Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Spine Journal 1/2020

01-02-2020 | Review Article

Revision surgery of spinal dynamic implants: a literature review and algorithm proposal

Authors: R. Cecchinato, A. Bourghli, I. Obeid

Published in: European Spine Journal | Special Issue 1/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction

Dynamic stabilization of the spine has been performed since the 1990s with the double purpose of restoring spinal segmental stability and allowing residual movement at the operated level. When we take into account the different motion-preserving devices and the spinal areas where they are applied, we can identify three categories of spinal implants: anterior cervical, anterior lumbar, and posterior lumbar. However, as in all prosthetic procedures performed in orthopedic surgery, the life span of a joint replacement device is a central topic of discussion, and this is true also for spinal dynamic devices, being revision surgery a complex procedure in specific cases.

Materials and methods

We performed a literature review on the different dynamic spinal implants and the most common causes of failure, providing clinical cases as illustrative options for revision surgery.

Results

The review of the literature showed a 11.3% to 22.6% revision rate in posterior lumbar dynamic systems, with a peak of 40.6% in case of adjacent segment disease. In lumbar TDRs, infection and severe dislocations are the most frequent causes of anterior revisions, while posterior pedicle screw fixation could be a suitable option in minimal subsidence or TDR displacement. An algorithm for the planning of revision surgery is proposed.

Conclusions

Surgical revision of spinal dynamic implants could be a demanding surgery especially in anterior approaches. Anterior cervical revision remains globally safe, but careful preoperative evaluation of vessels and ureter are suggested to avoid intraoperative complications in the lumbar spine. In posterior revision, a proper sagittal alignment of the spine should be restored.

