Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®
Published in: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® 12/2011

01-12-2011 | Clinical Research

Superiority of the Bryan® Disc Prosthesis for Cervical Myelopathy: A Randomized Study with 3-year Followup

Authors: Lei Cheng, MD, PhD, Lin Nie, MD, Mu Li, MD, Yong Huo, MD, Xin Pan, MD

Published in: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® | Issue 12/2011

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The current standard of care for cervical myopathy is anterior discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Although well tolerated in the short term, this treatment might ultimately result in progressive degeneration of adjacent motion segments. Artificial disc arthroplasty offers the theoretical advantage of preservation of motion at the operative level with consequent stress reduction at adjacent levels.

Questions/purposes

We compared function, radiographic measures, and incidence of complications at 3-year followup after cervical disc arthroplasty with the Bryan® prosthesis and ACDF in patients with cervical myelopathy.

Patients and Methods

Eighty-three patients with cervical myelopathy were randomized to undergo arthroplasty with implantation of a Bryan® cervical disc prosthesis (n = 41) or ACDF (n = 42). Patients were assessed preoperatively to 3 years postoperatively using the modified Odom’s criteria, Japanese Orthopaedic Association scale, SF-36, and Neck Disability Index. ROM, stability, and subsidence of the prostheses were evaluated radiographically.

Results

Patients who received the Bryan® prosthesis scored significantly better in three of the four functional assessment methods used (Japanese Orthopaedic Association scale, SF-36, and Neck Disability Index). ROM was retained by the patients in the Bryan® group but not in the patients in the ACDF group. Patients in the Bryan® group had fewer complications, primarily because dysphagia occurred in only one patient in the Bryan® group but in seven patients in the ACDF group. Other complications included pseudarthrosis in three patients in the ACDF group and one patient had spontaneous fusion, one had deep vein thrombosis, and one had heterotopic ossification in the Bryan® group.

Conclusions

Bryan® cervical disc arthroplasty appears reliable and effective in the treatment of cervical myelopathy.

