl W, Szeimies U, Stabler A, Weiler C, Nerlich AG, Mayer MH (2012) Influence of lumbar intervertebral disc degeneration on the outcome of total lumbar disc replacement: a prospective clinical, histological, X-ray and MRI investigation. Eur Spine J 21(11):2287–2299PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral

Title: Parameters influencing the outcome after total disc replacement at the lumbosacral junction. Part 2: distraction and posterior translation lead to clinical failure after a mean follow-up of 5 years
Authors: Patrick Strube
Eike K. Hoff
Hendrik Schmidt
Marcel Dreischarf
Antonius Rohlmann
Michael Putzier
Publication date: 01-10-2013
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: European Spine Journal / Issue 10/2013
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-013-2967-2

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Parameters influencing the outcome after total disc replacement at the lumbosacral junction. Part 2: distraction and posterior translation lead to clinical failure after a mean follow-up of 5 years

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 10/2013

Letter regarding “Denosumab: a potential new and innovative treatment option for aneurysmal bone cysts”

Letter to the editor concerning: “Antibiotic treatment in patients with chronic low back pain and vertebral bone edema (Modic type 1 changes): a double-blind randomized controlled trial of efficacy” by Albert HB et al. Eur Spine J (2013) 22:697–707

Letter to the editor concerning “hepatic myelopathy with spastic paraparesis: report of two cases and review of the literature” by S. Ben Amor et al. (Eur Spine J. 2013, Jun 1)

Biomechanical characteristics of cement/gelatin mixture for prevention of cement leakage in vertebral augmentation

AO spine injury classification system: a revision proposal for the thoracic and lumbar spine

AO spine classification system for thoracolumbar fractures