Graphic abstract

These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Graf H (1992) Lumbar instability: surgical treatment without fusion. Rachis 4(2):123–137 Graf H (1992) Lumbar instability: surgical treatment without fusion. Rachis 4(2):123–137
2.
go back to reference Park SJ, Lee CS, Chung SS, Lee KH, Kim WS, Lee JY (2016) Long-term outcomes following lumbar total disc replacement using ProDisc-II: average 10-year follow-up at a single institute. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 41(11):971–977CrossRef Park SJ, Lee CS, Chung SS, Lee KH, Kim WS, Lee JY (2016) Long-term outcomes following lumbar total disc replacement using ProDisc-II: average 10-year follow-up at a single institute. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 41(11):971–977CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Guérin P, Obeid I, Gille O, Bourghli A, Luc S, Pointillart V, Vital JM (2012) Sagittal alignment after single cervical disc arthroplasty. J Spinal Disord Tech 25(1):10–16CrossRef Guérin P, Obeid I, Gille O, Bourghli A, Luc S, Pointillart V, Vital JM (2012) Sagittal alignment after single cervical disc arthroplasty. J Spinal Disord Tech 25(1):10–16CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Xu S, Liang Y, Zhu Z, Qian Y, Liu H (2018) Adjacent segment degeneration or disease after cervical total disc replacement: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Orthop Surg Res. 13(1):244CrossRef Xu S, Liang Y, Zhu Z, Qian Y, Liu H (2018) Adjacent segment degeneration or disease after cervical total disc replacement: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Orthop Surg Res. 13(1):244CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Tapp SJ, Martin BI, Tosteson TD, Lurie JD, Weinstein MC, Deyo RA, Mirza SK, Tosteson ANA (2018) Understanding the value of minimally invasive procedures for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis: the case of interspinous spacer devices. Spine J 18(4):584–592CrossRef Tapp SJ, Martin BI, Tosteson TD, Lurie JD, Weinstein MC, Deyo RA, Mirza SK, Tosteson ANA (2018) Understanding the value of minimally invasive procedures for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis: the case of interspinous spacer devices. Spine J 18(4):584–592CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Di Silvestre M, Lolli F, Bakaloudis G (2014) Degenerative lumbar scoliosis in elderly patients: dynamic stabilization without fusion versus posterior instrumented fusion. Spine J 14(1):1–10CrossRef Di Silvestre M, Lolli F, Bakaloudis G (2014) Degenerative lumbar scoliosis in elderly patients: dynamic stabilization without fusion versus posterior instrumented fusion. Spine J 14(1):1–10CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Berjano P, Cecchinato R, Damilano M, Morselli C, Sansone V, Lamartina C (2013) Preoperative calculation of the necessary correction in sagittal imbalance surgery: validation of three predictive methods. Eur Spine J 22(SUPPL 6):S847–S852CrossRef Berjano P, Cecchinato R, Damilano M, Morselli C, Sansone V, Lamartina C (2013) Preoperative calculation of the necessary correction in sagittal imbalance surgery: validation of three predictive methods. Eur Spine J 22(SUPPL 6):S847–S852CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Wu JC, Huang WC, Tsai HW, Ko CC, Wu CL, Tu THT, Cheng H (2011) Pedicle screw loosening in dynamic stabilization: incidence, risk and outcome in 126 patients. Neurosurg Focus 31(4):E9CrossRef Wu JC, Huang WC, Tsai HW, Ko CC, Wu CL, Tu THT, Cheng H (2011) Pedicle screw loosening in dynamic stabilization: incidence, risk and outcome in 126 patients. Neurosurg Focus 31(4):E9CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Pham MH, Mehta VA, Patel NN, Jakoi AM, Hsieh PC, Liu JC, Wang JC, Acosta FL (2016) Complications associated with the Dynesys dynamic stabilization system: a comprehensive review of the literature. Neurosurg Focus 40(1):E2CrossRef Pham MH, Mehta VA, Patel NN, Jakoi AM, Hsieh PC, Liu JC, Wang JC, Acosta FL (2016) Complications associated with the Dynesys dynamic stabilization system: a comprehensive review of the literature. Neurosurg Focus 40(1):E2CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Rienmüller AC, Krieg SM, Schmidt FA, Meyer EL, Meyer B (2019) Reoperation rates and risk factors for revision 4 years after dynamic stabilization of the lumbar spine. Spine J 19:113–120CrossRef Rienmüller AC, Krieg SM, Schmidt FA, Meyer EL, Meyer B (2019) Reoperation rates and risk factors for revision 4 years after dynamic stabilization of the lumbar spine. Spine J 19:113–120CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Laugesen LA, Paulsen RT, Carreon L, Ernst C, Andersen MØ (2017) Patient-reported outcomes and revision rates at a mean follow-up of 10 years after lumbar total disc replacement. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 42(21):1657–1663CrossRef Laugesen LA, Paulsen RT, Carreon L, Ernst C, Andersen MØ (2017) Patient-reported outcomes and revision rates at a mean follow-up of 10 years after lumbar total disc replacement. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 42(21):1657–1663CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Ozer AF, Oktenoglu T, Egemen E, Sasani M, Yilmaz A, Erbulut DU, Yaman O, Suzer T (2017) Lumbar single-level dynamic stabilization with semi-rigid and full dynamic systems: a retrospective clinical and radiological analysis of 71 patients. Clin Orthop Surg 9:310–316CrossRef Ozer AF, Oktenoglu T, Egemen E, Sasani M, Yilmaz A, Erbulut DU, Yaman O, Suzer T (2017) Lumbar single-level dynamic stabilization with semi-rigid and full dynamic systems: a retrospective clinical and radiological analysis of 71 patients. Clin Orthop Surg 9:310–316CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Cui XD, Li HT, Zhang W, Zhang LL, Luo ZP, Yang HL (2018) Mid- to long-term results of total disc replacement for lumbar degenerative disc disease: a systematic review. J Orthop Surg Res 13(1):326CrossRef Cui XD, Li HT, Zhang W, Zhang LL, Luo ZP, Yang HL (2018) Mid- to long-term results of total disc replacement for lumbar degenerative disc disease: a systematic review. J Orthop Surg Res 13(1):326CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Nandyala SV, Marquez-Lara A, Fineberg SJ, Singh K (2014) Comparison of revision surgeries for one- to two-level cervical TDR and ACDF from 2002 to 2011. Spine J 14(12):2841–2846CrossRef Nandyala SV, Marquez-Lara A, Fineberg SJ, Singh K (2014) Comparison of revision surgeries for one- to two-level cervical TDR and ACDF from 2002 to 2011. Spine J 14(12):2841–2846CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Wang B, Wu T, Liu H, Deng Y, Ding C (2017) Intraoperative conversion of artificial cervical disc replacement to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for iatrogenic fracture. A rare case report. Medicine 96:47(e8917) Wang B, Wu T, Liu H, Deng Y, Ding C (2017) Intraoperative conversion of artificial cervical disc replacement to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for iatrogenic fracture. A rare case report. Medicine 96:47(e8917)
16.
go back to reference Kostuik JP (2004) Complications and surgical revision for failed disc arthroplasty. Spine J 4(6 Suppl):289S–291SCrossRef Kostuik JP (2004) Complications and surgical revision for failed disc arthroplasty. Spine J 4(6 Suppl):289S–291SCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Patel AA, Brodke DS, Pimenta L, Bono CM, Hilibrand AS, Harrop JS, Riew KD, Youssef JA, Vaccaro AR (2008) Revision strategies in lumbar total disc arthroplasty. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 33(11):1276–1283CrossRef Patel AA, Brodke DS, Pimenta L, Bono CM, Hilibrand AS, Harrop JS, Riew KD, Youssef JA, Vaccaro AR (2008) Revision strategies in lumbar total disc arthroplasty. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 33(11):1276–1283CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Leary SP, Regan JJ, Lanman TH, Wagner WH (2007) Revision and explantation strategies involving the CHARITE lumbar artificial disc replacement. Spine 32:1001–1011CrossRef Leary SP, Regan JJ, Lanman TH, Wagner WH (2007) Revision and explantation strategies involving the CHARITE lumbar artificial disc replacement. Spine 32:1001–1011CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Spivak JM, Petrizzo AM (2010) Revision of a lumbar disc arthroplasty following late infection. Eur Spine J 19:677–681CrossRef Spivak JM, Petrizzo AM (2010) Revision of a lumbar disc arthroplasty following late infection. Eur Spine J 19:677–681CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Onken J, Reinke A, Radke J, Finger T, Bayerl S, Vajkoczy P, Meyer B (2017) Revision surgery for cervical artificial disc: surgical technique and clinical results. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 152:39–44CrossRef Onken J, Reinke A, Radke J, Finger T, Bayerl S, Vajkoczy P, Meyer B (2017) Revision surgery for cervical artificial disc: surgical technique and clinical results. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 152:39–44CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Punt I, Willems P, Kurtz S, van Rhijn L, van Ooij A (2012) Clinical outcomes of two revision strategies for failed total disc replacements. Eur Spine J 21:2558–2564CrossRef Punt I, Willems P, Kurtz S, van Rhijn L, van Ooij A (2012) Clinical outcomes of two revision strategies for failed total disc replacements. Eur Spine J 21:2558–2564CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Cunningham BW, Hu N, Beatson HJ, Serhan H, Sefter JC, McAfee PC (2009) Revision strategies for single- and two-level total disc arthroplasty procedures: a biomechanical perspective. Spine J 9(9):735–743CrossRef Cunningham BW, Hu N, Beatson HJ, Serhan H, Sefter JC, McAfee PC (2009) Revision strategies for single- and two-level total disc arthroplasty procedures: a biomechanical perspective. Spine J 9(9):735–743CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Gerometta A, Rodriguez Olaverri JC, Bittan F (2012) Infection and revision strategies in total disc arthroplasty. Int Orthop (SICOT) 36:471–474CrossRef Gerometta A, Rodriguez Olaverri JC, Bittan F (2012) Infection and revision strategies in total disc arthroplasty. Int Orthop (SICOT) 36:471–474CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Eskander MS, Onyedika II, Eskander JP, Connolly PJ, Eck JC, Lapinsky A (2010) Revision strategy for posterior extrusion of the CHARITÉ polyethylene core. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35(24):E1430–E1434CrossRef Eskander MS, Onyedika II, Eskander JP, Connolly PJ, Eck JC, Lapinsky A (2010) Revision strategy for posterior extrusion of the CHARITÉ polyethylene core. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35(24):E1430–E1434CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Galbusera F, Bellini CM, Anasetti F, Ciavarro C, Lovi A, Brayda-Bruno M (2011) Rigid and flexible spinal stabilization devices: a biomechanical comparison. Med Eng Phys 33(4):490–496CrossRef Galbusera F, Bellini CM, Anasetti F, Ciavarro C, Lovi A, Brayda-Bruno M (2011) Rigid and flexible spinal stabilization devices: a biomechanical comparison. Med Eng Phys 33(4):490–496CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Phan K, Nazareth A, Hussain AK, Dmytriw AA, Nambiar M, Nguyen D, Kerferd J, Phan S, Sutterlin C 3rd, Cho SK, Mobbs RJ (2018) Relationship between sagittal balance and adjacent segment disease in surgical treatment of degenerative lumbar spine disease: meta-analysis and implications for choice of fusion technique. Eur Spine J 27(8):1981–1991CrossRef Phan K, Nazareth A, Hussain AK, Dmytriw AA, Nambiar M, Nguyen D, Kerferd J, Phan S, Sutterlin C 3rd, Cho SK, Mobbs RJ (2018) Relationship between sagittal balance and adjacent segment disease in surgical treatment of degenerative lumbar spine disease: meta-analysis and implications for choice of fusion technique. Eur Spine J 27(8):1981–1991CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Obeid I, Boissière L, Vital JM, Bourghli A (2015) Osteotomy of the spine for multifocal deformities. Eur Spine J 24(Suppl 1):S83–S92CrossRef Obeid I, Boissière L, Vital JM, Bourghli A (2015) Osteotomy of the spine for multifocal deformities. Eur Spine J 24(Suppl 1):S83–S92CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Obeid I, Berjano P, Lamartina C, Chopin D, Boissière L, Bourghli A (2019) Classification of coronal imbalance in adult scoliosis and spine deformity: a treatment-oriented guideline. Eur Spine J 28(1):94–113CrossRef Obeid I, Berjano P, Lamartina C, Chopin D, Boissière L, Bourghli A (2019) Classification of coronal imbalance in adult scoliosis and spine deformity: a treatment-oriented guideline. Eur Spine J 28(1):94–113CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Yoshida G, Boissiere L, Larrieu D, Bourghli A, Vital JM, Gille O, Pointillart V, Challier V, Mariey R, Pellisé F, Vila-Casademunt A, Perez-Grueso FJ, Alanay A, Acaroglu E, Kleinstück F, Obeid I (2017) Advantages and disadvantages of adult spinal deformity surgery and its impact on health-related quality of life. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 42(6):411–419CrossRef Yoshida G, Boissiere L, Larrieu D, Bourghli A, Vital JM, Gille O, Pointillart V, Challier V, Mariey R, Pellisé F, Vila-Casademunt A, Perez-Grueso FJ, Alanay A, Acaroglu E, Kleinstück F, Obeid I (2017) Advantages and disadvantages of adult spinal deformity surgery and its impact on health-related quality of life. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 42(6):411–419CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Cecchinato R, Redaelli A, Martini C, Morselli C, Villafane JH, Lamartina C, Berjano P (2017) Long fusions to S1 with or without pelvic fixation can induce relevant acute variations in pelvic incidence: a retrospective cohort study of adult spine deformity surgery. Eur Spine J 26(Suppl 4):436–441CrossRef Cecchinato R, Redaelli A, Martini C, Morselli C, Villafane JH, Lamartina C, Berjano P (2017) Long fusions to S1 with or without pelvic fixation can induce relevant acute variations in pelvic incidence: a retrospective cohort study of adult spine deformity surgery. Eur Spine J 26(Suppl 4):436–441CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Revision surgery of spinal dynamic implants: a literature review and algorithm proposal
Authors
R. Cecchinato
A. Bourghli
I. Obeid
Publication date
01-02-2020
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Spine Journal / Issue Special Issue 1/2020
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-019-06282-w

Other articles of this Special Issue 1/2020

European Spine Journal 1/2020 Go to the issue

Editorial

Editorial