Level of Evidence

Level II, therapeutic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of the levels of evidence.
Literature
1.
Anderson PA, Sasso RC, Rouleau JP, Carlson CS, Goffin J. The Bryan Cervical Disc: wear properties and early clinical results, Spine J. 2004;4(6 suppl):303S–309S.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Bridwell KH, Anderson PA, Boden SD, Vaccaro AR, Zigler JE. What’s new in spine surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86:1587–1596.PubMed
3.
Caspar W, Geisler FH, Pitzen T, Johnson TA. Anterior cervical plate stabilization in one- and two-level degenerative disease: overtreatment or benefit? J Spinal Disord. 1998;11:1–11.PubMedCrossRef
4.
DiAngelo DJ, Foley KT, Vossel KA, Rampersaud YR, Jansen TH. Anterior cervical plating reverses load transfer through multilevel strut-grafts. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000;25:783–795.CrossRef
5.
DiAngelo DJ, Roberston JT, Metcalf NH, McVay BJ, Davis RC. Biomechanical testing of an artificial cervical joint and an anterior cervical plate. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2003;16:314–323.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Duggal N, Pickett GE, Mitsis DK, Keller JL. Early clinical and biomechanical results following cervical arthroplasty. Neurosurg Focus. 2004;17:E9.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Emery SE, Bohlman HH, Bolesta MJ, Jones PK. Anterior cervical decompression and arthrodesis for the treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy: two to seventeen-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1998;80:941–951.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Garrido BJ, Taha TA, Sasso RC. Clinical outcomes of Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized, controlled, single site trial with 48-month follow-up. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2010;23:367–371.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Goffin J, Casey A, Kehr P, Liebig K, Lind B, Logroscino C, Pointillart V, Van Calenbergh F, van Loon J. Preliminary clinical experience with the Bryan Cervical Disc Prosthesis. Neurosurgery. 2002;51:840–845; discussion 845–847.PubMed
10.
Goffin J, Van Calenbergh F, van Loon J, Cassey A, Kehr P, Liebig K, Lind B, Logroscino C, Sgrambiglia R, Pointillart V. Intermediate follow-up after treatment of degenerative disc disease with the Bryan Cervical Disc Prosthesis: single-level and bi-level. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003;28:2673–2678.CrossRef
11.
Heller JG, Sasso RC, Papadopoulos SM, Anderson PA, Fessler RG, Hacker RJ, Coric D, Cauthen JC, Riew DK. Comparison of BRYAN cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical decompression and fusion: clinical and radiographic results of a randomized, controlled, clinical trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009;34:101–107.CrossRef
12.
Hilibrand AS, Robbins M. Adjacent segment degeneration and adjacent segment disease: the consequences of spinal fusion? Spine J. 2004;4(6 suppl):190S–194S.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Hsu W, Dorsi MJ, Witham TF. Surgical management of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Neurosurg Q. 2009;19:302–307.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Jung A, Schramm J, Lehnerdt K, Herberhold C. Recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy during anterior cervical spine surgery: a prospective study. J Neurosurg Spine. 2005;2:123–127.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Lafuente J, Casey AT, Petzold A, Brew S. The Bryan cervical disc prosthesis as an alternative to arthrodesis in the treatment of cervical spondylosis: 46 consecutive cases. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005;87:508–512.PubMed
16.
Nurick S. The pathogenesis of spinal cord disorder associated with cervical spondylosis. Brain. 1972;95:87–100.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Odom GL, Finney W, Woodhall B. Cervical disk lesions. J Am Med Assoc. 1958;166:23–28.PubMed
18.
Park DK, Lin EL, Phillips FM. Index and adjacent level kinematics after cervical disc replacement and anterior fusion: in vivo quantitative radiographic analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011;36:721–730.CrossRef
19.
Riew KD, Buchowski JM, Sasso R, Zdeblick T, Metcalf NH, Anderson PA. Cervical disc arthroplasty compared with arthrodesis for the treatment of myelopathy. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90:2354–2364.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Sasso RC, Best NM. Cervical kinematics after fusion and Bryan disc arthroplasty. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2008;21:19–22.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Sasso RC, Smucker JD, Hacker RJ, Heller JG. Artificial disc versus fusion: a prospective, randomized study with 2-year follow-up on 99 patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007;32:2933–40; discussion 2941–2942.
22.
Sekhon LH. Cervical arthroplasty in the management of spondylotic myelopathy: 18-month results. Neurosurg Focus. 2004;17:E8.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Sheffield D, Biles PL, Orom H, Maixner W, Sheps DS. Race and sex differences in cutaneous pain perception. Psychosom Med. 2000;62:517–523.PubMed
24.
Weisenberg M, Caspi Z. Cultural and educational influences on pain of childbirth. J Pain Symptom Manage. 1989;4:13–19.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Wigfield CC, Gill SS, Nelson RJ, Metcalf NH, Robertson JT. The new Frenchay artificial cervical joint: results from a two-year pilot study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002;27:2446–2452.CrossRef
26.
Wu S, Ma C, Mai M, Li G. Translation and validation study of Chinese versions of the Neck Disability Index and the Neck Pain and Disability Scale. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010;35:1575–1579.CrossRef
27.
Yue WM, Brodner W, Highland TR. Persistent swallowing and voice problems after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with allograft and plating: a 5- to 11-year follow-up study. Eur Spine J. 2005;14:677–682.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Superiority of the Bryan® Disc Prosthesis for Cervical Myelopathy: A Randomized Study with 3-year Followup
Authors
Lei Cheng, MD, PhD
Lin Nie, MD
Mu Li, MD
Yong Huo, MD
Xin Pan, MD
Publication date
01-12-2011
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® / Issue 12/2011
Print ISSN: 0009-921X
Electronic ISSN: 1528-1132
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-011-2039-z

Other articles of this Issue 12/2011

Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® 12/2011 Go to the issue

Clinical Research

Are Bone and Serum Cefazolin Concentrations Adequate for Antimicrobial Prophylaxis?

Reply to Letter to the Editor

Reply to Letter to the Editor: The Cam-type Deformity of the Proximal Femur Arises in Childhood in Response to Vigorous Sporting Activity

Symposium: Fractures of the Shoulder Girdle

Thromboembolic Events Are Uncommon After Open Treatment of Proximal Humerus Fractures Using Aspirin and Compression Devices

Erratum

Erratum to: Infirmity and Injury Complexity are Risk Factors for Surgical-site Infection after Operative Fracture Care

Symposium: Fractures of the Shoulder Girdle

Biographical Sketch: Thomas Callaway, FRCS (1822–1869)

Clinical Research

Cannulated Screw and Cable are Superior to Modified Tension Band in the Treatment of Transverse Patella Fractures