Design of the PROCON trial: a prospective, randomized multi-center study comparing cervical anterior discectomy without fusion, with fusion or with arthroplasty

Ronald H M A Bartels, Roland Donk, Gert Jan van der Wilt, J André Grotenhuis, Dick Venderink, Ronald H M A Bartels, Roland Donk, Gert Jan van der Wilt, J André Grotenhuis, Dick Venderink

Abstract

Background: PROCON was designed to assess the clinical outcome, development of adjacent disc disease and costs of cervical anterior discectomy without fusion, with fusion using a stand alone cage and implantation of a Bryan's disc prosthesis. Description of rationale and design of PROCON trial and discussion of its strengths and limitations.

Methods/design: Since proof justifying the use of implants or arthroplasty after cervical anterior discectomy is lacking, PROCON was designed. PROCON is a multicenter, randomized controlled trial comparing cervical anterior discectomy without fusion, with fusion with a stand alone cage or with implantation of a disc. The study population will be enrolled from patients with a single level cervical disc disease without myelopathic signs. Each treatment arm will need 90 patients. The patients will be followed for a minimum of five years, with visits scheduled at 6 weeks, 3 months, 12 months, and then yearly. At one year postoperatively, clinical outcome and self reported outcomes will be evaluated. At five years, the development of adjacent disc disease will be investigated.

Discussion: The results of this study will contribute to the discussion whether additional fusion or arthroplasty is needed and cost effective.

References

    1. Cloward RB. The anterior approach for removal of ruptured cervical disks. J Neurosurg. 1958;15:602–617.
    1. Robinson RA, Smith GW. Anterolateral cervical disc removal and interbody fusion for cervical disc syndrome. Bull Johns Hopkins Hops. 1955;96:223–224.
    1. Hirsch C. Cervical disc rupture: diagnosis and therapy. Acta Orthop Scand. 1960;30:172–186.
    1. Jacobs WCH, Anderson DG, Limbeek J, Willems PC, Pavlov PW. Single or double-level anterior interbody fusion techniques for cervical degenerative disc disease. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2004;3. Art. No. CD004958.DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD004958
    1. Bärlocher CB, Barth A, Krauss JK, Binggeli R, Seiler RW. Comparative evaluation of microdiscectomy only, autograft fusion, polymethylmethacrylate interposition, and threaded titanium cage fusion for treatment of single-level cervical disc disease: a prospective randomized study in 125 patients. Neurosurg Focus. 2002;12:1–7.
    1. Martins AN. Anterior cervical discectomy with and without interbody bone graft. J Neurosurg. 1976;44:290–295.
    1. Rosenorn J, Bech Hansen E, Rosenorn MA. Anterior cervical discectomy with and without fusion. A prospective study. J Neurosurg. 1983;59:252–255.
    1. Savolainen S, Rinne J, Hernesniemi J. A prospective randomized study of anterior single-level cervical disc operations with long-term follow-up: surgical fusion is unnecessary. Neurosurgery. 1998;43:51–55. doi: 10.1097/00006123-199807000-00032.
    1. van den Bent MJ, Oosting J, Wouda EJ, van Acker EH, Ansink BJ, Braakman R. Anterior cervical discectomy with or without fusion with acrylate. A randomized trial. Spine. 1996;21:834–839. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199604010-00011.
    1. Wirth FP, Dowd GC, Sanders HF, Wirth C. Cervical discectomy. A prospective analysis of three operative techniques. Surg Neurol. 2000;53:340–348. doi: 10.1016/S0090-3019(00)00201-9.
    1. 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. doi: 10.1097/00006123-200209000-00048.
    1. Coric D, Finger F. The Bryan cervical disc. Prospective, randomized controlled study: early clinical results from a single investigational site. 21st Annual meeting of the AANS/CNS section on disorders of the spine and peripheral nerves March 9-12 Phoenix, Arizona, United states. 2005;109
    1. Hacker RJ. Cervical disc arthroplasty: a controlled randomized prospective study with inetrmediate follow - up results. 21st Annual meeting of the AANS/CNS section on disorders of the spine and peripheral nerves March 9-12 Phoenix, Arizona, United states. 2005;106
    1. van Limbeek J, Jacobs WC, Anderson PG, Pavlov PW. A systematic literature review to identify the best method for a single level anterior cervical interbody fusion. Eur Spine J. 2000;9:129–136. doi: 10.1007/s005860050223.
    1. Bartels RHMA. Single - blinded prospective randomized study comparing open versus needle technique for obtaining autologous cancellous bone from the iliac crest. Eur Spine J. 2005;14:649–653. doi: 10.1007/s00586-004-0818-x.
    1. Ware J, Sherbourne D. The MOS 36 - item short-form health survey. Med Care. 1992;30:473–483. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199206000-00002.
    1. Melzack R. McGill Pain Questionnaire: major properties and scoring methods. Pain. 1975;1:277–299. doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(75)90044-5.
    1. Van der Kloot WA, Oostendorp RAB, Van der Meij J, Van den Heuvel J. De Nederlandse versie van "McGill pain questionnaire": een betrouwbare pijnvragenlijst. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 1995;139:669–673.
    1. Link HD, McAfee PC, Pimenta L. Choosing a cervical disc replacement. Spine J. 2004;4:294S–302S. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2004.07.022.
    1. Vernon H, Mior S. The Neck Disability Index: a study of reliability and validity. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1991;14:409–415.
    1. Amick BC, Lerner D, Rogers WH, Rooney T, Katz J. A review of health-related work outcome measures and their uses, and recommended measures. Spine. 2000;25:3152–3160. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200012150-00010.
    1. Oostenbrink JB, Koopmanschap MA, Rutten FFH. Handleiding voor kostenonderzoek; methoden en richtlijnprijzen voor ecomische evaluaties in de gezondheidszorg. Amstelveen, College voor Zorgverzekeringen; 2000.
    1. Angevine PD, Arons RR, McCormick PC. National and regional rates and variation of cervical discectomy with and without anterior fusion, 1990-1999. Spine. 2003;28:931–940. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200305010-00016.
    1. Rundle RL, Hensley S. Back fire: J & J's new device for spine surgery raises questions: artificial disk aims to help body's natural movement; some see risk if it slips; "big money riding on this". The Wall Street Journal (Eastern Edition) 2005;June 7:A1.
    1. Bartels RHMA, Verhagen WIM, van der Wilt GJ, Meulstee J, van Rossum LGM, Grotenhuis JA. Prospective, randomized controlled study comparing simple decompression versus anterior subcutaneous transposition for idiopathic neuropathy of the ulnar nerve at the elbow. Part 1. Neurosurgery. 2004;56:522–530. doi: 10.1227/01.NEU.0000154131.01167.03.
    1. Birkmeyer NJO, Weinstein JN, Tosteson ANA, Tosteson TD, Skinner JS, Lurie JD, Deyo R, Wennberg JE. Design of the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT) Spine. 2002;27:1361–1372. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200206150-00020.
    1. Bartels RHMA, Termeer EH, van der Wilt GJ, van Rossum LGM, Meulstee J, Verhagen WIM, Grotenhuis JA. Simple decompression or anterior subcutaneous transposition for ulnar neuropathy at the elbow: a cost – minimization analysis. Neurosurgery. 2005;56:531–536. doi: 10.1227/01.NEU.0000154132.40212.6E.

Source: PubMed

スポンサーと協力者

医学的状態

薬物療法

3
購読する